To spark intelligent debate on the stats your PC has versus the players ability/responsibility to play those stats in a believable manner. It would be interesting to me to hear a wider range of opinions on this one. Please, no flames, be civil, there are no right or wrong answers here (except mine, which are usually wrong :( )
:P
DMs, if this truly doesn't belong in general, then please move it where it goes and accept my apologies. In many forums any DnD discussion fits in the General Discussion of a DnD gaming communities forum.
Quote from: "Cruzel"*snip*...I just feel that if you as a player can't do the math in your head, your PC shouldn't be able to do it either. It's one of those things where rather than just using an OOC trick, you could play it as an IC thing, asking someone who CAN, playing it as an IC weakness. It's more interesting to me that way, rather than everybody somehow being a mathematician and knowing that numbers like 2324 / 8 are off the top of their heads.
Quote from: "MisterPAIN"Cruzel can't cast magic or swing a 20 pound weapon all the time in RL, all his PCs should not either. I believe this to be more interesting.
Quote from: "Cruzel"Bitch please, 20 lbs is way too light for me.
What I meant was, if you don't know how to do something or can't do the math in your head, saying your PC can is just lame. It's almost like making a PC with a background as an alchemist and then asking oocly to be told some recipes because your pc 'would know it'. It's lame. If you as a player don't know something, your PC shouldn't either unless a DM says otherwise, no matter what stats or background you have >.>
Down with the math wizards, please.
Quote from: "Me"Cruzel... what the #&$% are you talking about?
Your PC can only be as smart as the player?
That's the dumBest thing I've heard a smart guy say in some time.
(http://thecraptastics.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/fail.jpg)
Abilities are your PC's abilities, not YOUR abilities.
If you can't bench 50 lbs but your PC is Str 18, then he can bench 250.
If you have problems with your multiplications table but your PC is Int 18, then he can determine the cubed root of 729 in his head.
To suggest otherwise is foolishness and I demand you refrain from such foolishness.
Quote from: "Cruzel"(High int does not have to include amazing math skills, intelligence is not equal to knowledge, chums. Intelligence is the capacity to learn and process information. Higher int PCs learn and think more efficiently than lower int; It doesn't automatically mean they are a genius and know EVERYTHING. It's possible to be smart as shit but still fail at math, or not know how to read)
My arguement is more geared towards the mental capacity of players/PCs. Obivously not everyone can lift a 250 lb object irl that takes up 6 inventory squares. Amazing strength isn't immersion breaking. But when you see people who are generally idiots dividing and multiplying perfectly, that really grinds my gears, because it makes no sense. Yes, it's possible to have people who are generally bricks, have some math skill, but if you can point out someone like that IRL is a few fries short of a happy meal, that can do that without paper or a calculator I'd be impressed. It just doesn't work.
Summary; Playing a high int PC when you aren't the brightest of the bunch is totally fine, there is tons of different ways you could represent INT. But using OOC tools like calculators to overcome what you could play as an IC weakness is lame rather than take those immersion breaking 4 seconds to punch in a couple numbers and copy the result, you could actually play the weakness, which might actually lead to an interesting situation or two. It's like playing a high charisma PC. Some people just don't really have it in them to play high charisma PC's, and the PC never ends up having that force of personality or social nature, (whatever, really) that the stat would imply. Does that mean that even though the player is shy and not outgoing, that we should just ASSUME the pc is vibrant and social, or very intimidating, simply because they have 18 cha? Totally not.
Quote from: "me"Fine, then I amend my statement to:
If your PC is Str 18, then I can accept that he can bench 250, even if YOU can't.
If your PC is Int 18, then I can accept that he can determine the cubed root of 729 in his head, even if you can't.
In no case is it your place to tell me my character can't do something if the numbers can reasonably support it.
These are fantasy characters who may be good at things that we, the players, are not.
Shame on you for telling me that my creative process in regards to my characters abilities should be capped by any of my own personal, real-life limitations.
An in game calculator would be useful.
While Secutor is correct that your computer probably comes with a working calculator, not everyone plays in windowed mode or can quickly and easily tab out of the game to access the calculator.
Simply typing in a function and getting an answer would be simpler for the player. Worthwhile to set aside time to try to script? Maybe not.
