You can compare to the feeble mind spell, that's a 1 but other than some language comprehension it's probably similar. "The creature can’t cast spells, activate magic items, understand language, or communicate in any intelligible way. The creature can, however, identify its friends, follow them, and even protect them."
One way to work it would be to say he's a barbarian, normally he has an int of 8 but when he rages its a red haze of murderous intent and his int drops to 4 while the rage lasts.
Again, Pang - the number's there. I do believe part of the thread's intent is that the player cannot change it. INT 4 is super troublesome, but so is a 4 in anything else. DMs normally love to impose 'make the best of what you've got' situations on the player. This is one of those.
Stats should be a guide, not a shackle. People who say that a player shouldn't be allowed to speak at the table, or even play at all, unless their Intelligence is 8 or higher may need to rethink their priorities. We all remember Grog Strongjaw, ne?
I remember his Int being 6. ;-)
The very first sentence in my post above says I like seeing 6s and 7s here and there in statlines. Fives and 4s I'm still ok with, but Int is arguably the problematic one (and I disagree a 4 in anything else is as troublesome as in Int).
Let's assume we want to play the stats by their implicit value, so no making allowances: basically that means having someone with the mental capabilities (but not necessarily the innocence) of a small child in an adventuring party. I think we can agree that's potentially awkward and hurtful - plenty of groups have explicit rules against child PCs, and this isn't all that different. I'm more than ok with exploring mature themes like racism, sexism, poverty, whatever in game if the group is up to it, but bringing a mentally disabled character into the sort of adventures D&D lends itself best to? I think I'll pass, and maybe try something else that's a little bit more suited to that sort of emotional and dramatic content.
If on the other hand allowances do get made and we only look at the explicit consequences (a -3 modifier whenever the rules call for it), sure, it gets quite a bit easier. And again, if others want to play that way that's totally fine by me, I don't judge how other groups play - if they're having fun, they're doing things right. But to me that feels inconsistent and contrived. It makes Int even more of an easy dump stat. It treats Int differently from other stats, pretty much just to accommodate a character type I'd more than likely find somewhat distasteful if it were played right.
I like to think I'm reasonably open minded about what I allow at my table, but apparently this either crosses the limit or at least gets very, very close to it.
I think it's rather difficult to tell just how a human with an int of four would act. You can certainly find some comparisons that would make it seem impossible to work. Then again, as has been already brought up, a raven has an int of 2, and ravens are capable of fairly complex decision making... Several creatures that are certainly considered intelligent such as wolves or boars have ints below four.. However, those animals have that int level naturally, where as humans aren't.
I see people saying that the person would be unable to maintain decent hygiene, however many animals with an int of three of four show real efforts of hygiene... we have birds constantly cleaning their feathers and cats and dogs cleaning their fur... So a person with the benefit of soceity teaching them human norms of hygiene would probably easily be taught these things... Even if they may not understand the finer nuances.
I think the real troublesome bit is when you get into the complex thinking needed to have basic social interactions or understanding plans... we are incredibly complex animals with regards to our social behavior, so your character would probably be treated like half a pet or work animal... Think Hodor from GoT... Able to function but is easily stressed out by complex situations.
All that said... That may be overthinking it entirely... Perhaps simply going with "I'm a person with well below average int and I'll try to act like one" is enough... I just worry that it may be a limiting experience for a longer campaign.
We need to separate character and player. The player controlling the 4 INT character can still contribute to the table as much as any other player. Let's not forget that what's really happening is based upon PLAYER intelligence, not PC. Here's a few examples and counter points to the "a 4 Int character isn't playable."
Of course, you could have a less than intelligent real life player with a 20 INT Wizard and the DM could throw them a clue because "their PC could figure out what the player couldn't", but it GOES BOTH WAYS.
Without a wizard in play, Intelligence is the most common (or high on the list) dump stat. Many put Int somewhere between 8 - 11. The DM presents puzzles. Trap door secret things. Investigative shenanigans. X-Files, Criminal Minds, Hidden doors sort of stuff. What actually happens at the table?
PLAYERS (not PCs) put their collective minds together and come up with solutions. Sure, dice are rolled, but the reason dice are rolled is because of PLAYER input. NOT PC input. If the DM defaulted to STATS, they could easily say...seeing as the highest INT in the party is an 11, you'll never figure this thing out. Where do you go from there?
