Do you use stats to guide pc behavior?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Just curious.

Seems to me if I roll a 6 Intelligence fighter I should generally play one. Now my fighter can have quirks, he can love balet and opera, he might even be really knowledgeable about building carts.

Do you all play your high wisdom charcters as wise? Do you try to be socially inept with low charisma PC's?

Or are they all just stats for rolling saves? I'm newish so I dunno what is commonly done.

[denthor]

I make the atempt I had a 6 chrasima halfling once she was played like this

She made a suggestion if she got anything other then let's try she turn on her heel disgusted snot and stomped away.

DM ask what her Chrasima was and said you just proved it. Asked me to stop. He and I can play together fairly well but he considers me rude .

Spoiler alert I am slightly rude no real hello goodbye pleasantries

[KorvinStarmast]

To inform the character's behavior, yes, but I do not let the numbers get in the way of role playing. It's not a computer game. It's OK to try things and fail if your bonuses, or lack of bonuses, put the odds against you. Likewise, to try and succeed, even if the numbers were against them.

[TheCrowing1432]

I make the atempt I had a 6 chrasima halfling once she was played like this

She made a suggestion if she got anything other then let's try she turn on her heel disgusted snot and stomped away.

DM ask what her Chrasima was and said you just proved it. Asked me to stop. He and I can play together fairly well but he considers me rude .

Spoiler alert I am slightly rude no real hello goodbye pleasantries

was this written by someone with 6 int?

[Finger6842]

The numbers themselves don't limit your character RP. A 6 is often misleading until you realize your still pretty smart about certain things just not highly educated or worldly. A higher wisdom can make you seem more intelligent when considered as street smarts. The long and short of it is take it into consideration but RP the character the way you see it and let the mechanics handle how the world responds to you.

[Naanomi]

If I have a character I want to be smart or impulsive or rude or whatever, I make sure the stats reflect that... but in general unless the stats are very high or low (6 or less, 14 or higher) I don't tend to RP it unless I planned to conceptually already

[Waterdeep Merch]

I always take it into consideration, but I also keep in mind that just because someone's an idiot doesn't mean they can't have specialties where they're an expert. This edition, I try to build that in with skill and tool proficiencies gained via background, with some simpler roleplaying for more specific things. Like how maybe the idiot half-orc fighter is actually a huge geek when it comes to sword-smithing techniques despite not knowing how to do it himself, or perhaps despite the hulking barbarian's visage he loves tea and can identify blends and even nationality by taste. Maybe the rogue's not all that wise, but he understands how to slow down and be careful when his neck's on the line. Stuff like that.

[RSP]

I try to fit the stats in, but at the end of the day, I doubt I'm going to pull off roleplaying a genius or a comparable wise or charismatic character.

I do like to have the stats reflect how I want the character to act: if it's a curiousity killed the cat type, then Wisdom is going to be their lowest stat.

Likewise, if not particularly bright, Int; or clumsy, Dex; so on and you get the idea.

I don't feel the need to box a character in with "they have stat X so they need to act like ___." Hopefully I plan the stats right to how I want the character to act when creating the PC.

[Dappershire]

I usually stick to me stats fairly religiously. I just got so annoyed of players treating their characters as practically gods, when they had numerous low stats. Then again, sometimes you had a player whos intelligence stat was lower then his characters. That's always dreadful.

It just grated on me, because it basically seemed like metagaming. If you have 6 charisma, I doubt you're going to have grown up to be very confident. 6 strength, and you're probably not the type to rush into the front lines of danger. I base my characters psychology around their stats, because that is what stats are for.

Sure, you can try anything in D&D. Your 6 charisma might make a successful persuasion check because maybe the Guard just likes girls with big ol' toad eyes. But a character shouldn't rely on miraculous rolls. Stick to your concept. And Conceptualize as per your stat rolls.


Yeah, well, that's just, like, my opinion, man.

[Darth Ultron]

Always.

Most role players do. A big part of the game is playing the role of a character. So a role player will make up a character personality to play.

