Intelligence 5 character: Roleplaying Advice


Advice


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've got a 5 intelligence Demon-Spawn Tiefling I'm going to be using in PFS. Now, since it's PFS, I could in most cases simply ignore my intelligence, as it has no effect in PFS outside of skill points and other direct numerical things.

However, I don't want to do this, and would actually like to make something fun out of the fact that my character is mentally challenged.

Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace. This puts him, roughly speaking, in the same relative position as Forrest Gump.

Methodology:
I assume that, in addition to the people with 3 intelligence (1 in 216) and 4 intelligence (3 in 216), half of the people that have 5 intelligence (6 in 216) are dumber than this character, and half are smarter. This leaves him smarter than 7 in 216, or dumber than 209 in 216. Of course, this does not take into account a racial boost to intelligence, but given that racial boosts are almost always applied to individuals' highest stats anyway, that's not likely to much effect how many people are smarter than him.

So, I'm basically looking for ideas about how I can roleplay this character in an interesting manner, without irritating the hell out of my fellow players.

So far, I have that he was raised by an Iroran Monk (who considered raising my character to be on his own path to perfection) who very, very painstakingly taught him how to survive in the world. My character has lists that he checks over, written by his adoptive father, along with easy to remember catch phrases. "Father says that .. preparation is the key to perfection." (spoken slowly)


Reading might be a bit of a challenge. If he reads something, make sure he sounds everything out slowly and moves his lips.

remember you can be wise and stupid at the same time. Don't charge orcs because you're not intelligent, leave that to the unwise. It might be fun when asked how many orcs there are, to report back with one, two, or lots because numbers past 2 are hard to conceptualize.

Dark Archive

This can't be coincidence.

Posted earlier this morning.

Same int, same race, same day, *gasps* same RPG. I got two words: Restraining. Order.

Aside from that I fully intend to play this character as normal.....except he is so overcome by his hedonism that he doesn't stop to think about the consequences of those actions. Impulse overrides reason. The fact he is a Tiefling I use to argue that he was given no real education. He barely knows how to read and when he does it is slow and difficult. He knows very little due to the lack of education so he has no skill ranks to work with. He can learn, however. It just takes him so much longer than most or a lot more effort. He may or may not be learning disabled. But starting with no education, he might as well be.

He doesn't have to actually be stupid because of the stat. He is still clever in his own way. I just use the low score to represent his utter lack of knowledge and skill and formal education as well as the severity to which his dark impulses distract him from actually thinking about things.


Yeah, he's got a 10 wisdom, so he's o.k. there. "Father says that lack of caution leads to calam.... calam.... bad things."

I think he can probably count at least as high as his fingers, though. =D

I bought him a chalkboard and chalk so he can practice his writing during downtimes.

One thing that makes him a bit more functional than he might otherwise be is that he's an Iroran Paladin raised by an Iroran Monk. He's driven to perfect himself, and his Paladin Code is basically "Don't give up." So, he practices these things that are difficult to him relentlessly.


Dark Immortal wrote:
He doesn't have to actually be stupid because of the stat. He is still clever in his own way. I just use the low score to represent his utter lack of knowledge and skill and formal education as well as the severity to which his dark impulses distract him from actually thinking about things.

I dunno... I think if you have intelligence 5, you have to be at least a *little* stupid. I mean, you make intelligence checks for things like finding your way out of maze spells. I guess you could play that as he just rushes blindly through the maze, though?

In any case, this version really will be stupid. But endearing :)


Dark Immortal wrote:
I fully intend to play this character as normal.....except he is so overcome by his hedonism that he doesn't stop to think about the consequences of those actions. Impulse overrides reason.

That sounds like the very definition of low Wisdom to me, countering average Intelligence.

To the OP: I think Brick Tamland is another good example of someone with around a 5 Intelligence.


