Dispute over a character with low int


Advice

1 to 50 of 464 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

So in a session I'm part of there is a bit of trouble concerning a sorcerer with 4 int and 12 wisdom. Other players feel like the sorcerer isn't being role played correctly. For example, the entire team screwed up and was arrested except for said sorcerer because he was somewhere else at the time. He returned though just in time to see them being arrested. He used invisibility and followed them inside. Asked if he could percept keys and was told where they were by the dm.

He then grabbed them and used them to open the cells of his allies and when a guard came to see if everything was good, he hid the keys under his clothes so they couldn't be seen.

The other players argued that he isn't smart enough to know that he should save them while he says that it's a matter of wis not int.
They also said that couldn't know the keys are also invisible when hidden under his clothes but the spell description says so specifically.

What are your takes on this? Are the other players correct or are they harassing him without proper reasons?

Thanks in advance.


16 people marked this as a favorite.

What a load of tosh. I'm sorry, but who do the other players think they are, telling this guy how to play his character? This character is not intelligent, so of course, if the he starts talking complex math and high-litterature, perhaps someone should ask the player if he really thinks that, that is what his character would realistically do. ASK him if that is what he thinks. Not tell him that it is not. It's not like the guy is lacking the wisdom to make good decisions, and he can be expected to know how his own spells work, just as much as a fighter can be expected to know his sword is made of a hilt, blade, pommel and crossguard.

If there has been a historical issue in the group of this player dumpstatting and then just roleplaying his way around it, as if it didn't matter, then I can see a reason why you would take the player aside to ask him, after the game. But if I was said player, I'd frankly ask the others to take their noses out of my business while I'm roleplaying my character.

My 2 cents.

-Nearyn

Edit: does this thread belong on the advice board?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would look a bit askance at the player too.

However, I think the proper approach is to ask him "What limitations, outside of skill points and other dull numerics, does your low intelligence place on your behavior?"

I would think it unreasonable, and against the spirit of roleplaying in general, that there should be no limitations of such an unbelievably low intelligence, but it's better for the player themselves to come up with some actual limitations themselves.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Wolves have a 1 or 2ish intelligence and are able to flank, trip, disarm, use complex group tactics and a lot of other things, but this is a matter of wisdom, not intellect. intellect is book smarts. this is more common sense, which goes under wisdom.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Even Crows have been know to bend wire to create tool, in which to procure objects from where they cannot reach.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wolves, and I'm fairly sure the majority of vertebrae animals, are 2. I only know that because I have a rule that creatures with intelligence 1 can't use tactics of any kind. :)


Nearyn wrote:

Edit: does this thread belong on the advice board?

Yeah wasn't too sure because it's also about the rule definition of int and wis


Low intelligence, high wisdom tends to be impulsive in my mind. In this specific circumstance, it could be said the player saw strange men take away his friends, and thus did what he could to get them back.

With that said, he's 2 intelligence away from animal-grade intellect RAW. You know, like a deer?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Huh, funny; I see high wisdom as the opposite of impulsive. Shows how subjective these things are.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

By the way, a 4 intelligence, is the same as the Village Idiot NPC, from the GameMastery Guide.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Low intelligence, high wisdom: Winnie the Pooh, Forrest Gump.

Nothing described in this scenario requires sophisticated knowledge. If you're not going to let a player use basic common sense, you shouldn't allow characters with mental stats of 4.


Saint_Yin wrote:

Low intelligence, high wisdom tends to be impulsive in my mind. In this specific circumstance, it could be said the player saw strange men take away his friends, and thus did what he could to get them back.

With that said, he's 2 intelligence away from animal-grade intellect RAW. You know, like a deer?

Hey, don't make fun of him, he is at least twice as smart as a deer!


Int vs Wis is an interesting topic, at least for me.

It's hard to nail the details down but I think that

Int = I know how to solve this problem.

Wis = I know why to solve this problem a certain way.

That said, using a spell comes natural to a Sorcerer, and figuring out that you need a key for a cell isn't that hard.

