Roleplaying dilemma

[mehs]

So In a campaign, I rolled up a himbo paladin. As in, 6 int, 18 cha, 18 strength (after level 4 bonuses and such).

So the situation is, I am roleplaying him being a charasmatic idiot well, to the extent of getting inspiration, but on the other hand it is frustrating to the dm. Dm also agrees with the dilemma of it being good roleplaying but frustrating.

Advice?

[Phhase]

How exactly is it frustrating? Did the DM expect not expect to have a Good Boi keeping the party on the straight and narrow? Or is it the high stats?

[mehs]

The low intelligence in particular. He is an idiot. To the extent that the characters name is "oaf" is a different language. Not a suicidal "what's this do" *explosion* (yet), but social situations are weird.

[OldTrees1]

Well you both value it as good roleplaying, you both value the GM not being frustrated, and you both recognize something about it is frustrating the GM. That is a good start.

If you can find out why it is frustrating / what is the frustrating part then that can help inform the both of you about further options beyond a binary of stop or go. You mentioned it was the low intelligence, but more information can inform you and the GM more.

It would also be good to get a measure about whether either of you considers the character a net positive experience. You both value the roleplaying but dislike the frustration it causes. If that is a net positive for both, then that leans in favor of some variation of continuing. If it is not a net positive for both, then that leans in favor of some variation of stopping.

Gathering that additional information would put you and the GM in a position where you can evaluate your opinions on minor/moderate changes. You can find out if their is a solution that is a net positive, and if there is an ideal solution.


Edit:
Also consider the alternative. You could have a different character that was not frustrating and was relatively similarly good roleplaying. So, in your shoes, I would be biased towards resolving the frustration over keeping the character.

[mehs]

Compunding the issue, I'm in the spectrum albeit barely and have a difficult time assessing social situations. So at least some of the frustration is inherent to me the player. I asked someone and they judged it as 3/8 of a Sheldon (from the show the big bang theory)

[OldTrees1]

Compunding the issue, I'm in the spectrum albeit barely and have a difficult time assessing social situations. So at least some of the frustration is inherent to me the player. I asked someone and they judged it as 3/8 of a Sheldon (from the show the big bang theory)

Seek further help from your GM. They understand their feelings better than I do. Maybe something like:
"I understand my character being an idiot is frustrating for you. I don't want you to be frustrated. I don't fully understand what about it is frustrating and I would like your help to figure out what can be done to make it less frustrating or perhaps even non frustrating."

Although this advice would be the same regardless of if you are or are not in the spectrum. You both are rather close to a solution, you just need to continue communicating.

[da newt]

A simple rule of thumb that may help: make one dumb / silly / funny comment per interaction, but then allow the rest of the party to steer your guy towards the 'right' action. Allow your PC to trust the others to make better decisions. The aim is to still have fun with your roll playing, but not take the group away from doing what you 'should' be doing.

[mehs]

The party hasn't met yet, still in first few sessions. Dm made an odd choice and had paladin, me, be assigned by church to investigate the wizard, which has caused some in character animosity. The wizard and bard (we are trying to get more players, but currently have 3) are buddies after they pulled a meaningless con that more or less was just getting the church riled up.

[BlackOnyx]

A simple rule of thumb that may help: make one dumb / silly / funny comment per interaction, but then allow the rest of the party to steer your guy towards the 'right' action. Allow your PC to trust the others to make better decisions. The aim is to still have fun with your roll playing, but not take the group away from doing what you 'should' be doing.


This is probably the sort of route I would look into as well.

Though the character himself might have a hard time identifying the best course of action, it's fair to think he might try to follow the example of/defer to the party members/church leaders whose judgement he trusts.

For example: "Say Adivar, what's this do?" or "Say Aileen, do you think they like us?"

Just as well, you could always have the character come to the "correct" conclusion/perform the "correct" action for the "wrong" reasons.

For example, failing to a open a (quite likely) trapped door because he mistakenly tried to pull when he should have pushed.

[Pex]

Low intelligence just means he doesn't know things. That doesn't mean he must act stupid. Go for the humor in saying dumb things when it doesn't matter, i.e. not talking to NPCs. There is no need to instigate trouble. Despite your low intelligence you are not a vegetable. You are still a paladin who knows how to fight. Don't do dumb actions in combat on purpose. Fight normally. Smite. Cast spells. Protect party members. Do what paladins are supposed to do. When a Knowledge check is asked, don't be the one to roll. When the party plans, don't be the one to come up with one. The occasional joke plan for lulz is ok, but it's occasionally not all the time. Don't be disruptive.