Who comes up with the idea to jump off a cliff, parkour roll out of it, and land in the ready position? Is this only a thing shared at the table by those with 16+ Dexterity (those actually capable of doing it?) No, it's brought up by any PLAYER. Dice are rolled and only the high Dex folk accomplish the task but the idea -- the initiative taken -- the very thing that prompts decision, action, and dice rolling comes from PLAYERS, not CHARACTERS.
Give Neil DeGrasse a 4 int character and tell me that dude can't contribute something to the table. If so, you (in my opinion) aren't playing stats the correct way. You're using them as a crutch. As a fixed rule and not a guide. This is wrong.
Int, probably above any other stat can go low simply because it's the one thing that is at odds with the thinking folk at the table. Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities? Do you require that the smart players at the table (those capable of deciphering and puzzle solving some really tough shit) to stay quiet unless they've played a 15+ INT character? If the answer is no, then why keep a 4 Int PLAYER from contributing equally? Hell, I'd venture that a Mensa member at the table playing a 4 int character might come up with some pretty damn clever, imaginative, and interesting gameplay scenarios that would make the 4 INT "experiment" completely viable.
Stats ONLY matter when you roll dice. Let negative stat fail what they suck at. As far as input, reasoning, talking, and contributing, let it all go. No one says, "stay quiet real life dude. Your character only has a 10 Charisma because you're a barbarian and would have nothing to contribute to this social situation."
Instead, let the Barbarian player have at it, then say, "ok, that's my thoughts - now..my character won't be the one doing this of course, so bard guy, you do it."
Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities?
Well, no. I don't require Mensa members present in order to allow intelligence based activities either. What's the point you're making here?
As you said.. I mean, you can push the hopelessly naive, never thinks anything through, never cares to figure stuff out type all you want but at 4 Int you're arguably unable to understand moderately complex plans.
The player can think it through. The player can understand complex plans. The player doesn't have to be naive. The player might care (and be capable) of figuring stuff out. Therefore, a 4 INT character contributes as much as an 18 INT character simply because each is a player with things to contribute. If you contend that only players capable of SUCCEEDING at tasks (rolling dice) can contribute, I'd say you're approaching it incorrectly. I'd bet the 4 INT character has a much higher stat elsewhere. They contribute in that regard. That's sort of the point of varying stats, complimentary players, cooperation, etc. You're finding a hard number where you believe the character is near useless and incapable of bringing anything worthwhile to the table. I disagree. That's the point I'm making. We good?
Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities?
Well, no. I don't require Mensa members present in order to allow intelligence based activities either. What's the point you're making here?
As you said.. I mean, you can push the hopelessly naive, never thinks anything through, never cares to figure stuff out type all you want but at 4 Int you're arguably unable to understand moderately complex plans.
The player can think it through. The player can understand complex plans. The player doesn't have to be naive. The player might care (and be capable) of figuring stuff out. Therefore, a 4 INT character contributes as much as an 18 INT character simply because each is a player with things to contribute. If you contend that only players capable of SUCCEEDING at tasks (rolling dice) can contribute, I'd say you're approaching it incorrectly. I'd bet the 4 INT character has a much higher stat elsewhere. They contribute in that regard. That's sort of the point of varying stats, complimentary players, cooperation, etc. You're finding a hard number where you believe the character is near useless and incapable of bringing anything worthwhile to the table. I disagree. That's the point I'm making. We good?
OP isn't asking how they can contribute as a player. They're asking how to roleplay a character with an Intelligence of 4. Your mistake regarding what the conversation is about has led to you dramatically misunderstand the points others, like pangurjan, are making.
Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities?
Well, no. I don't require Mensa members present in order to allow intelligence based activities either. What's the point you're making here?
As you said.. I mean, you can push the hopelessly naive, never thinks anything through, never cares to figure stuff out type all you want but at 4 Int you're arguably unable to understand moderately complex plans.