But if he starts coming up with complex battle plans, complex solutions and thinking quick on his feet etc. than we enter the "I neglect my stats " territory, because he simply RPGs over his dump stat.

I have no problem with dump stats, but one should respect them. It's easier with STR etc. you can't RPG over low STR, but that's the challenge he accepted the moment he dumped Int.


Thinking about that INT....I wonder whether having a familiar (tattooed sorcerer, arcane bloodline, dip into wizard, etc) would change things.

I mean, even a level 1 familiar has 6 INT. And if you have something like a thrush or raven, which have the supernatural ability to talk from the get go, then they could actually give you advice....

That could theoretically solve this kind of problem (might not be a viable solution for you, since I doubt you have this specific kind of build...but eh)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There is no rule for roleplaying a stat.

I tend to discourage any stat below 7. This is as much mechanical as anything else. What you have is a common problem in point buy games. People dump stats especially an Off mental stat and basically behave as of the other 2 make up for it.

The above scenario is not that far fetched given the information. However the character is only average in the common sense department and extremely handicapped in intellect. I'm going to assume he has a stratospheric charisma.

Unless you have a specific and communally accepted house rule that institutes a disconnect between stats and Roleplay you will always have players that absolutely detest what this player has done.

It helps to have examples of what ultra low stats actually do for players to discuss and agree on ahead of time, just like alignment.

For me and my group an INT value that low is not just a crude understanding of Book Learnin'. This character would be illiterate, would have difficulty counting beyond maybe 10 and would have a vocabulary that was incredibly simplistic. Multi syllabic words and any complex concept beyond base emotional reactions would be suspect. That he's a spell caster using verbal components should probobly cut that base vocabulary down even further. Comparing PCs to animal stats is a mistake, animals have poor stats comparatively (look at the STR on bears and gorillas and compare that to observable YouTube film). A better analogue would be our concept of a Caveman. In the modern world an intellect that low would be on disability and likely unable to hold more complex jobs than sorting Recyclables by shape and color.

A STR, DEX or CON value of 4 are mathematically devastating in PF if the inherent penalties are actually applied. The mental stats should be no different.

Unless stats are just math and have nothing to do with the character beyond static bonuses and penalties. If that's the case everyone involved should be on board with that.


Let me point out that he has 19 charisma. We didn't do a point buy system but we rolled our stats. The dm didn't think it would be necessary to reroll those stats and decided that even though 4 int is bad, he would have to choose it because other stats would be more important.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

considering someone with int 3, could still end up getting 20 skill points in Knowledge(whatever), i think lower int in an Awakened creature at worst limits their ability to learn a great many things at once.

an Animal with 4 int still cannot speak, they are not awakened, comparing an animal to an awakened creature for what int does is not a good relative example.


juste anote on the "unable to count or limited vocabulary or complex thoughts woudl be beyond them.. " kinda train of thought. Whats the accepted int of a toddler or baby? cause thats roughly where that would be. My guess is int 2 is babby 3-4 is childhoodish. on sentient things.

I think this guy would be illeterate most likely (barigng poitns in ling or something) but unless he's never been around language before he grewup, then he'll be able to speak fine, he may not understand ovely fancy words, probably not understand sarcasm, maybe have trouble with permanancy of objects. But the language would be fine baring never being exposed(likeFeralChildren) the sorta thing your describing would be int 2 or 3 of intelligent races. Animal intelligence rating implies other things. (Hell there are dogs that are smarter than some children)

I would play this guy as pretty darn forgetful, having issues with the concept of permanancy, having issues with any math more complicated. He's basically as intelligent as the villiage idiot. The villiage idiot isn't brain dead unable to function in socieity. Just an idiot.
The charactger in question has pretty decent Wis which would be his common sense/sense of self. So yeah he'd understand his friends are important and the people took them.
Out of how that scenario sounded on this. the only thing I would note would be the possiblity of him not knowing the cops were cops, if he's never seen cops before.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Int is things that RPG players are good at. Like books, math and solving problems with recalled solutions from booklearnin'.

