PC Abilities vs Player Abilities

[Jayde Moon]

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.

*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.

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.

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.

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.



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.

(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.

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.

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.

[Jayde Moon]

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.

[Calculor]

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.

[PanamaLane]

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.

[JackOfSwords]

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.

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...

[Cruzel]

[hide="Response to Panama"]

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"]

• 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]

[JackOfSwords]

Cruzel wrote:

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.

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.

[Jayde Moon]

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.

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

[Xorisai]

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.

[Thomas_Not_very_wise]

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.

[Metro_Pack]

Cruzel is wrong. Quel surprise.

[Jayde Moon]

*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.

[9lives]

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.

[Jayde Moon]

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.'

[Lansert]

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?