The player can think it through. The player can understand complex plans. The player doesn't have to be naive. The player might care (and be capable) of figuring stuff out. Therefore, a 4 INT character contributes as much as an 18 INT character simply because each is a player with things to contribute. If you contend that only players capable of SUCCEEDING at tasks (rolling dice) can contribute, I'd say you're approaching it incorrectly. I'd bet the 4 INT character has a much higher stat elsewhere. They contribute in that regard. That's sort of the point of varying stats, complimentary players, cooperation, etc. You're finding a hard number where you believe the character is near useless and incapable of bringing anything worthwhile to the table. I disagree. That's the point I'm making. We good?
OP isn't asking how they can contribute as a player. They're asking how to roleplay a character with an Intelligence of 4. Your mistake regarding what the conversation is about has led to you dramatically misunderstand the points others, like pangurjan, are making.
I absolutely understand yours and other's points. You've essentially said its unplayable, not-advisable, or unwelcome (a hindrance) at the table. I disagree. Give me your 'roleplay checklist' that a 10 INT character can anchor too that a 4 INT character can't?
Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities?
Well, no. I don't require Mensa members present in order to allow intelligence based activities either. What's the point you're making here?
As you said.. I mean, you can push the hopelessly naive, never thinks anything through, never cares to figure stuff out type all you want but at 4 Int you're arguably unable to understand moderately complex plans.
The player can think it through. The player can understand complex plans. The player doesn't have to be naive. The player might care (and be capable) of figuring stuff out. Therefore, a 4 INT character contributes as much as an 18 INT character simply because each is a player with things to contribute. If you contend that only players capable of SUCCEEDING at tasks (rolling dice) can contribute, I'd say you're approaching it incorrectly. I'd bet the 4 INT character has a much higher stat elsewhere. They contribute in that regard. That's sort of the point of varying stats, complimentary players, cooperation, etc. You're finding a hard number where you believe the character is near useless and incapable of bringing anything worthwhile to the table. I disagree. That's the point I'm making. We good?
It isn't about the player contributing. It's about roleplaying the character as appropriate for the stats, and what that entails for the campaign. Do adventuring parties (in character) generally want to babysit an 8-year old (arguably a charitable comparison) in the body of an adult? Are players (out of character) generally comfortable roleplaying situations where their characters have a mentally disabled person tag along? Is it fun to have someone (in character) there who is likely to misunderstand even moderately complex plans so you can't rely on them not to do something stupid, someone who can't be trusted with money or valuables, someone you can't really let out of your sight for more than five minutes? I think most groups, if they're even willing to try, would grow tired of this real soon and/or find it more than a little awkward. A 4 Int isn't Forest Gump or Rudy in my estimate, it's quite a bit worse than that. It's someone completely unable to survive unless through the charity of others.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Or are able to survive, but are basically feral. Speech is limited to single syllable words, abstract reasoning is very limited, mathematical ability is probably limited to counting to ten. Tool usage is extremely basic- can use a club, a knife, a spear, but a crossbow is out. Issues like that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
You can be the guy who misremembers every situation.
"Remember when I took on that dragon by myself"
Party "you mean the one you ran away in fear of"
"Remember when I fought evil doers attacking that poor injured illithid?"
Party "that was us, you attacked us soon as that 'injured mind flayer' ambushed us."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Truth be told, what ultimately matters is the sort of game you’re playing. If you’re playing a simulationist game, then most of the comments are right: 4 INT is a Neanderthal at best. But if you’re playing a more cinematic game, which most people do, then it’s okay to play the character as really dumb, but not as dumb as the score might actually indicate.
Incidentally, I’ve had a player roll up a 4 INT character for a one-shot once. The pitch was “an orc so stupid he forgot his own name.” :)
Truth be told, what ultimately matters is the sort of game you’re playing. If you’re playing a simulationist game, then most of the comments are right: 4 INT is a Neanderthal at best. But if you’re playing a more cinematic game, which most people do, then it’s okay to play the character as really dumb, but not as dumb as the score might actually indicate.
Incidentally, I’ve had a player roll up a 4 INT character for a one-shot once. The pitch was “an orc so stupid he forgot his own name.” :)
Neanderthals were, so far as we know, substantially smarter than INT 4. INT 4 is a toddler old enough to take diapers off but not yet potty trained.