Wis is things RPG players aren't good at. Like percieving social cues, common sense and solving problems with prior experience.


Zwordsman wrote:
I think this guy would be illeterate most likely (barigng poitns in ling or something)

Perhaps.

Bear in mind that in Pathfinder, a character with low Int can learn to use magic scrolls of every kind, be a skilled lockpicker and trap-disabler, a master of disguise, an animal trainer, a musician, a gifted orator, a pickpocket, a master of wilderness survival, and make a good living in any profession. He just can't learn to do as many of these at once as someone with decent Int.


Or making wondrous items by gaining the feat. Someone with low int shouldn't be able to do that yet it's possible.


Matthew Downie wrote:
Zwordsman wrote:
I think this guy would be illeterate most likely (barigng poitns in ling or something)

Perhaps.

Bear in mind that in Pathfinder, a character with low Int can learn to use magic scrolls of every kind, be a skilled lockpicker and trap-disabler, a master of disguise, an animal trainer, a musician, a gifted orator, a pickpocket, a master of wilderness survival, and make a good living in any profession. He just can't learn to do as many of these at once as someone with decent Int.

Yup. that was the bit about being unable to read, baring points.

That they can still do all that stuff no matter their INT (unless 0 and brain dead). Rather than Int automatically making them unable to do something. Most of the time that one or two points would lean towards things that provide them with a lively hood. Farming, craft, whatever you roll to beg (what diplo or bluff?)

Scarab Sages

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The arguments in this thread are a good demonstration why people stat dump intelligence on martials.

The game has no mechanic to stop people from using their personal reasoning ability while ignoring the number on their character sheet.

Personal idea: make him roll a DC 10 int check any time he comes up with a plan.


A chart I found online of IQ associated with real-life accomplishments says that at IQ 40 adults can mow lawns and do simple laundry. IQ 50 can do domestic work and simple carpentry. Based on older editions of the game it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the PC in question would be around those ranges in IQ.

Per the rules apes have Int 2. I'd certainly expect that an ape could learn to use a key. Hiding a small item by putting it in something else seems like a concept that a "village idiot" could grasp, so even if the PC didn't understand how Invisibility worked he might try to hide the keys all the same.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Devilkiller wrote:

A chart I found online of IQ associated with real-life accomplishments says that at IQ 40 adults can mow lawns and do simple laundry. IQ 50 can do domestic work and simple carpentry. Based on older editions of the game it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the PC in question would be around those ranges in IQ.

Per the rules apes have Int 2. I'd certainly expect that an ape could learn to use a key. Hiding a small item by putting it in something else seems like a concept that a "village idiot" could grasp, so even if the PC didn't understand how Invisibility worked he might try to hide the keys all the same.

Not at all needed but I just find it cool.

Dogs can be taught to use a key and open a door. I just find that to be pretty interesting it can choose th right key and use it (granted they were oversized to facilitate mouth and not chocking).
Though its a weird thing to try and teach a dog


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't understand what's the fuss about low mental stats roleplay "you can't do that, full stop". The mechanical penalties are well enough to show a character limitation in this regard. Even with the limitation is a -3, nothing a class skill can't compensate, it's not ohmygodican'tevenhowdoiwalk?

I'm not expected to roleplay low strenght. Nobody tells me "you do no damage because low strenght". I roll and the GM decides accordingly.
I'm not expected to roleplay low dexterity. Nobody tells me "You fail to stay on your feet because 4 dexterity". I roll and the GM decides accordingly.
I'm not expected to roleplay low constitution. Nobody tells me "You fall ill because 4 constitution". I roll and the GM decides accordingly.

Why am i expected to make bad decision based on low mental stats? For starters, it should at least be required a roll... And second, how do you define "complex tactics"? Wolves use coordinated pack tactics to exhaust their prey and kill them easier. Crows let nuts fall on zebra crossings, let cars crush them and then wait for the green light to go and eat. To me those are quite complex tactics and both are performed by 2 intelligence animals.

Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

To answer the OP: there was nothing in those tasks that required that high of an intelligence than what would you need to actually be alive up untill tha point, plus someone should be expected to know how his own spells work.

Also it's always fun to see people bash on "minmaxer" when it's actually easier to get stats that low when you roll dices rather than with point buy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that forcing the player to stop participating in the planning part of the game just because he rolled a low Int score sounds like less fun. I guess one could argue that any plan his PC comes up with on his own should be limited to something the PC could reasonably think of, but I don't think that, "If I steal the key I can let my friends out of the jail cell" is something beyond the mental capabilities of a small child or an adult smart enough to mow lawns and maybe do domestic work and simple carpentry.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it's just a mistake to have a 4 int character in the game. That IS a really low int. The GM should bump it up to 6 or 7 and have done with it.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

HODOR!!!


JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Why do you define 4 INT as IQ 50? JSRC wrote about how wolves with an INT of 2 could do some rather complex tactical work... Why shouldn't someone with double the INT be able to do something much more complex? The task that was described by OP doesn't sound that complex to me.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

I agree. 5 int for example is waaay lower int than the way the classic Hulk is usually portrayed. With his Hulk smash and all that. The Hulk can figure things out, talks in halted speech, etc. 4-5 int is really, really low. I don't allow scores lower than 8 at my table. The low physical scores are less problematic than the low mental scores, so I just make a blanket statement when I run- no scores on the sheet lower than 8. (But I allow a generous point buy).


Lifat wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Why do you define 4 INT as IQ 50? JSRC wrote about how wolves with an INT of 2 could do some rather complex tactical work... Why shouldn't someone with double the INT be able to do something much more complex? The task that was described by OP doesn't sound that complex to me.

Wolves are not figuring out new things on the fly. They can do pack combat, because that's all they do. They hunt with the pack every day of their lives. They know how to harry their foes. You put a wolf in a new situation it's going to get confused and attack or run. I think the OP's situation the character may have been able to do that, but that would have been the extent of his mental capacity.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It's BS for the other players around the table to be telling this player how to play his character. Full stop.

This said, I would expect the INT 4 PC to have gaps somewhere in his cleverness factor. How you can balance 4 INT with a medium or high WIS is a tough call, though. Would he have limited language abilities? limited initiative in thinking up new ways to do things, as in out-of-the-box thinking? limited comprehension of numbers and the value of things? limited ability to grasp nuances in conversation and behaviour?

I wouldn't think he'd need to have *all* of those limitations, but there ought to be some way for an outside observer to see that this guy just ain't too smart. As a fellow player or GM I'd suggest (post session!) that the player come up with a few ideas to rp his 4 INT in an entertaining way, or else to re-balance his characteristics, if it was a point buy in the first place.


I get that the other players around the table don't feel it's good RP, and they're allowed to like/dislike whatever they want, and not want to play in a game where something is happening that ruins it for them. That's their call, at the end of the day.

However.

While a 4 int character isn't exactly an Einstein, it isn't a drooling vegetable either. By all means ask the player to reflect the character's low int in some manner of *their* choosing, and laugh at them as they fail all kinds of int-related tests others are passing, but their actions in this respect don't really seem to be even vaguely approaching rocket science. Even the stupidest human being comes up with a decent plan from time to time (I even believe I had one myself a few years ago!)


The stats were rolled like I mentioned before but it wouldn't be entirely fair towards other characters if he got a boost out of it. Though it has happened before with another character where the person was discontent with character itself.

So if I summarize it correctly:

- The DM is partially at fault for allowing a 4 point stat
- The actions the Sorcerer made were legitimate though he shouldn't be capable of doing more than just that.
- A good way of dealing with this is having him make a int check for mental capabilities like planning or executing a somewhat complex plan. Though 10 might be a bit low since he has a int of 4. He can easily make the check with a D20. 12 - 15 or something like that might be better
- Another good way is for him to RP as a forgetful person.

Am I missing anything?