Quote from: "Cruzel, in an edit of his previous post quoted above"Some stats require the player themselves to live up to them, before a PC can. Some stats like str con or dex don't really matter, as there is no issue; But Personality stats can be as high as you want; It doesn't mean they don't have limits or weaknesses. Nobody can do everything.
I'd like to start by saying Cruzel does raise some interesting points and some interesting questions. Sorry for the double post, but I wanted to separate my statement from the above. Long post, maybe TL:DR long. But meh.
- If you do not have the ability as a player to correctly play your mental and social abilities, what happens?
- Is that aspect of the mental or social ability not represented? Are you not allowed to have it?
- Do you only get the mechanical advantages of the ability but none of the RP ones?
- Are you not allowed (or is it cheese) to use tools to enhance the players ability to represent PC abilities that are reasonably supported by the mechanical numbers?
- How does this effect the opposite situation, where a PCs mental and social attributes are lower? If it applies one way, surely it applies the other?
- As it is a responsibility of the player to properly RP low stats, is it not the responsibility of the player to properly RP high stats?
- If you cannot properly RP your stats, high or low (and who judges?), should you simply always make your PCs with mental and social attributes around the same area as you estimate your own to be equivalent to?
From my point of view, DnD is a Fantasy Game and using EfU, a
Roleplaying server, to play it is akin to taking on, for a limited time, a persona that is not yourself. It is a chance to be an adventuring hero or villain or scholar (etc.) that is stronger/weaker than you, braver/more craven than you, smarter/dumBer than you, prettier/uglier than you, etc.
It is a unique form of entertainment that allows us to live vicariously through extraordinary people doing extraordinary things.
Certainly, in the interests of fairness and balance, we must place restrictions on how your imagination can take shape in terms of numbers used to support the concepts you come up with in your head.
30 points to spread between 6 attributes that all start at 8, for example. Limiting the upfront availability of races and classes are another.
But within those mechanical limits, should we be limiting what we choose to imagine and create, so long as what we imagine and create are supported by the numbers that govern our mechanical systems?
The example that brought this discussion to the fore is whether using calculators to represent an intelligent character's knack for math. Why is using such a tool cheese (if you think it is)? Why is it different from any other tool used to represent your abilities, either in mechanical or RP terms? Why is it different from researching a character concept from history or fiction? Shouldn't you be limited to the concepts you already have in your head? Why is it different from using tables and game mechanics to represent raw strength? Perhaps your PC should only be as strong as you are in real life?
Stating that the physical attributes (most easily represented in purely mechanical terms) are somehow different than mental and social attributes is, in my opinion, a fallacy. It is an idea that marginalizes three very important tools for RP and it marginalizes the concept of making someone who is, in personality, far removed from your own. The latter is an important part of the concept of immersive RP (though not the end all be all, it is perfectly legitimate to make PCs who are very close to your own personality and disposition).
I concede Cruzel's point that having a High Int does not necessarily
mean good with numbers. But the position that if I am not good with numbers means none of my characters can be good with numbers is a draconian limitation that is not only unenforceable, but puts unnecessary restrictions and judgments on the way some people may wish to play a character. What if my whole character concept is a math whiz? Can I not play that concept because I, myself, might not be a math whiz?
Why is that different than casting spells, then? Just because the mechanics allow it? That is a slippery slope that moves us in the opposite direction of immersive RP.
Of course, this does bring us to the simple point of those who have high mental and social attributes but are unable to properly RP them because the player themselves do not possess that level of intelligence or grace.
Cruzel said, "It's like playing a high charisma PC. Some people just don't really have it in them to play high charisma PC's, and the PC never ends up having that force of personality or social nature, (whatever, really) that the stat would imply. Does that mean that even though the player is shy and not outgoing, that we should just ASSUME the pc is vibrant and social, or very intimidating, simply because they have 18 cha? Totally not."
I very much agree that if the character is played as shy and not outgoing, I will not react to the PC as vibrant and social, or very intimidating.
But I stress that the PCs raw CHA score has nothing to do with my reaction. I am reacting to the way the PC is roleplayed. The PCs CHA score is a meta stat that I have no way of proving as high or low and can only take the word of the player in question. My PC definitely does not know about such a thing as a CHA score.