Incidentally, it will only slightly reduce your average roll - bringing it slightly closer to the same curve as point buy - if you replace "roll 4d6, drop lowest" with "roll 5d4, drop lowest, add 1", and your new minimum will be 5, not 3. That can help avoid stats so low they're an active detriment to everyone's fun.
To those saying that INT 4 is animal level intelligence and therefore unplayable, that is saying that most if not all species of animal are incapable of acting on anything other than pure instinct. However that is simply not the case.
Communications would be rudimentary and mostly grunts but not completely impossible.
Animals can be taught rudimentary behaviour. An Int 4 character could certainly be taught to keep clean and dress themselves, to do chores for food, that they can sleep in a cot or on some hay in the stables, that they can give money for goods in a store (though the value of things is probably unclear), etc. Such a character could be taught to be functional in a community, if only on a very basic level - but it'd really require one or a few people watching over and taking care of them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To me, roleplay is about making meaningful choices. Getting into a character's head and making the choices they would make. The issue with INT 4 is that you barely have the capacity to do that. Every choice is going to be based on the same handful of basic instincts OR what the party tells you to do. There's just very little substance there to dig into over multiple sessions of play, and there's very little room for character growth.
To me, roleplay is about making meaningful choices. Getting into a character's head and making the choices they would make. The issue with INT 4 is that you barely have the capacity to do that. Every choice is going to be based on the same handful of basic instincts OR what the party tells you to do. There's just very little substance there to dig into over multiple sessions of play, and there's very little room for character growth.
Again, that implies animals cannot make meaningful choices. It is hard to play but not impossible.
It's a big, unproven claim that animals can make choices, let alone meaningful ones.
Apologies if this mirrors anything said so far but i speed read most of the entries....my 2cp worth would be to refer to 3.5e (I've underlined those relating to low Int)
****
INTELLIGENCE, WISDOM, AND CHARISMA
You can use your character’s Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scoresto guide you in roleplaying your character. Here is some background(just guidelines) about what these scores can mean.
A smart character (one with high Intelligence) is curious, knowledgeable, and prone to using big words.
A character with a high Intelligence but low Wisdom may be smart but absentminded, or knowledgeable butlacking in common sense.
A character with a high Intelligence but a low Charisma may be a know-it-all or a reclusive scholar.
A smart character lacking in both Wisdom and Charisma may put her foot in her mouth often.
A character with a low Intelligence mispronounces and misuseswords, has trouble following directions, or fails to get the joke.
A character with a high Wisdom score may be sensible, serene, “intune,” alert, or centered.
A character with a high Wisdom but low Intelligence may be aware, but simple.
A character with high Wisdom but low Charisma knows enough to speak carefully and may become an advisor (or “power behind the throne”) rather than a leader.
The wise character lacking in both Intelligence and Charisma is uncouth and unsophisticated.
A character with a low Wisdom score may be rash, imprudent, irresponsible, or “out of it.”
A character with high Charisma may be attractive, striking, personable, and confident.
A character with high Charisma but a low Intelligence can usually pass herself off as knowledgeable, until she meets a true expert.
A charismatic character lacking in both Intelligence and Wisdom is likely to be shallow and unaware of others’ feelings.
A character with low Charisma may be reserved, gruff, rude, fawning, or simply nondescript.
****
Based on that you don't really have to go any further than having your Int 4, regardless of how it compares to animal stat blocks, mean you have trouble with simple math, saying long words and you cannot read/write but you may still be able to hold a conversation and understand basic tactics etc. You can just be a hermit/recluse/foundling raised by animals (think Mowgli from Jungle Book or Tarzan), you might be a soldier who suffered a head injury in battle and was discharged, maybe you were training to be a wizard and misread a spell scroll and got your brain swiss cheesed or were just a miner that got caught in a cave in and your mind never fully recovered from having to spend days alone in the dark. You can always use Feats and ASI to show character growth or you getting better as you gain levels, it might make for some good character RP if the rest of the party see you struggling to overcome something and making breakthroughs, if your off a mind to do it, start as a fighter and you'd get your Int to 10 by level 8 using ASI's.
As a person who works with individuals with intellectual disabilities, part of me cringes when I think about trying to roleplay a low Intelligence character.