Also the player himself doesn't want to tip toe around because of this and it's best for there to be a clear distinction between what he can and can't do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Our Beagle can unlock doors, we used to put a doggie gate up and close the door to my daughters room and come back later and the door would be open and he would be sitting in the living room tail a' wagging and a barbie in his mouth with partially chewed off arms.

animals are smarter then you give them credit for Mavael especially when it comes to escaping:)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Where is it stated that 4 is 50 IQ? you mean that in real life the difference between an average IQ person and a 50 IQ person is 15% less things he remembers from what you both studied in college? Or, if college is too much of a stretch, elementary school?

Stats are abstraction just like HP, you can't say int 4 = IQ 50 as an absolute rule, it's just arbitrary. Let's add the fact that in a medieval times people were a lot less educated also for what concerned "using" their brain to learn abstracts things (they we're mostly useless when you only needed to bring home the food), so the average should be a lot less than today.

Let's not apply real (not yet perfected) science to an abstraction, only bad things can come from that.


I don't see a problem with his handling of this situation. Int 4 is plenty to comprehend the function of a key. And as a sorcerer (I would expect/rule) he has an intuitive understanding of his spells.

Going by the old 3d6 standard roll for ability scores and the normal distribution of IQ, an intelligence score of 4 would be around 60-70 IQ (pretending IQ is only based on Int and relevant for the game.)
That is a mostly functional individual. Maybe comparable to a normal 2nd or 3rd grader in comprehension level as an adult.

That being said - I don't think IQ is relevant for the in-game. And more importantly, I don't think that players should be that limited in their choices for dumping a stat they essentially don't need to make their character work mechanically. Or that other players should decide when a character is RP'ed right or wrong. They can make suggestions and ask questions.


Lifat wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Why do you define 4 INT as IQ 50?

I pulled it from an earlier quote on the thread. If you actually do the math, 4 Int corresponds to about an IQ of 60, as it's just over two standard deviations from the norm.

Quote:
JSRC wrote about how wolves with an INT of 2 could do some rather complex tactical work...

Math may not be JSRC's friend -- nor psychometrics, either. Intelligence scores of 2 (on 3d6) are literally beyond the scope of the IQ bell curve, which is why they're reserved for non-sentient creature.

Put more bluntly, 4 is about a 60 IQ. 2 is, literally, no measurable IQ, in the way that a cat has no IQ at all.

Quote:


The task that was described by OP doesn't sound that complex to me.

Hiding a key? Not at all. Apes, which also have no measurable IQ, nevertheless know about hiding things from other apes.

But we're not just talking about hiding keys. If you look above, we're talking about "working in society" and "getting college degrees."


I think apes have been tested out as around 70ish if you try to make reasonable allowances for cultural differences. (Famous example: You are shown pictures of a shoe, a sandwich, a flower, and a banana, and asked which of them are edible. Humans pick the sandwitch and the banana. Apes pick the flower and the banana.)

The game doesn't really try to model things exactly. I don't think there's any real game-mechanics reason to say he can't be capable of significantly more than that, not just what he actually did; mechanically, the limit is a -3 penalty on int checks and -3 to skill points. I would not make him roll int to do things. I might fuss a bit if I felt he were out-of-character too much, but honestly, I don't think it's a good thing to be pushy about things like that. If the low stat gives mechanical advantages and he does funny-stupid things sometimes, that's plenty good.

I've seen GMs use int checks for optional bonus hints. I don't think requiring int checks to choose reasonable actions is fair.

And I would absolutely not use a DC higher than DC 10. Just in basic game design terms: If you have under a 25% chance of getting to take your action, that's not fun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Where is it stated that 4 is 50 IQ? you mean that in real life the difference between an average IQ person and a 50 IQ person is 15% less things he remembers from what you both studied in college? Or, if college is too much of a stretch, elementary school?

Stats are abstraction just like HP, you can't say int 4 = IQ 50 as an absolute rule, it's just arbitrary. Let's add the fact that in a medieval times people were a lot less educated also for what concerned "using" their brain to learn abstracts things (they we're mostly useless when you only needed to bring home the food), so the average should be a lot less than today.