However, this is different than saying a player cannot find a way to RP their character differently. And if they figure out a way to do so and their PC becomes elegant and stately, then my PC will react to them as such. I, the player, and my PC have no in game reason to suspect the meta ability of the player to behave in an elegant and stately way and it is not for ME to judge the player for finding a way to acceptably RP their stats.
If you have a poet PC and you spout slightly modified lines of Emily Dickenson IC, then good for you for figuring out a creative way to overcome your own poetic inability to play a poetic character.
It is perfectly alright to use OOC tools to help represent your character's abilities. Stating that a player should limit the abilities of their character to their own abilities (which is exactly what was being suggested, despite claims to the contrary) is moronic, and we certainly don't expect anyone to follow that expectation. If you are better able to represent your PC and his/her abilities with the help of a tool-- be it a modified real life poem, or a calculator, or what have you-- by all means, knock yourself out.
I will state, however, to use your judgement-- even with a high lore and intelligence, your PC shouldn't know about certain things one might easily read about in the setting lore: the Shadow Weave, the various secrets of Netheril, and the like. This is an exception to the rule.
QuoteIt's almost like making a PC with a background as an alchemist and then asking oocly to be told some recipes because your pc 'would know it'. It's lame.
While there is some merit to its lameness, I don't think its cut and dry. I have a PC right now who spent his whole life (and he's no spring chicken) crafting gadgets, reading books and generally working on this kind of stuff. His feats include skill focus Lore, skill focus Spellcraft and Courteous Magocracy. I think its nearly just as lame that he doesn't know a single alchemical recipe simply because I do not.
Lets face it, he knows more then I do, especially about things that exist in his world that don't in mine. Now, I'm not going to run to a DM and ask for recipes, but clearly you must admit there is a gap here.
Quote from: Jayde Moon;97006If you have a poet PC and you spout slightly modified lines of Emily Dickenson IC, then good for you for figuring out a creative way to overcome your own poetic inability to play a poetic character.
Oooooh! You could even mix the poet and mathemitician:
Be sure you count, should I forget, --
Some one the sum could tell, --
This, and my heart, and all the bees
Which in the orchard dwell.
Um, ok, everybody gets 42 gold each...
[hide="Response to Panama"]
Quote from: "Panama said;"It's almost like making a PC with a background as an alchemist and then asking oocly to be told some recipes because your pc 'would know it'. It's lame. While there is some merit to its lameness, I don't think its cut and dry. I have a PC right now who spent his whole life (and he's no spring chicken) crafting gadgets, reading books and generally working on this kind of stuff. His feats include skill focus Lore, skill focus Spellcraft and Courteous Magocracy. I think its nearly just as lame that he doesn't know a single alchemical recipe simply because I do not.
Lets face it, he knows more then I do, especially about things that exist in his world that don't in mine. Now, I'm not going to run to a DM and ask for recipes, but clearly you must admit there is a gap here.
Maybe you should think this way;
Recipes are based on regional ingredients; You have no idea where (geographically speaking) you are. You/your PC has never been to Ymph, so its perfectly understandable you don't know how to use local ingredients to make things. [/hide]
[hide="Response(s) to Jayde"]
Quote- 1.If you do not have the ability as a player to correctly play your mental and social abilities, what happens?
- 2.Is that aspect of the mental or social ability not represented? Are you not allowed to have it?
- 3.Do you only get the mechanical advantages of the ability but none of the RP ones?
- 4.Are you not allowed (or is it cheese) to use tools to enhance the players ability to represent PC abilities that are reasonably supported by the mechanical numbers?
- 5.How does this effect the opposite situation, where a PCs mental and social attributes are lower? If it applies one way, surely it applies the other?
- 6.As it is a responsibility of the player to properly RP low stats, is it not the responsibility of the player to properly RP high stats?
- 7.If you cannot properly RP your stats, high or low (and who judges?), should you simply always make your PCs with mental and social attributes around the same area as you estimate your own to be equivalent to?
1;To play incorrectly is a bullshit concept, there are so many things that you can do to represent a high/low stat. But a high stat does not mean your PC is perfect in everything that stat can represent, it just means they could/might have a natural inclination towards it, and learn/understand it/them better.