Here is my observations. Roleplay the character as not worrying about things. Be cheerful even when things are awful.
You can compare to the feeble mind spell, that's a 1 but other than some language comprehension it's probably similar. "The creature can’t cast
spells, activate magic items, understand language, or communicate in any intelligible way. The creature can, however, identify its friends, follow them, and even protect them."
One way to work it would be to say he's a barbarian, normally he has an int of 8 but when he rages its a red haze of murderous intent and his int drops to 4 while the rage lasts.
I remember his Int being 6. ;-)
The very first sentence in my post above says I like seeing 6s and 7s here and there in statlines. Fives and 4s I'm still ok with, but Int is arguably the problematic one (and I disagree a 4 in anything else is as troublesome as in Int).
Let's assume we want to play the stats by their implicit value, so no making allowances: basically that means having someone with the mental capabilities (but not necessarily the innocence) of a small child in an adventuring party. I think we can agree that's potentially awkward and hurtful - plenty of groups have explicit rules against child PCs, and this isn't all that different. I'm more than ok with exploring mature themes like racism, sexism, poverty, whatever in game if the group is up to it, but bringing a mentally disabled character into the sort of adventures D&D lends itself best to? I think I'll pass, and maybe try something else that's a little bit more suited to that sort of emotional and dramatic content.
If on the other hand allowances do get made and we only look at the explicit consequences (a -3 modifier whenever the rules call for it), sure, it gets quite a bit easier. And again, if others want to play that way that's totally fine by me, I don't judge how other groups play - if they're having fun, they're doing things right. But to me that feels inconsistent and contrived. It makes Int even more of an easy dump stat. It treats Int differently from other stats, pretty much just to accommodate a character type I'd more than likely find somewhat distasteful if it were played right.
I like to think I'm reasonably open minded about what I allow at my table, but apparently this either crosses the limit or at least gets very, very close to it.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think it's rather difficult to tell just how a human with an int of four would act. You can certainly find some comparisons that would make it seem impossible to work. Then again, as has been already brought up, a raven has an int of 2, and ravens are capable of fairly complex decision making... Several creatures that are certainly considered intelligent such as wolves or boars have ints below four.. However, those animals have that int level naturally, where as humans aren't.
I see people saying that the person would be unable to maintain decent hygiene, however many animals with an int of three of four show real efforts of hygiene... we have birds constantly cleaning their feathers and cats and dogs cleaning their fur... So a person with the benefit of soceity teaching them human norms of hygiene would probably easily be taught these things... Even if they may not understand the finer nuances.
I think the real troublesome bit is when you get into the complex thinking needed to have basic social interactions or understanding plans... we are incredibly complex animals with regards to our social behavior, so your character would probably be treated like half a pet or work animal... Think Hodor from GoT... Able to function but is easily stressed out by complex situations.
All that said... That may be overthinking it entirely... Perhaps simply going with "I'm a person with well below average int and I'll try to act like one" is enough... I just worry that it may be a limiting experience for a longer campaign.
We need to separate character and player. The player controlling the 4 INT character can still contribute to the table as much as any other player. Let's not forget that what's really happening is based upon PLAYER intelligence, not PC. Here's a few examples and counter points to the "a 4 Int character isn't playable."
Of course, you could have a less than intelligent real life player with a 20 INT Wizard and the DM could throw them a clue because "their PC could figure out what the player couldn't", but it GOES BOTH WAYS.
Without a wizard in play, Intelligence is the most common (or high on the list) dump stat. Many put Int somewhere between 8 - 11. The DM presents puzzles. Trap door secret things. Investigative shenanigans. X-Files, Criminal Minds, Hidden doors sort of stuff. What actually happens at the table?
PLAYERS (not PCs) put their collective minds together and come up with solutions. Sure, dice are rolled, but the reason dice are rolled is because of PLAYER input. NOT PC input. If the DM defaulted to STATS, they could easily say...seeing as the highest INT in the party is an 11, you'll never figure this thing out. Where do you go from there?
Who comes up with the idea to jump off a cliff, parkour roll out of it, and land in the ready position? Is this only a thing shared at the table by those with 16+ Dexterity (those actually capable of doing it?) No, it's brought up by any PLAYER. Dice are rolled and only the high Dex folk accomplish the task but the idea -- the initiative taken -- the very thing that prompts decision, action, and dice rolling comes from PLAYERS, not CHARACTERS.