Well I have always used a INT*10 = IQ formula...... it isnt perfect but it is close .......
10 INT = 100 IQ ... pretty average
3 INT = 30 IQ ..... Severly Retarded

The link below shows the breakdown of IQ and gives a general guide..
http://www.paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/iq_ranges.html

The chart puts you at mildly retarded and says:
"Educatable, can learn to care for oneself, employable in routinized jobs but require supervision. Might live alone but do best in supervised settings. Immature but with adequate social adjustment, usually no obvious physical anomalies.

Moderate and mild retardation, contrary to the more severe forms, are typically not caused by brain damage but part of the normal variance of intelligence, and therefore largely genetic and inherited. This is important with regard to the question whether or not retarded persons should have children; for especially the moderate and mild forms of retardation, with which it is physically possible to have children, are the most likely to be inherited."

Which is right on with your description I think.......

You would almost certainly have an extremely immature personality and prone to fits of rage and uncorralable emotion..... This isn't really fun for the other players!!!! so perhaps you could focus your particular IQ issue on an object or non party cohesion breaking way...such as:

1. stop battle to look at butterflies for a round or two
2. insist that the sparkly gem is yours (even if it is not worth much)
3. carry around a dead small animal that is your 'pet" ..... pet to death....
4. ask a party member to take you to the potty/market etc.....
5. eat strange mushrooms at random
6. get ripped off at said market
7. make a mess in the bathroom that gets the party kicked out of the inn

Pleanty of space for comedic relief without going into a mental challenged person rage!!!!!


Roleplaying advice:

1) Limited vocabulary, and simple syntax. Or, more appropriately, little words and short sentences. This poster has a good example of the sort of language you could use, although I think the syntax in the poster is actually a little too complex. I'd try to avoid relative clauses.

2) Poor generalization performance. Low intelligence will not prevent you from doing something well as long as it's something you've done a lot before, but change things even a little bit and things get bad. So one of the things to think about is "have I ever done this exact thing before"? If the answer is "yes," do it normally -- if the answer is "no," ham it up.


@Zalman: Had to look up the name, but perhaps I'll watch some clips; thanks.

@Devin: If you do the actual standard deviation calculation, using 3d6 as the distribution for the "common folk", this puts him barely above a 70 IQ, believe it or not. 71, 72, something like that. This puts him on the border between the description you give and:

Borderline Retarded:
Limited trainability. Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone book, reading bus or train schedules, banking, filling out forms, using appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven or computer, etcetera, and therefore require assistance from relatives or social agencies in the management of their affairs. Can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision.

Which is more what I was going for, too.

The rage issues are helped greatly by more than a decade of growing up in a monastery, so he doesn't have any more rage issues than Forrest Gump did. Thank you for the other suggestions!

@Orfamay: Good points on the language, which I'd thought of, and the generalization, which I hadn't. "Have I done this exact thing before?" is an absolutely fantastic tool to use. Thank you.


Lenthalia wrote:


Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.

I don't think this is much of a valid assumption, personally.

He's only 15% less likely to succeed at an INT-based task than someone with a 10. That's not a huge disparity, plus we're attempting to quantify the unquantifiable in the first place.

Dark Archive

@Zalman, you are absolutely right in regards to that single part of the description. That is to say taken out of context. The rest of the description goes on to demonstrate how it isn't a low wisdom issue. He never learned to stop and think. He has wisdom enough to know a good decision from a bad one, to look for the simpler things he can understand, to leave complex tasks for others who are better suited to it. But figuring something out? Making an educated guess about things that are common knowledge? Not understanding that his vices and hedonism are bad (his experience says that they are, in fact, good; so very good) that's him being stupid. He is the guy at work who you talk to and everything seems more or less OK but something is nagging you about his responses and the second you probe, you find out that this guy has no freaking clue what you're talking about. He's just been nodding his head and agreeing with you and pretending to know what's been going on. Even worse, he can't infer what is happening based on the conversation he is having with you. I have actually met several people like this. It's sooooo annoying. But man it would be hilarious at a table.