2; See above; Just like it's not possible to be good at everything, it's not possible to fail at everything either(Usually). As a player there is definately aspects of higher stats that you can flesh into your PCs that don't necessarily mean the all too common math genius.
3; See 1+2; Sometimes it seems that way for some players, as I don't really see the high stat reflected in their RP. For some PCs this is completely intentional though, maybe they don't want a person to know about their abilities, etc. I don't think that saying "You are a stupid player so you cannot play a high int wizard" is very fun nor fair, and is not really what I was suggesting.
4. I think this is a shifty grey area, tbh. IMO mechanical numbers should be based on concept, and your concept should include more aspects of WHY you have those numbers to begin with. mechanical numbers should not determine what your PC can/Can't do, it /should/ be the other way around. I oppose these tools usually.
5. If I understand right, you are referencing a stupid PC being played by a smart player? This is a nonissue, unless you have some sort of disorder that prevents you from acting stupid.
6; I would say yes; Don't give your PC a high stat simply for the HP or extra spellslots, and if you do, you should really justify that in your concept. I don't really see this as an issue because most people on EFU seem to do this already.
7; I do think there is a 'comfort zone' of stats each player has, tbh. While I don't think you should say; 'I am 8 cha IRL so I will always make 8 cha PCs' There are stats that some players just cannot represent in their RP once they get too high.
Example; I once had a 20 cha Aasimar. As a player, I did not feel I could represent that high stat, and anyone else who met that PC would probably only place him at like 13-15 or so charisma. That my friends, is fail. As such, I tend not to play 16+ charisma because I have difficulty showing it in my RP. Personally I think there are better ways to place your stats, than to put them into a skill so high you cannot pull off to being with.
Just my opinion.
[/hide]
Cruzel wrote:
QuoteExample; I once had a 20 cha Aasimar. As a player, I did not feel I could represent that high stat, and anyone else who met that PC would probably only place him at like 13-15 or so charisma. That my friends, is fail.
Charisma can reflect appearance. Why not portray the character as incredibly and breathtakingly beautiful? That my friends, is pass!
You can find a way to play any stat within your RL abilities if you think about it long enough. Or ask others for some help, most players are ready to offer suggestions.
The worst thing you can do, IMHO, is to avoid playing a concept you really like just because you don't think others will approve of how you play it. That just sucks the fun right out of playing, and you might as well go buy a Wii.
QuoteIf I understand right, you are referencing a stupid PC being played by a smart player? This is a nonissue, unless you have some sort of disorder that prevents you from acting stupid.
I don't know if it's a disorder, but I have some sort of mental block against stupidity. Has to do with being a genius.
:D
Playing a moderately dumb PC is actually really hard for me. I mean, I'm no genius, but I've been to college and I use a lot of big words that my character might not. I sometimes have to catch myself and re-write what I was about to say; I utilize a certain vocabulary in my own life and it's not easy for me to forgo it for something that sounds "less educated" or "less intelligent."
I think RPing a really stupid character is easy because there's basically no vocabulary at all - the sterotypical cavemanesque half-orc comes to mind. Anyone can do that. But adequately playing a 10 Int human, who isn't a blockhead but isn't notably bright, either, presents a different kind of difficulty to me. How do you sound plain without sounding dumb?
Mental ability scores always present some kind of a challenge to RP and I suggest we just let people do their best and not worry about whether the aasimar paladin seems more 16 Cha or more 20 Cha. Roleplay a character, not a list of stats.
Admittedly, I sometimes go over the top. I go like, 21 INT IMASKARI, WOOT, EXTRA SPELLS SO I CAN PWN PEOPLE. Well, I realized it doesn't work like this. I know damn well I don't have 21 INT in real life, and I created a number of factors that will limit his potential in the intelligence criteria. Kawurachi Is brilliant when it comes to magic, but he often forgets practical stuff like putting on a shirt before getting out of the bed and he wonders why he is cold. He has a tendency to run his mouth on and on despite the hostile threats he may receive. He sometimes confuses the meaning of words since Common is a relatively new language to his usual Roushemi. He sometimes makes mathematical errors, simply because he doesn't double check his work. Genius doesn't mean ALWAYS right, it means you know the answer, and move on. Hell, I've lost over 2000 gold coins because of common math mistakes I INTENTIONALLY made.