Give Neil DeGrasse a 4 int character and tell me that dude can't contribute something to the table. If so, you (in my opinion) aren't playing stats the correct way. You're using them as a crutch. As a fixed rule and not a guide. This is wrong.
Int, probably above any other stat can go low simply because it's the one thing that is at odds with the thinking folk at the table. Do you require strongman present in order to allow strength based activities? Do you require that the smart players at the table (those capable of deciphering and puzzle solving some really tough shit) to stay quiet unless they've played a 15+ INT character? If the answer is no, then why keep a 4 Int PLAYER from contributing equally? Hell, I'd venture that a Mensa member at the table playing a 4 int character might come up with some pretty damn clever, imaginative, and interesting gameplay scenarios that would make the 4 INT "experiment" completely viable.
Stats ONLY matter when you roll dice. Let negative stat fail what they suck at. As far as input, reasoning, talking, and contributing, let it all go. No one says, "stay quiet real life dude. Your character only has a 10 Charisma because you're a barbarian and would have nothing to contribute to this social situation."
Instead, let the Barbarian player have at it, then say, "ok, that's my thoughts - now..my character won't be the one doing this of course, so bard guy, you do it."
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
Go teach your grandmother to suck eggs, JG. :p
Well, no. I don't require Mensa members present in order to allow intelligence based activities either. What's the point you're making here?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
As you said.. I mean, you can push the hopelessly naive, never thinks anything through, never cares to figure stuff out type all you want but at 4 Int you're arguably unable to understand moderately complex plans.
The player can think it through. The player can understand complex plans. The player doesn't have to be naive. The player might care (and be capable) of figuring stuff out. Therefore, a 4 INT character contributes as much as an 18 INT character simply because each is a player with things to contribute. If you contend that only players capable of SUCCEEDING at tasks (rolling dice) can contribute, I'd say you're approaching it incorrectly. I'd bet the 4 INT character has a much higher stat elsewhere. They contribute in that regard. That's sort of the point of varying stats, complimentary players, cooperation, etc. You're finding a hard number where you believe the character is near useless and incapable of bringing anything worthwhile to the table. I disagree. That's the point I'm making. We good?
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
OP isn't asking how they can contribute as a player. They're asking how to roleplay a character with an Intelligence of 4. Your mistake regarding what the conversation is about has led to you dramatically misunderstand the points others, like pangurjan, are making.
I absolutely understand yours and other's points. You've essentially said its unplayable, not-advisable, or unwelcome (a hindrance) at the table. I disagree. Give me your 'roleplay checklist' that a 10 INT character can anchor too that a 4 INT character can't?
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
It isn't about the player contributing. It's about roleplaying the character as appropriate for the stats, and what that entails for the campaign. Do adventuring parties (in character) generally want to babysit an 8-year old (arguably a charitable comparison) in the body of an adult? Are players (out of character) generally comfortable roleplaying situations where their characters have a mentally disabled person tag along? Is it fun to have someone (in character) there who is likely to misunderstand even moderately complex plans so you can't rely on them not to do something stupid, someone who can't be trusted with money or valuables, someone you can't really let out of your sight for more than five minutes? I think most groups, if they're even willing to try, would grow tired of this real soon and/or find it more than a little awkward. A 4 Int isn't Forest Gump or Rudy in my estimate, it's quite a bit worse than that. It's someone completely unable to survive unless through the charity of others.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Or are able to survive, but are basically feral. Speech is limited to single syllable words, abstract reasoning is very limited, mathematical ability is probably limited to counting to ten. Tool usage is extremely basic- can use a club, a knife, a spear, but a crossbow is out. Issues like that.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
You can be the guy who misremembers every situation.
"Remember when I took on that dragon by myself"
Party "you mean the one you ran away in fear of"
"Remember when I fought evil doers attacking that poor injured illithid?"
Party "that was us, you attacked us soon as that 'injured mind flayer' ambushed us."