The stats do make for a bit of a wrinkle for some players as they want (''or must have to play'') high stats in everything. And then they can't play a ''dumb dwarf'', for example, as the dwarf will have an intelligence of 16. But most of palyers of this type won't be playing the ''role of a character'', but instead will just play ''themselves'', so in the end it just does not matter. After all the character can have a wisdom and intelligence of 20, and this type of player will see a door with a huge skull painted on it and a floor covered in bones and still be like ''ok, whatever, I open the door, is there any loot inside?"

[Lombra]

I try to use them when interacting with other PCs, if a player doesn't have a really strong argument but his character has 20 charisma I try to make my character follow the other PC's idea. And try not to make the character act smart when he has low int scores, if I happen to have a genial intuition I might propose it to whoever player has the character with the highest intelligence score OOC, just to keep the overall experience coherent.

[Unoriginal]

You don't need a low WIS to be impulsive or a low CHA to be rude. Some people can be rude jerks and still charismatic, for exemple.

The thing with stats is that they inform what you can do, which affect the way you act but rarely exclude anything. You can be a sport enthusiast with any stat, but you're not going to be a great sportsman if you have very low STR and DEX. You can be impulsive with any stat, but a high WIS would let you consider more factors that will affect how you handle your impulsion.



The numbers themselves don't limit your character RP. A 6 is often misleading until you realize your still pretty smart about certain things just not highly educated or worldly.

6 INT is probably not smart about anything, though.

[Findulidas]

I try to follow my stats somewhat. Sometimes I use them to justify doing something I think is funny but stupid. After all the end goal is to have fun.

[Millstone85]

Some people can be rude jerks and still charismatic, for exemple.I play a warlock who has no idea how to use her Charisma for anything other than repelling-blasting her problems, or similar magic tricks. My reasoning is that her spellcasting ability is actually a seventh score she would instinctively use in place of Charisma if she tried to be suave.


6 INT is probably not smart about anything, though.According to numbers, a 17th-level 6 Int character with proficiency in History would be as knowledgeable on the matter as an any-level 18 Int character who didn't pursue that line of study.

[nickl_2000]

I certainly try to do so. I've got a 6 Cha Druid right now who I play as obnoxious in social situations (he asks inappropriate questions, talks to loud, and often interrupts). The challenge with this is reading the other players at the table, there is a point when the PC starts getting to annoying, then it is time to meta game and shut up so I don't take away from their fun.

[MrMcBobb]

It just grated on me, because it basically seemed like metagaming. If you have 6 charisma, I doubt you're going to have grown up to be very confident. 6 strength, and you're probably not the type to rush into the front lines of danger. I base my characters psychology around their stats, because that is what stats are for.

Sure, you can try anything in D&D. Your 6 charisma might make a successful persuasion check because maybe the Guard just likes girls with big ol' toad eyes. But a character shouldn't rely on miraculous rolls. Stick to your concept. And Conceptualize as per your stat rolls.


Yeah, well, that's just, like, my opinion, man.

I dunno Dappershire, I've been in a lot of pubs in my time and seen many a str 6 fella getting fighty. By the same token I've had my mates being hit on by shady creepers who clearly have sub-par charisma. In real life your "stats" don't inform your decision making process too much, but they obviously affect it. It's just a case of finding the right balance in game. It's a tough process and to each their own, no wrong way of doing it so long as you're not impinging on other's enjoyment of the game.

[Jophiel]

Like others, I try to. I made a 6 INT character before and my role playing was that she was raised on the streets and thus just not educated in anything (or really literate). She wasn't "hurr durr" dumb but was useless if you needed to solve a word puzzle or remember who the current Duke of Stormwood was or examine ancient runes. I often wouldn't even make rolls on that stuff because it was silly to think I'd roll a 20 and say "Oh yeah, that's Third Dynasty Terellion script used only by the high born ladies of the era..."

It can be a little challenging to role play over your pay grade (genius, prophet-like wisdom, super-charismatic, etc) but the mechanics work well enough. Sort of the opposite of the 6 INT character, I can have my bard try and sweet talk everyone and rely on the dice rolls to make up for my inability to regularly charm the DM with my scintillating personality. To be honest, after a couple off the cuff flowery speeches followed by a 1 on the D20, I sometimes feel ready to just say "My bard sez stuff *roll die*..."