I agree with cruzel in saying, 21 intelligence is your ability to learn, not what you already know. Lore is history, spellcraft is knowledge of magic, etc... High ranks in these should incorporate what you already know, not the 18 intelligence. Lore represents WHAT you know. Not intelligence.
Cruzel is wrong. Quel surprise.
Quote from: "Thomas"*snip*...he often forgets practical stuff like putting on a shirt before getting out of the bed and he wonders why he is cold. He has a tendency to run his mouth on and on despite the hostile threats he may receive... *snip* ... He sometimes makes mathematical errors, simply because he doesn't double check his work.
These things are generally in the realm of Wisdom. Wisdom which governs such things as intuition and
common sense.
Ever heard the saying, "Got book sense but no
common sense"?
That's high int, low(er) wis. The PHB literally gives this example, which closely matches yours:
"An 'absentminded' professor has low Wisdom and high Intelligence."
That said, yes, your Intelligence of more a representation of your learning
capacity, I agree, Thomas, just as IQ represents that in real life.
However, saying Lore represents what you know is a shaky oversimplification.
If I have no points in lore, then do I not know ANYTHING?
I guess my point, overall, is that it isn't for Cruzel or anyone to dictate to me what I decide that 18 Intelligence means for my PC in terms of what he's good at or not good at, mentally. That's MY choice. And if I have the personal insight to know that
I'm not that intelligent then I hope I have the responsibility (in an immersive RP setting) to utilize whatever means necessary (and not cheating) to represent that mental ability.
Giving someone grief OOC for the way they play their character is poor form.
It's far harder to convincingly play low mental stats, than it is high.
So hard that rarely do we see it done to (personal) satisfaction.
How much of that is due to your own personal interpretations of how low stats should be played vs how another might view them?
I think you infer that this is part of the issue in that by noting that it's often 'not done to (personal) satisfaction.'
I know quiet a few people who are walking-talking calculators IRL, and in fact they suck at everything else that involves intelligence of any kind. Autistic people for example.
And there are times when some one will say, "So 729 amongst 7 of us is...?", and I immediately know "104, give or take a few" with out the use of a calculator. So not every mathematical answer IG is with the use of a calculator.
Besides, who needs to bring up the computer's calculator when you have a cheap cellphone calculator or expensive scientific calculator?
That was, more or less, an attempt to separate my opinions from the team proper and an excuse to use brackets.
The problem is that you suck.
If we should limit our characters to those with mental and physical capacity similar to our own, then for what purpose do we play this game of imagination and wonder where we might live out our fantasies?
Quote from: Lansert;97059And there are times when some one will say, "So 729 amongst 7 of us is...?", and I immediately know "104, give or take a few" with out the use of a calculator. So not every mathematical answer IG is with the use of a calculator.
Division is incredibly easy, btw. For example, 700/7=100 and 29/7 = 4 and change, so 104. Anyone can do this <_<
The thing is, you can argue all you want, unless there's some kind of chart published saying 8-9 INT characters can do this, can't do that, 10-11 INT can do this, cant do that, etc.. you'll just argue forever.
BTW, human social studies (Howard Gardner) counts (more than) 8 kinds of 'Intelligence', located in various parts of our brain. Basically:
- musical intelligence
- corporal intelligence
- logical intelligence
- language intelligence
- space intelligence
- relational intelligence
- personnal intelligence
- nature intelligence
We usually favor 'logical intelligence', but that's just because we deem it more useful in modern societies...
In game terms we qualify many of those types of intelligence into Wisdom or Charisma or various skill checks.
low intelligence people: not smart
high intelligence people: smart
I disagree with Cruzel, mostly. Though I have noticed several occasions where I take the time on some high int char to do the maths after a quest in my head, just to find that the more standard int chars have already tossed out the correct answer.
I do not approve of this extensive use of calculators, but that isn't because I think people shouldn't have high int characters unless they're intelligent. It's because characters who shouldn't be able to do such quick calculations suddenly spew up completely correct figures, something that is far too easy to do as a player, since the calculator is so close at hand.