[dafrca]

Low intelligence just means he doesn't know things. That doesn't mean he must act stupid. Go for the humor in saying dumb things when it doesn't matter, i.e. not talking to NPCs. There is no need to instigate trouble. Despite your low intelligence you are not a vegetable. You are still a paladin who knows how to fight. Don't do dumb actions in combat on purpose. Fight normally. Smite. Cast spells. Protect party members. Do what paladins are supposed to do. When a Knowledge check is asked, don't be the one to roll. When the party plans, don't be the one to come up with one. The occasional joke plan for lulz is ok, but it's occasionally not all the time. Don't be disruptive.

I agree with this sort of thought. Low INT does not mean he must mess everything up. He clearly was able to earn a spot as a Paladin so he clearly does have something to offer. Just keep the silly to a side thing and not the main focus of the character.

I also agree with those saying continue your dialog with the GM. Keep the door open and look for a solution that is the best for both of you. :smallsmile:

[Glorthindel]

Dm made an odd choice and had paladin, me, be assigned by church to investigate the wizard, which has caused some in character animosity.

To be fair, this is the problem, not the low intelligence.

The low intelligence has probably just compounded the issue by preventing some of the bridges to fix the initial party fracture that the DM presented you with. By the sound of it, he started the rest of the party together, and you on your own, so there is no higher intelligence character supporting you to assist mending the fracture. If you are a couple of sessions in, and the party has still not formed properly, this is likely the cause of the frustration because the DM cannot get on with the story.

Rather than worry about the intelligence issue, speak to the DM to get him to artificially mend the issue between your character and the Wizard, and allow the party to move on as a cohesive unit. Then the low intelligence issue will likely vanish into the background.

[KorvinStarmast]

Dm also agrees with the dilemma of it being good roleplaying but frustrating.

Advice? Yes, stop playing him as an idiot.
(I just noticed da newt's answer, and that's excellent advice. Strongly suggest following it).

At worst, play him as "slow on the uptake" or "slow to catch on" and perhaps semi-literate but before I go any further ... What is his Wisdom score?

You forgot to include that in your problem statement. There are three mental scores: Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma. Each informs role play in social situations, so you leaning hard into low INT seems to ignore the other two scores. Blend all three into his role play.

Here's a short concept for you to consider in terms of a blend:
The INT Score will reflect how well that the paladin does, or does not, remember an NPC's name and or face, or the directions to somewhere (which means that sometimes you may call them by the wrong name until you get to know them well, or may forget how to get to a particular place since a few of the minor landmarks changed or a tree got cut down, or he'll forget which stable he left his horse in overnight)
The Wisdom score will reflect how well the paladin picks up on the other character's body language and non verbal cues,
while the Charisma score will inform your ability to persuade, lie to, or intimidate other characters and your Paladin's self confidence in trying that.
Beyond that, I'd suggest that you use the 6 INT to play him as a little bit absent minded and forgetful. Here is why I suggest that.

Intelligence Measures: Mental acuity, information recall, analytical skill

Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason.

Anyway, that's my advice. It's worth as much or as little as you'd like it to be, but here's my caveat.
You are correct to wonder "what do I need to do differently" when both you and your DM are finding the RP to be a annoying at the table. When that comes up, adjust it so that it isn't annoying.

Also: you can play a wizard with a 6 INT. It's gonna be tough, but it can be done.

Dm made an odd choice and had paladin, me, be assigned by church to investigate the wizard, which has caused some in character animosity. Your DM is a part of the problem here, creating a deliberate PvP situation between players.
My suggestion: ask him to adjust or modify that.

Also, I'd like you to go to consider the bell curve.
Scores go from 3 to 18.
Based on 3d6, with a 3 being a functionally viable PC based on how the rules on rolling up characters go,
an INT of 10.5 is the mean. An INT of 10 or 11 is what a normal person has.
How many results from 3d6 get a result of 5 or less? He's more intelligent than any of them.
How many results from 3d6 get a result of 6? He's as smart as that sample of the population.
How many results from a 3d6 yield a result of 7 or more? That percent of the population has a higher INT.

Your PC is smarter than you are giving him credit for.
But, if we look at both point buy and the standard array, no score there can be less than 8.
So yeah, he's certainly of below average intelligence, but that doesn't make him an idiot.