[Dudewithknives]

Yes, very much so.

I am currently playing a brute type character with an int and cha of 8.

He is brutally honest to a fault, he just does not really see the point in subtly or pleasantries, he tends to be loud, uncouth, and brash. He also missinterprates what large words mean and gets some facts wrong.

It is a OOTA game, last session I spent 10 mins in a conversation with an npc about fighting and books because my guy though a "pascifist" was someone who studied history.

He does have a solid wisdom, so most of the time, he is smart enough to keep his mouth shut, and tends to know if a plan is a good idea or not, even though he does not really get the specifics.

[rollingForInit]

I always try to find a way to explain low stats. For instance, I played a rogue with 8 Intelligence. I played her as having a poor general education and being bad at stuff like mathematics. But then, she was proficient in Investigation, so she was really good at putting clues together to solve problems.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Note that by all accounts, a score of 8 is slightly sub-par but still well within the bulge of the bell curve. That means that someone with an INT of 8 is not a moron; they're just not intellectually oriented. May not even be noticeable in normal life. Same with the other stats. A 6 should show noticeable (and meaningful) impairment; a 4 should be severely disabled.

I think that scores of 8 get over-played. Even "stupid" people say insightful and pertinent things after all. I'd probably play an 8 INT character as unlearned but not mentally deficient. 8 CHA would be slightly brusque, rude, or shy, but not so much as to be grating. 8 DEX is slightly clumsy, but not slapstick levels. 8 STR is probably what I am--capable of everyday tasks but out of shape for long grueling runs or heavy lifting.

On the flip side, a score of 12 is just barely above the norm. Probably not noticeable. 14 is noticeable but not superlative, 16 is amazing, 18 is near-peak, and 20 is legendary. Playing 20 INT well is hard.

[Naanomi]

I don't consider someone 'disabled' in the classic sense until 2 on a stat... disabilities don't manifest because of simple random variation in a population, they occur because of specific impairing situations and/or events (albeit often prenatal ones)

[Temperjoke]

I think stats are a good place to start for building your character, but they don't define it. For example, if your character had a low Dex score, that could indicate they might be clumsy/uncoordinated as opposed to possessing a physical disability. A low charisma score could be a really nasty facial scar, or it could be the character is a meek and quiet introvert, since charisma could also be seen as force of personality.

You interpret your stats when you make your character.

[Joe the Rat]

Attributes should inform the character, but not define the character. Doubly so for mental attributes, as their labels and mechanical functions are a tenuous relationship.
The majority of Intelligence tasks deal with Knowledge and Memory, followed by Logic, followed by Reasoning. Low Int can simply be uneducated, and not necessarily an indication of ability, particularly if you have a decent Wisdom, or grab Investigation proficiency so your "putting two and two together" outstrips your "knowing what that phrase means".

Wisdom has jack all to do with judgement and practical experience informing decision-making. It's awareness, intuition, and will-themed saving throws. Are you paying attention?

You can use them like "processing power" and "judgement and impulse control" for characterization. For the most part, the game doesn't.


To be honest, after a couple off the cuff flowery speeches followed by a 1 on the D20, I sometimes feel ready to just say "My bard sez stuff *roll die*..."If your DM isn't into "what you say modifies the roll," see if you can reverse the process. Say what you want to do for influence (what type of appeals, ideals/flaws/bonds you are exploiting, etc.), roll, and then expound based on the results. Save the great speeches for high rolls, and do a "Why don't you give me your name, horsefGIMLI!r" on a 1.

[Isaire]

I dunno Dappershire, I've been in a lot of pubs in my time and seen many a str 6 fella getting fighty. By the same token I've had my mates being hit on by shady creepers who clearly have sub-par charisma. In real life your "stats" don't inform your decision making process too much, but they obviously affect it. It's just a case of finding the right balance in game. It's a tough process and to each their own, no wrong way of doing it so long as you're not impinging on other's enjoyment of the game.

Well, the funny thing with your example is that the shady creepers may well only have came across as such because of their low charisma.. So the outcomes were decided by the stats, but not the behaviours.

Though that is definitely not the case with all shady creepers.