(Using here the example that started the debate in the other thread)
IMO there is the definition of the stat and the reality of it…
[COLOR="Red"]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[/COLOR]
Int: To me a poor vocabulary doesn’t always mean somebody has a low intelligence it may just be racial dialect or even a speech impediment. Or as was said you could simply be uneducated but have the learning capacity available and perhaps be great at logic and word problems but not long division or spelling. Then there are eidetic and photographic memories to contend with, their IQ is based on what they have heard, seen or read and although they may be able to get you the correct answers because they have seen the formula it doesn’t necessarily mean they know how the formula really works or why. (Athough I do dislike playing a PC that is smarter than me.)
Str: To me Strength is more of a measure of not just how much you can press but the force and power you are able to deliver also. Who’s best at knocking down a door: A 110-pound black belt, a 225 lb body builder or a 500 lb fat man? Add any two or more of these together and you have the winner. A 500 lb <(power) body-building <(strength) black-belt <(force) will undoubtedly take out most doors with a single kick.
Dex: Balance, speed, agility, flexibility and I even like to add confidence to this list. Again, being awesome at any one of these may give you a high dex but you could also be mediocre at all of them and have a higher dex than Jet Li. Jet Li is one fast mother but would his dex be higher than an Olympic gold medalist in gymnastics who can do back flips on a balance beam?
Con: Physical & mental health, stamina, endurance, regenerative ability, allergies, and others. I always like to say caution is the hidden factor of constitution, mostly because a cautious person may actually outlive an impulsive, curious or brave person.
Wis: Besides the basic mental stability, common sense and willpower (or stubbornness), there is streetwise, nature wise, age-wise, religion wise, etc., etc… Wisdom is more a statistic of a morals and ethics to me. The streetwise punk and a Judge both have a certain amount of wisdom but on differing levels of morality and ethics, and neither would be able to survive in the others world for very long.
Cha: Per canon rules I believe charisma is now combined with comeliness once again. Both have their place and having both of course makes a person even more charismatic. But I also like to include a couple other factors such as PC class, level, Str, Dex, Con, Int and Wis… To me charisma is based off the character in whole, each of his or her abilities, classes and levels factoring into and maybe even turning into an average of the entire PC plus or minus the basics of charisma and comeliness. But with charisma I also feel that role-playing this stat is based on both the player and the PC. I think it is perfectly acceptable to say a PC has an 18 Cha but only plays out as maybe a 10 or 12 (or whatever). Charisma does not have to be flaunted and certainly doesn’t have to be forced on the PC based on his or her personalities. Just because a person has the ability to take charge of a given situation doesn’t always mean s/he wants to is going to or has to.
[COLOR="Red"]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[/COLOR]
In a nutshell I guess what I do is not to limit myself to the definition of the stat when assigning them to my PC. This may not be the best way to do it but it helps me justify the PC a bit easier.
Wisdom and Inteligance are hard to fake. No matter how many calculators you throw around, your PC will still be a bumbling idiot if you are.
Wisdom is even worse, as much of wisdom is impossible through the NWN client.
But Im not going to say you cant try. Just try to avoid such great statements like (Coming from an 18 int wisard, I kid you not) "I hate to have had fought through so many undead and didnt find any magic". >_>
Some of you may remember Scrapper. I played him as if his intelligence was 7 or 8, talking to his stuffed animal and shit, (just short of needing a drool cup). If you hung around and actually talked to him you might have seen me roll a bluff check occasionally. Based on how long he talked or what the conversation was about you may have gotten an //OOC or [tell] from me saying, “You get the impression Scrapper may be smarter than he acts.†His intelligence and wisdom where both 10, he was definitely not a genius but he was not stupid either. I played him off the fact that he was ugly and people seen him as not just ugly but slow in the head. He grew up getting away with things because people were sympathetic towards the ‘slow’ guy, so he worked with it instead of against it.
Catch more flies with honey than vinegar theory…
[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR]
Quote from: RIPnogarD;97129Catch more flies with honey than vinegar theory…
I tested that in collage. Glycerin caught the most, Vinegar the second most, honey the third, and peanut butter the least.
The old wives are lieing to you.
Quote from: Cruzel;97021Maybe you should think this way;
Recipes are based on regional ingredients; You have no idea where (geographically speaking) you are. You/your PC has never been to Ymph, so its perfectly understandable you don't know how to use local ingredients to make things.