@Lenthalia Yeah, he can't find his way out of a maze. He'd forget to drop the breadcrumbs or fail to realize the use of the crumbs and pick some up to feed birds he might see later on. If he realized he was lost he might just rush through figuring that going faster will make him get out sooner. He can pass as normal until you start going beneath the surface much at all.

I think doing the 5 int can be fun. And as has been pointed out, that low int is prone to bouts of rage or tantrums and our bloodlines have us feel exactly that way. Not sure how you would demonstrate it with a paladin but there are plenty of good rp ways to have a tiff and not disrupt the story or group but to enhance the experience.


Zhayne wrote:
Lenthalia wrote:


Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.

I don't think this is much of a valid assumption, personally.

He's only 15% less likely to succeed at an INT-based task than someone with a 10. That's not a huge disparity, plus we're attempting to quantify the unquantifiable in the first place.

That's fair, but that's more the general problem with trying to resolve skill based issues with d20 rolls in the first place. It's the same problem with why Strength 7 wizards can sometimes succeed at strength checks that strength 18 fighters fail.

In any case, the 3d6 distribution was only used to give me an idea of how to play this character relative to the population; I'm not claiming it as a "rules" matter.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I was going to suggest, and the monastic training ties in nicely, a tendency to focus very strongly on the task at hand: listening to the venture captain's briefing, searching a room, etc.


Zhayne wrote:
Lenthalia wrote:


Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.

I don't think this is much of a valid assumption, personally.

He's only 15% less likely to succeed at an INT-based task than someone with a 10.

That doesn't take into account the availability of taking 10 on skill-based checks.

In general, DC 10 on Int-based skills (e.g. Knowledge) represents common knowledge that everyone has. With an Int modifier of +0 (e.g. average), you need never miss those kind of questions, and people don't. With an intelligence modifier of even -1, you miss those kind of questions roughly half the time.

Taking 10 is something that people should realistically do for the vast majority of their day-to-day lives. Walking to the church in the next village? That's a Knowledge (geography) check to know which way to go. Trying to remember the reponse to "Pax vobiscum"? That's a Knowledge (religion) check. Trying to remember the name of the local sheriff? That's a Knowledge (local) check. Trying to darn a sock? That's a Craft check.

Any of those are actually problematic for a person with a negative Intelligence modifiers. The chances of missing are 15% greater for things that you already have a 50/50 chance (at best) to know, and for the vast majority of things that everyone knows, you've got a 50/50 chance not to know what everyone else knows 100% of the time..


Lenthalia wrote:


@Orfamay: Good points on the language, which I'd thought of, and the generalization, which I hadn't. "Have I done this exact thing before?" is an absolutely fantastic tool to use. Thank you.

Thanks. That's basically the "limited trainability" effect you mentioned:

Quote:


Limited trainability. Have difficulty with everyday demands like using a phone book, reading bus or train schedules, banking, filling out forms, using appliances like a video recorder, microwave oven or computer, etcetera, and therefore require assistance from relatives or social agencies in the management of their affairs. Can be employed in simple tasks but require supervision.

That's actually very badly written -- using a phone book, filling out forms, and reading bus schedules are not "everyday" tasks (everyone who has used a phone book today please raise your hand.... anyone?) They are commonplace, but not common, and that's precisely why they're difficult for people with low intelligence.

A person who used a microwave all the time -- perhaps nuking food in a restaurant, for example -- would have no problem learning how to use that microwave to nuke that particular food. To warm up coffee, put the cup in the 'wave, press this set of buttons, and take it out after the beep. The problem comes when you try to warm up a sandwich instead of a cup of coffee, because you need to press a different set of buttons, and it's hard to reason from first principles what that different set is to be.


Dark Immortal wrote:
The rest of the description goes on to demonstrate how it isn't a low wisdom issue. He never learned to stop and think.