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
That's more low wisdom
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Truth be told, what ultimately matters is the sort of game you’re playing. If you’re playing a simulationist game, then most of the comments are right: 4 INT is a Neanderthal at best. But if you’re playing a more cinematic game, which most people do, then it’s okay to play the character as really dumb, but not as dumb as the score might actually indicate.
Incidentally, I’ve had a player roll up a 4 INT character for a one-shot once. The pitch was “an orc so stupid he forgot his own name.” :)
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Neanderthals were, so far as we know, substantially smarter than INT 4. INT 4 is a toddler old enough to take diapers off but not yet potty trained.
Incidentally, it will only slightly reduce your average roll - bringing it slightly closer to the same curve as point buy - if you replace "roll 4d6, drop lowest" with "roll 5d4, drop lowest, add 1", and your new minimum will be 5, not 3. That can help avoid stats so low they're an active detriment to everyone's fun.
Animals can be taught rudimentary behaviour. An Int 4 character could certainly be taught to keep clean and dress themselves, to do chores for food, that they can sleep in a cot or on some hay in the stables, that they can give money for goods in a store (though the value of things is probably unclear), etc. Such a character could be taught to be functional in a community, if only on a very basic level - but it'd really require one or a few people watching over and taking care of them.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To me, roleplay is about making meaningful choices. Getting into a character's head and making the choices they would make. The issue with INT 4 is that you barely have the capacity to do that. Every choice is going to be based on the same handful of basic instincts OR what the party tells you to do. There's just very little substance there to dig into over multiple sessions of play, and there's very little room for character growth.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
It's a big, unproven claim that animals can make choices, let alone meaningful ones.
Apologies if this mirrors anything said so far but i speed read most of the entries....my 2cp worth would be to refer to 3.5e (I've underlined those relating to low Int)
****
INTELLIGENCE, WISDOM, AND CHARISMA
You can use your character’s Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scoresto guide you in roleplaying your character. Here is some background(just guidelines) about what these scores can mean.
A smart character (one with high Intelligence) is curious, knowledgeable, and prone to using big words.
A character with a high Intelligence but low Wisdom may be smart but absentminded, or knowledgeable butlacking in common sense.
A character with a high Intelligence but a low Charisma may be a know-it-all or a reclusive scholar.
A smart character lacking in both Wisdom and Charisma may put her foot in her mouth often.
A character with a low Intelligence mispronounces and misuseswords, has trouble following directions, or fails to get the joke.
A character with a high Wisdom score may be sensible, serene, “intune,” alert, or centered.
A character with a high Wisdom but low Intelligence may be aware, but simple.
A character with high Wisdom but low Charisma knows enough to speak carefully and may become an advisor (or “power behind the throne”) rather than a leader.
The wise character lacking in both Intelligence and Charisma is uncouth and unsophisticated.
A character with a low Wisdom score may be rash, imprudent, irresponsible, or “out of it.”
A character with high Charisma may be attractive, striking, personable, and confident.
A character with high Charisma but a low Intelligence can usually pass herself off as knowledgeable, until she meets a true expert.
A charismatic character lacking in both Intelligence and Wisdom is likely to be shallow and unaware of others’ feelings.
A character with low Charisma may be reserved, gruff, rude, fawning, or simply nondescript.
****
Based on that you don't really have to go any further than having your Int 4, regardless of how it compares to animal stat blocks, mean you have trouble with simple math, saying long words and you cannot read/write but you may still be able to hold a conversation and understand basic tactics etc. You can just be a hermit/recluse/foundling raised by animals (think Mowgli from Jungle Book or Tarzan), you might be a soldier who suffered a head injury in battle and was discharged, maybe you were training to be a wizard and misread a spell scroll and got your brain swiss cheesed or were just a miner that got caught in a cave in and your mind never fully recovered from having to spend days alone in the dark. You can always use Feats and ASI to show character growth or you getting better as you gain levels, it might make for some good character RP if the rest of the party see you struggling to overcome something and making breakthroughs, if your off a mind to do it, start as a fighter and you'd get your Int to 10 by level 8 using ASI's.
As a person who works with individuals with intellectual disabilities, part of me cringes when I think about trying to roleplay a low Intelligence character.
Here is my observations. Roleplay the character as not worrying about things. Be cheerful even when things are awful.