That's fine. It was just an example. In this case, even if he doesn't have the right ingredients or however we choose to justify it, I think we can also make the case that he knows other recipes that I don't.
Just as your character might know what its like to be married when you do not, or know how to cast a spell when you do not, your character is your character and you're really just reading his/her lines as they exist in the improvosational script.
What those lines read should be a combination of abilities, background and personality.
Actually I think literality is part of the issue with stats and the playing of them IG/IC. It’s not the fact that flies like shit better than honey, it’s the way you interpret it or them (the stats).
There are IC reasons why alchemical recipes are secret.
Cruzel is so wrong it isn't even funny anymore.
Quelle suprise imo
I believe the discussion has migrated from it's initial intent to a discussion about intelligence.
Going back to comments for the OP.
I couldn't disagree with Cruzel more. We are not our PCs. We play them, but we are not them. When we make personal consolidations to be more and more like our PCs it becomes more and more like "playing yourself" than "role playing".
Do I think intelligent people should limit themselves to playing intelligent characters? No. Why is the importance of the strength stat any different than the important stat. To say so would be a move to incredible bias in the stat system. Why can a strong person play a weak character, but a dumb person not play an intelligent character? Unfair to the stat system.
There is something to be said about intelligent/hawt(err... charismatic) players playing intelligent/charismatic characters. Given they may have more real world experience in those fields, they MIGHT do a better job representing those fields, but to say that one should limit their character by their own abilities as a player is folly. It causes a fundamental break in what role-playing really is. It is a given some of our characters might take on the similar styles, because we have to represent them all through the same medium, and it is very much an art form.
No, people should not limit themselves. This is a fantasy game afterall. To me one of my favorite parts about role-play is playing that which is vastly different from myself. Im not a genius but I love racking my brain for a few long words when I am playing a wizard.
How are we ever going to become better role-players if we consistently limit ourself to our own abilities? Many of which don't even translate to a DnD setting.
Thank you, Easy.
Yes, all of you who point out that there are different types of intelligence, you are absolutely right!
But you make the mistake, in this thread, of focusing on the example that sparked this discussion and not the discussion itself.
The point of the discussion is more to the point of, "Is it right, in your opinion, for Player Joe to tell Player James that Player James can't play a Bard because Player James has no musical ability in real life? Is it right for Player Joe to tell Player Amy that Player Amy can't have a character who is a math whiz because Player Amy is not a math whiz in real life?"
Should we, as players, be limited in our character creation process, a creative and imaginative process, to only those things we ourselves are good at. Whether that be physically, mentally, or socially?
If yes to some and no to others... why?
Devil's advocate to my own position: The mechanics allow you to flub being stronger, faster, more robust if you the player are weak, clumsy, or frail. There is no mechanical buffer for intelligence, wisdom, and charisma.
If we can find or create those buffers, can it be acceptable (ie tools). Are you REALLY gonna know if 'I'm using a calculator next to my computer' vice 'I'm a mathematical savant'?
And if so... do you really, REALLY care? How much sleep are you gonna lose over it?
"Dammit, Amy's such an idiot, I KNOW she uses a calculator to divide the loot. RARRRGH!!!! That makes me so ANGRY!!!!" *hulks out*
I get what you're saying Jayde Moon, and agree 100%. No one has the right to tell another player how they should be playing their character. The DM's have also commented on this as well, both here and very clearly in the past on the old forums... I don't know the link now, but they were pretty emphatic, even then.
As a person who has 18s in all stats IRL (except Dex, I admit, I'm just above average), it's hard for me to play anything but a near God-like character.
Should I be forced to "dummy down" a character who in reality is a digital representation of myself? If you prick them, do they not bleed red-magenta pixels?
Beggar,
Oh yeah? What's your bench? (Without a strength potion!)
:D
Dance puppets, dance.
Cruzel, you cannot now pretend this was all a clever ruse.
Smash them all.
Writing it off as a joke: #1 way to try and get out of debacles such as this one.
NWN and FR are "fantasy" games. The fantasy being you can be what ever you want as long as it rides well with the DM's.
I think that sums up the topic. :)