That still is indicative of a low Wisdom, not Intelligence. With a decent Wisdom, you know the difference between bad decisions and good. Your low Intelligence just makes it harder for you to understand the complex details of your surroundings -- but you definitely know what's good and what's bad.

In fact, with such a low Intelligence, you may not understand exactly what your vices are in the first place. Sure, you remember the nice man that gave you that powder that made you feel really good -- but all you remember is that it was white powder. You probably entertained the entire inn by snorting a bag of flour and not understanding why it didn't make you feel just as good.

People with impulse control and addictions lack Wisdom. With a high Wisdom -- 14, in your case -- it might in fact be likely you decided taking that white powder was a bad idea, in the first place.

To the OP, if you watch the [b]Game of Thrones{/b] series, your character is like Hodor -- only Hodor is brain-damaged, which is why the only word he says is "Hodor". Hodor is used as general labor around Winterfell, untrained labor which doesn't require skill, just a strong back and a willingness to learn. Your fighting skills may just be a natural talent combined with raw instinct.

But yes, you're right that it's PFS, so it doesn't matter. If you catch a GM who thinks differently, all he can do, really, is refuse to have you at his table. Go find another GM.

Dark Archive

Intelligence is fluid and not based so neatly into pure wisdom, pure intellect, etc. There is plenty of room for the two to interact, bleed over or emulate one another. Impulse control is typically a willpower issue. Good decisions and bad decisions are typically wisdom/common sense related. But real life experience is more complex than that. Things are not perfectly cut into the relative black and white shapes of pathfinder.
I find being detailed here, often leads to the this very sort of debate. So allow me to rephrase:
The character has 5 int and the low score is represented by lack of understanding and poor memory retention. He doesn't understand how or why drugs are bad. They make him feel good. They make others feel good.

His wisdom tells him that certain actions are frowned upon so if he is going to do them he should probably not get caught.

Stats are generalities but having a high or low stat by no means implies that a character is a master of all things related to the ability. It could just as likely mean that they are specifically talented in some areas with said stat. High wisdom boosts the will save, yes. But a low will class has an average will now. High wisdom could easily be represented as a preternatural sense of the future but no common sense. Or excellent common sense but no intuition, or a really high intuition but no whatever.

Intelligence works the same way. 5 int can mean slow learning, poor memory, unknowledeagble, etc. It can be all of those things or just one. I could make a 5 int knowledge machine who makes most knowledge skill checks (and has a lot) easily. No one would call him stupid, necessarily.

Stats are flexible. I was demonstrating that flexibility with my own take on 5 int. This could get really complicated if we tried adding charisma into the mix. That bleeds into typical wisdom concepts in a lot of places as well.


Lenthalia wrote:

I've got a 5 intelligence Demon-Spawn Tiefling I'm going to be using in PFS. Now, since it's PFS, I could in most cases simply ignore my intelligence, as it has no effect in PFS outside of skill points and other direct numerical things.

However, I don't want to do this, and would actually like to make something fun out of the fact that my character is mentally challenged.

Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.

*

For Golarion, this is incorrect. About one NPC in six has a Int of 8, other than a few set-pieces, that's the lowest. In other words, folks in Golarion are NOT rolled 3d6 but use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) or Elite array.

Now, as far as acting stupid, this gets very old, very quick. Suitable for a Toon! game, but not D&D.

Also, they may be folks at your table that will be offended by this.

The Exchange

DrDeth wrote:
Lenthalia wrote:

I've got a 5 intelligence Demon-Spawn Tiefling I'm going to be using in PFS. Now, since it's PFS, I could in most cases simply ignore my intelligence, as it has no effect in PFS outside of skill points and other direct numerical things.

However, I don't want to do this, and would actually like to make something fun out of the fact that my character is mentally challenged.

Now, if we assume that the majority of the common folk are generated via 3d6 methods, that means that he's dumber than 96.7% of the populace.