Let's not apply real (not yet perfected) science to an abstraction, only bad things can come from that.

If I had to create a pathfinder iq, it would be based on the average of wis and int not on int alone. So in this case the equivalent would be 80, not 40. He's slow, but eventually has pretty good comprehension if he works at it.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Lifat wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
JustSomeRandomCommoner wrote:


Low intelligence sounds more like the definition of being "slow": on equal skill ranks and bonuses (so equal effort on the topic), the character will have less chances to remember things they both studied. But you can still work in society, everybody knows "that dumb person" that got a college degree... Why should he not work fine in sosciety?

Because "that dumb person" who got a college degree doesn't have an IQ of 50; he's probably got an IQ of 90 or so.

I'm not entirely convinced that you understand the full range of human intelligence. I'm sure that you don't actually know how disabling an IQ of 50 is.

Why do you define 4 INT as IQ 50?

I pulled it from an earlier quote on the thread. If you actually do the math, 4 Int corresponds to about an IQ of 60, as it's just over two standard deviations from the norm.

Quote:
JSRC wrote about how wolves with an INT of 2 could do some rather complex tactical work...

Math may not be JSRC's friend -- nor psychometrics, either. Intelligence scores of 2 (on 3d6) are literally beyond the scope of the IQ bell curve, which is why they're reserved for non-sentient creature.

Put more bluntly, 4 is about a 60 IQ. 2 is, literally, no measurable IQ, in the way that a cat has no IQ at all.

Quote:


The task that was described by OP doesn't sound that complex to me.

Hiding a key? Not at all. Apes, which also have no measurable IQ, nevertheless know about hiding things from other apes.

But we're not just talking about hiding keys. If you look above, we're talking about "working in society" and "getting college degrees."

Heck, orangutans are known for being rather masterful lockpickers.

Scarab Sages

It is really difficult because in real life wis and int are not so split up except for people we'd call handicapped. 4 int is like a 40-50 IQ, severely disabled and reliant upon the group. Not Forrest Gump but more like down's syndrome. A sorcerer is an ok choice since the magic is innate and the character doesn't have to actually understand how the magic works through him.

*(actually someone said more like 50-70, 70 is legally retarded yet high functioning, my wife has defended a number of clients like this, people who get in trouble but aren't really "bad", if they scored low enough on an IQ test she could help them avoid jail).

However, I think your real problem is of inter-personal dynamics among the players in your group. As Nearyn said, who the heck are they to tell him how to play? If a friend thinks there is a problem, he needs help to roleplay it, not orders or complaining. It is very difficult to RP a 4 in a mental stat.

Maybe he can work harder during sessions to demonstrate his low IQ, and that would make the group happier. Like constantly wanting to aid another, but because of his low skills he just gives -2 to attempts (you'd have to have a houserule for that i guess if he rolls under 10)

Secondly the rest of the group should be told to give helpful, constructive advice instead of what they did during that session. As someone else wrote, everyone could maybe get together and brainstorm on how a low mental stat should affect the character. Let the player then use those ideas.


So INT4, WIS12, and CHA19? This is a perfectly functional person (since he has so many friends to help him out!). Can't learn new things very well or quickly and always gets the long words wrong. Probably can't spell worth a lick and doesn't bother with math more difficult than you'd see on Dora the Explorer. So, notably stupid. This isn't the guy you want as a manager, but quite likely as a motivational speaker.

As for the complexity of the plan, I would only be a tiny bit surprised if my three-year-old daughter came up with the same plan. Just think, this is a sorcerer- he just "gets" invisibility. Magic is how to overcome obstacles to INT4 sorcerer. That high charisma could probably be used to convince the gaoler to release his friends, but it's not what he did. He did magic! He actually did something stupid, given the resources available- he made his friends fugitives.

"But he hid the key!" Yup. With an understanding of the limits of his spell, which he does have, and a positive modifier for wisdom, why does this seem unreasonable?

1 to 50 of 464 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Dispute over a character with low int All Messageboards