[mehs]

Yes, stop playing him as an idiot.
(I just noticed da newt's answer, and that's excellent advice. Strongly suggest following it).

At worst, play him as "slow on the uptake" or "slow to catch on" and perhaps semi-literate but before I go any further ... What is his Wisdom score?

You forgot to include that in your problem statement. There are three mental scores: Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma. Each informs role play in social situations, so you leaning hard into low INT seems to ignore the other two scores. Blend all three into his role play.

Here's a short concept for you to consider in terms of a blend:
The INT Score will reflect how well that the paladin does, or does not, remember an NPC's name and or face, or the directions to somewhere (which means that sometimes you may call them by the wrong name until you get to know them well, or may forget how to get to a particular place since a few of the minor landmarks changed or a tree got cut down, or he'll forget which stable he left his horse in overnight)
The Wisdom score will reflect how well the paladin picks up on the other character's body language and non verbal cues,
while the Charisma score will inform your ability to persuade, lie to, or intimidate other characters and your Paladin's self confidence in trying that.
Beyond that, I'd suggest that you use the 6 INT to play him as a little bit absent minded and forgetful. Here is why I suggest that.



Anyway, that's my advice. It's worth as much or as little as you'd like it to be, but here's my caveat.
You are correct to wonder "what do I need to do differently" when both you and your DM are finding the RP to be a annoying at the table. When that comes up, adjust it so that it isn't annoying.

Also: you can play a wizard with a 6 INT. It's gonna be tough, but it can be done.
Your DM is a part of the problem here, creating a deliberate PvP situation between players.
My suggestion: ask him to adjust or modify that.

Also, I'd like you to go to consider the bell curve.
Scores go from 3 to 18.
Based on 3d6, with a 3 being a functionally viable PC based on how the rules on rolling up characters go,
an INT of 10.5 is the mean. An INT of 10 or 11 is what a normal person has.
How many results from 3d6 get a result of 5 or less? He's more intelligent than any of them.
How many results from 3d6 get a result of 6? He's as smart as that sample of the population.
How many results from a 3d6 yield a result of 7 or more? That percent of the population has a higher INT.

Your PC is smarter than you are giving him credit for.
But, if we look at both point buy and the standard array, no score there can be less than 8.
So yeah, he's certainly of below average intelligence, but that doesn't make him an idiot.

I think you are taking idiot to be much stronger than was intended. He is currently played as a himbo, he can function well, but interacting with him leads to either getting along famously or repeatedly facepalming. Think like kronk or scorpia.

[OldTrees1]

He is currently played as a himbo, he can function well, but interacting with him leads to either getting along famously or repeatedly facepalming. Think like kronk or scorpia.

This is why I think you and your GM would benefit from further communication on what is frustrating about the character. It seems like a reasonable character and I doubt the GM is frustrated by the core character concept. They can be very enjoyable characters (especially with models like Scorpia).

At this point the forum does not know why the GM finds part of the character frustrating.


For example, is Glorthindel right that the PC vs PC animosity was what was causing the GM to be frustrated?
Or is the GM facepalming? Personally Kronk makes me facepalm in ways Scorpia never did.

[Phhase]

Basically as I gather, he just needs to become self-aware about his lack of smarts and learn to let the people who know what's what deal with some things, or at least to ask them about a thing before walking into it.

[deljzc]

Are we just debating examples of low intelligence, high charisma?

I mean, arguably that's many "super models" tropes. You could argue Ron Burgundy is low intelligence, high charisma. Gilderoy Lockhart in Harry Potter might be another example. Any one of those comedic "investigator" types that seems to stumble into the right answer by luck (or is that skill?).

If I was rollplaying him, I would make him ACT like he knows eveyrthing but really always gets it wrong in a funny kind of way. "Follow me, I know what to do!" but in reality it's probably WAY off, but he's such a good guy it always works out in the end.

Could be a very fun character to play if you and the DM balance the "adorable stupid" thing.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think you are taking idiot to be much stronger than was intended. He is currently played as a himbo Well there we go, I have never seen nor used the term himbo, so I had to look it up. Added to the lexicon now. Thank you. :smallsmile:
Kronk I get. (No idea what a scorpia is.)
Note that Kronk was built as comic relief (...and change the bull to a gill!)
Is that your intention with your PC? Is that what makes him annoying, or, does the whole table like the comic relief/Kronk angle and something else is annoying?