*

For Golarion, this is incorrect. About one NPC in six has a Int of 8, other than a few set-pieces, that's the lowest. In other words, folks in Golarion are NOT rolled 3d6 but use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) or Elite array.

Now, as far as acting stupid, this gets very old, very quick. Suitable for a Toon! game, but not D&D.

Also, they may be folks at your table that will be offended by this.

If they are going to BE stupid they should be played as stupid. that doesn't mean you have to be cartoonish about it. A lack of reasoning and problem solving skills, small vocabulary. not that hard and not insulting to anyone. Also reality is offensive.

Dark Archive

You can't please everyone. I have no tolerance for stupid people/behavior in real life but I find them hilarious when role played. See? You're not pleased but I am. So whether or not people at the table will be offended shouldn't determine whether she should play the character. Like you said, it's a game. If she knows it will offend someone then that is for her and that person to work out outside of game. I know people who get offended if using the word fat. When you change it to a more polite term like obese or large, they then think you are poking fun and being rude. She shouldn't have to role play around people who are going to constantly fail wisdom checks or intelligence checks or charisma checks like that. But you are right, it does happen. Since you never know who is going to take offense you have two primary options play the fat character or don't. The assumption is that players are mature and can handle concepts like racism, violence and death. If those said players cannot get beyond obesity, gender, sexuality and mental faculties they probably should not be playing the game.

Sovereign Court

What's that character's Wisdom score? Is it also low?

Linking (only) Intelligence to "smarts" is a pit many Pathfinder players fall into.

If you're linking smarts to NOT doing things that are stupid, (for example, having Common Sense) you're looking at Wisdom instead.

Intelligence is more akin to how much schooling/training you've had. Common Sense is better represented by the Wisdom stat (which, assuming is not also a dump stat, can allow for a low-Int character to not behave stupidly).


DrDeth wrote:

Now, as far as acting stupid, this gets very old, very quick. Suitable for a Toon! game, but not D&D.

Also, they may be folks at your table that will be offended by this.

I think I have to make an important distinction.

One thing to do is to "act stupid" in the sense of shouting random things, and screwing up the mission for your party all the time. This is not what I want to do.

Another thing is to convey the sense that your character is slow, and not quick to pick things up, despite his best efforts. I don't think there would be many people that would be terribly annoyed by this.

I'm not talking about picking up random things and eating them, or otherwise acting like a fool. Think Forrest Gump. I've said it before, but it bears repeating. Forrest Gump is a Lawful Good fellow with an intelligence of about 5, 6 at best. He doesn't go shouting random things, or eating random things, or getting distracted by teh shinez in the middle of combat situations.

He's just much slower than others to adjust to new concepts, and to pick things up.

EDIT: There are two characters in question, now. My character has:
Str 18 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 5 Wis 10 Cha 17.


DrDeth wrote:
For Golarion, this is incorrect. About one NPC in six has a Int of 8, other than a few set-pieces, that's the lowest. In other words, folks in Golarion are NOT rolled 3d6 but use the standard array (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8) or Elite array.

At the end of the day, it doesn't much matter to me whether the general populace follows a bell curve or not "officially".

That being said, the assumption that a standardized array implies that everyone in the world actually has that array seems a bit off. It seems perfectly clear that that is an ease-of-use decision, and is not supposed to be implying that there is not a single peasant out there whose ability scores don't go below 8, or above 13.


Here's something I can never figure out from a purely role playing perspective: why would someone this dumb be adventuring? And what party would actually agree to be saddled with someone this incapable?

I know, it's PFS. I know, mechanically speaking it's "just" a 15% penalty. Probably just me, but if I had something important that needed to get done the dumb guy in the corner is the last person I'd ask to help out. There are plenty of other potential adventuring companions in the world that aren't such a hindrance.

Meh, to each their own I guess.


Oh, I have that figured out. First, his adoptive father is a former pathfinder, who called in a few favors to get my character accepted into the society.

