2

Strength: 14

Dexterity: 14

Constitution: 17

Wisdom: 17

Charisma: 10

Intelligence: 1

How are you supposed to roleplay someone that can read and speak two languages, is extremely wise, but has the same int score as a lizard?

Piomicron
  • 836
  • 1
  • 9
  • 16
  • While I'm certain many users can offer suggestions as to how to play such a character, answers should come from users with experience having played a similar character in an actual campaign. With that in mind, is this a PC or an NPC? Is the character stuck with these stats or can new stats be generated differently? – Hey I Can Chan Jan 31 '19 at 13:46
  • See this answer to a similar question – NathanS Jan 31 '19 at 14:00
  • 2
    @Piomicron Hello! Although this question might get closed for being opinion-based, you could pop in [chat] if you want advise regarding this situation. – kviiri Jan 31 '19 at 14:02
  • @HeyICanChan PC – Piomicron Jan 31 '19 at 14:08
  • 2
    I would vote to reopen this question. Yes, an answerer could go off the rails with opinion, but there is also a lot of technical meat here. For one, the question is asking about the different between Intelligence and Wisdom. This is not entirely duplicative with past similar questions because it is such an extreme case. For example, does it make sense to even allow Medicine checks, a wisdom skill, if Int is 1? It is also asking about the possibility of playing a character with 1 intelligence. A rule-oriented answer could look to statblocks with 1 int. Finally, the language issue. – Pink Sweetener Jan 31 '19 at 14:22
  • 2
    This is the roleplaying stack, it's a question about roleplaying problem. I'd vote to reopen, but I don't have the privilege yet. – vicky_molokh- unsilence Monica Jan 31 '19 at 14:51
  • @PinkSweetener Questions about roleplaying based on stats tend to attract low-quality, opinion-based answers. – Cooper Jan 31 '19 at 15:50
  • 1
    @vicky_molokh There is no one correct answer to this question, though, which is likely why this will remain closed. There's no way of having any one answer that meets the requirements of "good subjective" be better than any other answer that meets those same requirements. – Cooper Jan 31 '19 at 15:51
  • 2
    @L.S.Cooper Sharing one's experience with roleplaying such characters, and how that went well/badly seems to not be fundamentally different from sharing experience regarding GMing techniques, dealing with problem players, fixing balance issues etc. – vicky_molokh- unsilence Monica Jan 31 '19 at 16:00
  • 2
    @L.S.Cooper That was my point in my initial comment—to have answers based on actual play experience rather than conjecture. There are lots of questions here that have no right answer, but there are also lots of questions that have answers that are more right than other answers. However, I'm more concerned this this is pretty much a duplicate of this (albeit less extreme) question (mentioned above) and that this question should be noted as such instead of being primarily opinion-based. – Hey I Can Chan Jan 31 '19 at 16:28
  • @L.S.Cooper We can downvote low quality answers. I believe there is sufficient official source material to provide as guidance on this issue for it to be a legitimate, technical issue. Even just extrapolating from different stat blocks could form a meaningful, objective analysis of this question.

    Further, I cannot find any questions on SE about playing as an Int 1 character. There is DM guidance, but that is very different from player guidance.

     – Pink Sweetener Jan 31 '19 at 17:11
  • 1
    @HeyICanChan though that question is also closed and I don't think we dupe to closed questions. – Rubiksmoose Jan 31 '19 at 18:09
  • 1
    @Rubiksmoose Aha! Yeah, your Meta question on the topic popped right up. However, it seems that, without marking this as a duplicate, the site can see questions about playing low Int/high Wis characters pop up repeatedly with this same discussion happening each time, users wasting their time because they didn't know they were part of long-ago discussed-and-dismissed cycle of questions and closures. :-( I'll keep further comments to Meta, but let me end by saying that seems like a lot of effort wasted just to avoid marking a duplicate. – Hey I Can Chan Jan 31 '19 at 18:23
  • 1
    @HeyICanChan I definitely don't necessarily disagree with anything you just said. But yeah discussion for meta. I'd be happy to see your thoughts there if you had some time at some point to write them down. Very good points it seems. – Rubiksmoose Jan 31 '19 at 18:26

0 Answers0