Do you allow your player to create characters with higher intelligence

>>51785241
You should be thankful they're easy to come by, given how quickly they get sick of your bullshit.

What do you do with a player wanting to play a high WIS character, that isn't wise at all? Also how do you decide if he's wise enough or not?

>>51785241
Thats fine, as long as all of your npc's only have 9 in every mental stat, OP

File: image.jpg (54KB, 214x400px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 214x400px

>>51785241
>if you aren't a diplomat you can't have high cha
>if you aren't buff you can't have high str
>is you aren't wise you can't have high wisdom
>if you can't walk a tightrope you can't have high Agi/dex
>if you can't pick locks you can't take lock picking as a skill
>if you can't cast magic you can't play a magic user
>if you can't summon miracles you can't play a cleric or paladin
>if you don't know how to use a weapon you can't be proficient in it.

It's a fucking game.

>>51785241
It has been said, and it will be said again:

The intelligence difference between the player and the character will be nullified by the method we play with. A smart character's player gives the character the ability to think quicker due to the fact that a single minute of game-time might be an hour in meatspace.

And having more intelligence doesn't make the character infallible. Everyone makes mistakes.

So all in all, your rule is very meh. If you combine this with the some people's forced charisma rules, people can't play anything but a muscled-up versions of themselves.

Also, people's intelligence doesn't usually show on surface level. The fact that you "evaluate" a player's intelligence this way rings to me that you think you have the ability to objectively categorise people. Which is just ridiculous.

>>51785241
Everyone is going to call your shit op and you're probably gonna just ignore it all.
Just remember you can't have npcs with cha above 6, wis above 6 and int above 7.

>>51785241
>He thinks education level correlates to intelligence
Look at him and laugh.

>>51785241
we have this thread every two weeks

File: 2017-02-17-05-37-35--1812550737.jpg (4KB, 99x196px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 99x196px

This has to be bait, right guys?

>>51785241
I don't play systems that have Intelligence as a stat for this precise reason.

>>51785241
Do you bar skinny weaklings from playing strong barbarians?

File: 1383270844708.jpg (38KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 625x626px

>>51785241
Do you also force your players to roleplay everything? If they make a history check, for example, do they have to know the history of the world or do you deem it alright to tell them because it's a fucking game and the characters are not mirrors of the players?

It's too early in the morning for this to have made me so mad. You're a shit DM.

Playing a higher intelligence character is easy. It just justifies and allows a certain degree of metagaming and GM interrogation, if you're not using a system with declarative knowledge skills and such.

>Retards not realizing OP is satirizing the retards who say that players shouldn't be able to roll their WIS/CHA/INT to replace their own lack of social or intellectual ability.

>>51785241
Same.
Also, not uggos are aloud to play high Charisma characters. Since they have no idea what it's like to be attractive and charismatic, they can't really be trusted to roleplay it correctly.

>>51785249

Best post first post.

>>51785302

>If you aren't a cyborg you can't play Cyberpunk
>if you aren't a BBEG you can't GM in a sword and sorcery game
>if you aren't a scrap of paper you can't play a game in which you have a character sheet

>>51785241
I'm not fucking retarded, so yeah, of course.

I don't let people play fighters that can bench press more than they can IRL.

>>51792330
>bumping a shitty bait thread
Why would anyone do that?

>>51785241
You can only have strength equal to or less than your 10-rep max dumbbell curl in pounds divided by 10 (i.e 10lb = 1str, 20lb = 2 str, 30lb = 3str, etc). This strength value is reduced by 1 for every 10 pounds by which you're outside the healthy weight range for your height.

Your max int is determined by your current annual earnings and your contributions to github. You get a free +1 if you figure out the algorithm I use to calculate it.

Your max cha is determined by popular vote among group members.

Your max con is decided by the number of jumping jacks you can do in a row.

Your max wisdom is determined by how quickly you to quit my game.

>>51785241

Fuck you, how about that?

Just reading this makes me angry enough to bump it, got me good OP

>>51785241
I know exactly what you're saying, man.
Like the SECOND some whiney tumblr weeaboo says they want to play a magic user I demand they cast fireball right then and there and if they can't then they have to play a peasant lol!

>>51785241

Yes because it's not my place to arbitrarily decide how smart someone is.

I'm the only person in my group with a four-year degree. I'm also a licensed EMT. It's safe to say I'm the "smartest" person there but actually believing it would be pretty fucking arrogant. There's plenty of stuff they know (mostly regarding mechanics and computers) which has me completely in the dark. So far be it from me to decide their real-world smarts means they aren't intelligent enough to play someone who fucking throws fireballs out of their hand.

File: 1449971949205.jpg (1MB, 2400x2984px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x2984px

The only place where I think something similar might - might - be valid is with charisma.

And that's mostly because I hate players who try their hardest to be some sort of party face or leader, but are no good at it when they're supposed to do their job. I can even deal with a player stuttering and stumbling as long as they get a good phrase out - if you're sitting there mute until someone tells you what you should say, or just saying 'my character tries to convince him to do this,' what are you even doing playing such a charisma-focused character?

I might be a pretty smart dude but my field of expertise is extremely narrow in scope in a field no one including employers gives a shit about, so maybe I'm not intelligent after all.

But realistically how do you define int? It's by far the most ambiguous stat and open to magnitudes of interpretation. Even wis is more cut and dry.

>>51795452
>But realistically how do you define int?
We can't, really. It's an extremely subjective and controversial quality IRL with no universally accepted definition or measurement. Even the IQ measure has enough problems that IMO it should be taken with a lot of salt.

>>51797112
oh boy here we go

>>51785241
How do you justify your game world having a civilization when it must be full of Int 8 Wis 6 Cha 3 morons?

>>51797200
/thread

File: I really hope you guys don't wield this.jpg (19KB, 238x227px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 238x227px

>>51797112
Are you really going to get mad about this, anon?

>>51785241
This is a good thread, it belongs on page one

>>51797200
>Int 8 Wis 6
That's pretty generous anon.

>You people still haven't phased out the Intelligence and Charisma skills yet

>>51800958
This is poor bait

>>51792566
>Using dumbell curls as a measure of strength
I bet you're one of those paladin from the bro-therhood

Please just let this bait thread die.

File: metalcylinder.jpg (72KB, 400x388px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 400x388px

>people posting BAIT GUYS THIS IS BAIT STOP REPLYING TO BAIT THREADS in bait threads

>not co-opting bait threads and creating a functioning role-playing system that uses built-in mechanical handicaps to weight encounter challenges based on the players' IQ or some other bullshit metric

>posting BAIT BAIT GUYS STOP REPLYING TO BAIT in the same thread tomorrow

We've always had low-effort trolls on /tg/. The difference is how we treated them.