The reason why my character wants to join is first, to follow in his admired father's footsteps, second, because he believes he will be able to do good, third, because he feels it is his path to perfection (that being a big thing in Iroran teachings).

EDIT: And, no, he's not meant to be someone you ask to do skilled or subtle things. He will be able to deal damage, take lots of damage, and pop off raise dead's at level 7 via Ultimate Mercy, which I'm sure many companions will appreciate the potential of.

At level 1, he's mostly a meatshield that has a Bardiche, a bite attack, and a +7 Diplomacy check. I figure he charms them with his simple and straightforward nature.


As I said, to each their own. If I ended up at a table with a person determined to play an Int 5 character I'd excuse myself, but that's just me. I am not trying to say you're having fun wrong. I just know I wouldn't enjoy playing alongside someone trying to play that kind of handicap.

If you want to get an idea of what it would be like to have that low Int, pick up a textbook on a subject you know is wildly beyond your ability to learn. Spend a few hours trying to get through chapter 1 to even get the basic grasp of the subject. Now imagine having that much trouble reading Dr Seuss.

EDIT: Here's an example that works for me.


Day Job suggestions:

Profession: Greeter

Profession: Guy Who Tears Down Boxes in the Stockroom

Profession: Guy Who Tears Covers off Remaindered Paperbacks in the Stockroom

...

You get the idea. ;)


David Haller wrote:

Day Job suggestions:

Profession: Greeter

Profession: Guy Who Tears Down Boxes in the Stockroom

Profession: Guy Who Tears Covers off Remaindered Paperbacks in the Stockroom

...

You get the idea. ;)

Welcome to Costco, I love you.

Liberty's Edge

Intelligence=5; Most likely illiterate. Speaks in short sentences using one or two syllable words. Cannot offer helpful or meaningful suggestions to others in game, especially regarding tactics. Unable to acquire certain skills involving the need for literacy and/or advanced language,writing, or training. Unable to learn any other language than common or characters native racial language. One skill point per level. Possibly superstitious and/or idiosyncratic.

Dark Archive

@deusvult tentative stat array is:
Str 16, Dex 10, con 13, int 5, Wis 14, cha 17 (I think).

And you are correct, the 14 wisdom is what carries him through as mostly normal. The 5 int is lack of education, slow to figure things out, lack of comprehension. The wisdom says 'hey, you don't understand and that's OK. Let's work with what we did understand and make the best decision we can with it'. This allows him to function in society as passibly normal. His charisma score allows him to fake it until he makes it? :)

@Lenthalia, Your character already sounds endearing and refreshing. I have no innate prejudice against characters with low int or severe handicaps. It comes down to who is playing the character and I believe that you would do a good job of it. I won't walk away from your table. Besides, I have to keep an eye on my clone, right? ;)

Sovereign Court

I always explained Wisdom to new players as that quality that allows you to realize to not do those "I shouldn't have done THAT.." situations BEFORE you do them.

With those mental scores, I could totally see some sort of lovable rustic type of character who's not at all familiar with big-city-ways but is still quite capable of not just getting by but contributing to a party's success. I could envision a less-whiny Luke Skywalker with such a statline :D


Simon Legrande wrote:
Here's something I can never figure out from a purely role playing perspective: why would someone this dumb be adventuring? And what party would actually agree to be saddled with someone this incapable?

Because stupid doesn't mean incapable.

And because in an emergency, you may need to adventure with the party you have, not the party you wish you had.


The person you're looking for is Charlie Kelly from Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia:

Pepe Silvia
Trash to Stars

Sadly, there aren't too many great quality clips on Youtube.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Simon Legrande wrote:
Here's something I can never figure out from a purely role playing perspective: why would someone this dumb be adventuring? And what party would actually agree to be saddled with someone this incapable?

Because stupid doesn't mean incapable.

And because in an emergency, you may need to adventure with the party you have, not the party you wish you had.