[Osrogue]

I play a warlock who has no idea how to use her Charisma for anything other than repelling-blasting her problems, or similar magic tricks. My reasoning is that her spellcasting ability is actually a seventh score she would instinctively use in place of Charisma if she tried to be suave.

According to numbers, a 17th-level 6 Int character with proficiency in History would be as knowledgeable on the matter as an any-level 18 Int character who didn't pursue that line of study.

17th level characters are basically superhuman, so comparing them with what's essentially a level 4 wizard isn't really fair.

At level 1, a 6 int character who went into a career or had a background that made them proficient in history, he would be as knowledgeable as a commoner who has never read a book in her life.

[Laurefindel]

Mental stats can mean so many things...

Typically, I will see a low stat as a flaw among the things that that stat can represent. Low CHA? perhaps the character is shy, or obnoxious, or rude, or lacks self-confidence, or overly talkative, or socially awkward, or perhaps not very pretty (yet not strikingly ugly). I'll take one that fits and/or define the character concept, but will not play all flaws simultaneously.

high stats are usually harder to play than lower ones, because acquiring a flaw is much easier than acquiring a quality that you, as a player, don't have to begin with.

[Naanomi]

high stats are usually harder to play than lower ones, because acquiring a flaw is much easier than acquiring a quality that you, as a player, don't have to begin with.
Especially at tables where you are expected to do a lot of mental/social tasks 'out of character'... it is a common expectation at most games I've played in to have to solve puzzles or 'know where to look for traps' and the like yourself, regardless of your character's high (or low) stats. Same with social situations; regardless of your Charisma score and social proficiencies you DC is set by your personal social insight to ask the right questions etc

[Laurefindel]

Especially at tables where you are expected to do a lot of mental/social tasks 'out of character'... it is a common expectation at most games I've played in to have to solve puzzles or 'know where to look for traps' and the like yourself, regardless of your character's high (or low) stats. Same with social situations; regardless of your Charisma score and social proficiencies you DC is set by your personal social insight to ask the right questions etc

Exactly. Note that the opposite is equally frustrating, finding the solution to the puzzle only to be told that with your 8 INT, your character would not have had found the solution :(

[GlenSmash!]

I agree with using stats to guide behavior, but not define it. If I have a character with High Int, I'm likely to try and use it to my advantage in most scenarios. If I don't, then I don't.

[rollingForInit]

Same with social situations; regardless of your Charisma score and social proficiencies you DC is set by your personal social insight to ask the right questions etc

Yeah, that's awful. I'd always do it more like ... If a person doesn't feel like acting out in detail, I'll just ask what angle they are going for. "I try to persuade the person" wouldn't be enough for me, I'd want some indication of how the character would act. Is the PC trying to be friendly? Logical? Is he fast-talking the npc? And depending on the situation I might give hints that are relevant to their high score, if it feels like it's something they'd obviously know from that.

[MrMcBobb]

Well, the funny thing with your example is that the shady creepers may well only have came across as such because of their low charisma.. So the outcomes were decided by the stats, but not the behaviours.

Though that is definitely not the case with all shady creepers.

That was my point. Dappershire was talking about people with low charisma being meek and people with low strength not being on the front of danger. I was just pointing out that people sometimes don't realise/care that they have low stats in a given area.

[Coidzor]

When one of my characters has low Int, I usually have them either not notice certain things that I do or I have them notice it in a round-about way or through taking more steps or not understanding something so that while discussing it and clarifying the question, what I wanted to get at comes up at least a fair amount of the time.

There's a bit of overlap between Wis and Int in that regard.

Charisma-wise... I actually try to word things more effectively when a character has a decent charisma or I'll be a bit quieter and more blunt with a low Cha character, I guess. For the most part, though, I think I don't really think about it as much. Maybe they're more self-assured/confident?



Strong PCs are confident in their strength, whether in combat or during exploration or social interaction, while weak ones try to avoid physicality whenever they can.

Tough ones are confident in their being able to take a few hits as necessary and exert themselves while less healthy ones tend to try to take it easy.

Dextrous PCs generally prefer to stay at range where possible. Clumsy ones who are aware generally try not to be the person handling delicate things.