I agree that stupid doesn't mean totally incapable. The problem is, they are so narrowly capable that the in-between times would be incredibly tedious. That's the reason I don't like playing characters below average intelligence, I don't want to just sit around waiting until the moment where my role comes into play.


Simon Legrande wrote:
I don't want to just sit around waiting until the moment where my role comes into play.

Who's making you?

Also, Hodor.

Dark Archive

Revel (my 5 int Tiefling) fully plans to be doing drugs, trying new foods, revisiting brothels with frequency, doing more drugs, going to concerts, going out to dance, staying up all night (perhaps at another brothel) and doing more drugs in the morning because they're starting to wear off and he's feeling tired. If you are going to waste the day doing errands and the night sleeping, that's your problem (you really should come hang out with him and loosen up, life's short after all). Heck, maybe stop by the temple for breakfast or lunch with him? He can guarantee some 'exotic' quisine. :D

Heck, his 5 int might be partly a result of doing those things. Too many drugs and maybe an untreated std that has caused some damage. He's still functional. Still interesting and capable but he's um...too lazy or not very capable of thinking things through. There are lots of ways to have low intelligence (or any other ability score) represented.

Remember that ability scores are guidelines and approximations with mechanical aspects in a world built around creativity and interpretive simulated realism. There is a lot of room for variation on some things.


Here's how I see it:

Low int, average others = yes, Forest Gump

Low wis, average others = bad president/dude with addiction problems/other things

Low cha, average others = doesn't know what certain sayings mean, says the wrong things sometimes or whatnot

Though I think things get very interesting if you have some high non-physical stats, but also some low non-physical stats.

For example, a high charisma but a low intelligence = Derek Zoolander.

If you're going for a charisma based character, I'd consider that approach rather than the Forest Gump approach.


Dark Immortal wrote:
And you are correct, the 14 wisdom is what carries him through as mostly normal. The 5 int is lack of education, slow to figure things out, lack of comprehension. The wisdom says 'hey, you don't understand and that's OK. Let's work with what we did understand and make the best decision we can with it'. This allows him to function in society as passibly normal. His charisma score allows him to fake it until he makes it? :)

Heh. I like this interpretation.

Dark Immortal wrote:
@Lenthalia, Your character already sounds endearing and refreshing. I have no innate prejudice against characters with low int or severe handicaps. It comes down to who is playing the character and I believe that you would do a good job of it. I won't walk away from your table. Besides, I have to keep an eye on my clone, right? ;)

Heh. In actuality, I posted this as an example build on the 21st of July, as part of my Iroran Paladin guide, with the specific post about the example builds being here. (Rudy2 is an alias of mine).

That being said, Int 5 Demon-Spawn is such a neat idea that I'm not particularly surprised that two people came up with it independently. There's a lot you can do with it. :)

It's changed a bit since that example build. My feats are now Fey Foundling > Extra Lay on Hands > Greater Mercy > Ultimate Mercy > Dragon Style, for example, picking up Dragon Ferocity with a dip into Unarmed Fighter after that.


Domestichauscat wrote:

For example, a high charisma but a low intelligence = Derek Zoolander.

If you're going for a charisma based character, I'd consider that approach rather than the Forest Gump approach.

Fair, but I'm not sure that Zoolander fits as well into his backstory, nor his class as an Iroran Paladin.

The character is definitely very sure of himself, comfortable in his skin, and exudes a simple, straightforward charm.

Grand Lodge

Lenthalia wrote:
Domestichauscat wrote:

For example, a high charisma but a low intelligence = Derek Zoolander.

If you're going for a charisma based character, I'd consider that approach rather than the Forest Gump approach.

Fair, but I'm not sure that Zoolander fits as well into his backstory, nor his class as an Iroran Paladin.

The character is definitely very sure of himself, comfortable in his skin, and exudes a simple, straightforward charm.

Hansel.

He is so hot right now.

Hansel.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Intelligence 5 character: Roleplaying Advice All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice