I have seen several times both here and in other places that INT is considered a dump stat by many players, if you don't cast magic using it then why bother putting anything in it. 

As a DM I have never found this to be an issue, but, I have always insisted my players roleplay to their characters intelligence. The number of times in the past a player, who dumped his low stat into INT has come up with some detailed intricate plan, has suddenly had a moment of realisation when I explain, thats great, but, your character would never come up with that so think of a simpler option. Now generally I explain this at player creation telling players, you have picked a low INT character, you realise how you need to roleplay that right. Sometimes players embrace it (mainly thanks to Travis brilliant playing of Grog in critical roll showing them they can really lean into it), usually they rethink where they want to put their stats. 

Another thing I have been known to do is make players roll against intelligence to remember stuff. What was the name of the barmaid in that inn we always go to, what was the town we where in 4 weeks ago that got attacked by goblins, last time we where here there was a great little magic shop with a cool item for sale, I can afford it now, where was it, and what exactly was that ring? If the player doesn't have it written down, then it's a roll against INT to remember. 

So as DM's how do you prevent players seeing INT as a dump stat, is it a problem or like me do your regular players understand that while mechanically it might not give their player a bonus, in terms of roleplay and general character development, it is an important thing to consider. 

Quote from Scarloc_Stormcall >>

I have seen several times both here and in other places that INT is considered a dump stat by many players, if you don't cast magic using it then why bother putting anything in it. 

As a DM I have never found this to be an issue, but, I have always insisted my players roleplay to their characters intelligence. The number of times in the past a player, who dumped his low stat into INT has come up with some detailed intricate plan, has suddenly had a moment of realisation when I explain, thats great, but, your character would never come up with that so think of a simpler option. Now generally I explain this at player creation telling players, you have picked a low INT character, you realise how you need to roleplay that right. Sometimes players embrace it (mainly thanks to Travis brilliant playing of Grog in critical roll showing them they can really lean into it), usually they rethink where they want to put their stats. 

Another thing I have been known to do is make players roll against intelligence to remember stuff. What was the name of the barmaid in that inn we always go to, what was the town we where in 4 weeks ago that got attacked by goblins, last time we where here there was a great little magic shop with a cool item for sale, I can afford it now, where was it, and what exactly was that ring? If the player doesn't have it written down, then it's a roll against INT to remember. 

So as DM's how do you prevent players seeing INT as a dump stat, is it a problem or like me do your regular players understand that while mechanically it might not give their player a bonus, in terms of roleplay and general character development, it is an important thing to consider. 

 i suggest following XP to lv3's  advice and give them extra proficiencies or languages for their int bonus

Well, Intelligence being a dump stat doesn't matter if you don't offer them any reason for using it. As you've said, making them roleplay their characters intelligence rather than using their own will go a long way to making them not dump it. I'm assuming you're working off point buy, as otherwise there's always going to be a dump stat for the lowest statistic and the players are going to pick whichever one they use the least.

This ultimately is an issue with character creation, and as such can only ever be resolved either in session 0, or in long-term gaming groups. In both cases, you need to give them uses for intelligence - intelligence save attacks from creatures, intelligence checks for extras, magic items which require an intelligence to use - they need to know that dumping this stat has consequences, in the same way as dumping strength will affect ones ability to swing a warhammer. Then this needs to either be a topic of discussion in session 0 (all the stats will be used in this game, there's no stat that's going to be safe to dump) and then proven through gameplay. In a longer term gaming group that's past session 0, you can start introducing more intelligence based foes so the group realises their weakness. When someone dies and needs a new character, I'd expect them to have better intelligence than their predecessor, especially if they died from a creature that forces intelligence saves!

In short - make them use it, they'll notice their shortcomings!

The idea nerfing a player's plan because their character is dumb doesn't sit well with me. I don't mind the big lunk having the occasional stroke of genius, and I think it's probably appropriate that even the smashiest of barbarians should have picked up some combat tactics along the way. If they were consistently guiding the party through complex political situations, I might start to take issue. Of course use of pure meta-knowledge is absolutely verboten.

Overall, I'd rather buff a high intelligence PC with in-game knowledge that they'd have even though the player doesn't.

I have a group of players entirely new to D&D, so they have no prior meta knowledge. I'm experimenting with giving my high intelligence players information about creatures they are facing (based on their passive intelligence scores). I'll also let them roll for more with a lookup table - the higher the roll, the more useful or direct the information. So far I've focused on information that could be used to roleplay a non-combat resolution, but it could branch into tactical information also. Thus far, it's worked quite well - letting the wizard think them out of a couple of encounters that could have gone quite badly for them. It will interesting to see what they could do with tactical information.

Thinking about it, there's more that can be done with this approach. It's reasonable that a high intelligence PC could learn much faster from an encounter, so even if they start with no real information, after the encounter was over, I might communicate that they noticed certain characteristics that could clue them in to abilities that the creature didn't actually exhibit. Like if a venomous creature never actually successfully used their venom, a high intelligence creature may still notice glands either side of their mouth and surmise that their bite can deliver venom. Or if they enter a room with ghouls, when a ghoul leaves their rat-dinner for larger prey, the notice that although the rat is alive and free to run, it appears to be paralyzed.

It's the kind of help that parties will only truly appreciate once it is gone. "Do I notice anything useful about these creatures?" Well, James, your character's intelligence is five. You notice it has black fur. Or it could just be really dark brown, you can't be sure. Oh, and that it's charging at you with claws at the ready.

Things I use or have used in past campaigns...

Give initiative bonus based on intelligence (1/2 modifier).
Give additional proficiencies (skills, tools, etc) based on intelligence (1/2 modifier).
Just because you know 4 languages, doesn't mean you know them fluently - roll an intelligence check.

One of my favorite table rules is that I allow an "oh shit, did I think to pack that" roll for mundane things (extra rope, chalk, etc). If the characters get into a bind, I allow each person to roll a DC15 Intelligence check to see if they remembered to pack something useful that they don't necessarily have... but only if they have a positive modifier in intelligence, and only once per session.

I haven’t ever put in in action, but I’m considering floating a rule where you can choose Dexterity or Intelligence for Initiative rolls. Your speedy assessment of the conflict let’s you act faster. This also has the nice side effect of making Dexterity slightly less dominant in all characters.

Make a history-heavy campaign. The players won't be able to get many places without succeeding on history or arcana checks to know what on earth they are talking about in the throne room.

In some older editions of D&D, higher Intelligence characters learned additional languages, while lower Intelligence characters couldn't read or write. The latter might not work for today, since medieval realism is less important, but I think the first might be smart. Maybe throw in tool proficiencies as well? (You'd have to cut the languages/tool proficiencies from backgrounds in order to compensate, or at least make it only one instead of two, but that would be okay.)

I'm also considering a house rule that Intelligence, not Charisma, is a Warlock's prime attribute. It fits better thematically with a master of weird forbidden lore, and increases the relevance of Intelligence. (And if you don't think the Archfey is "weird forbidden lore," look deeper into the Fae...that's some scary stuff.)

Quote from NaivaraArnuanna >>

In some older editions of D&D, higher Intelligence characters learned additional languages, while lower Intelligence characters couldn't read or write. The latter might not work for today, since medieval realism is less important, but I think the first might be smart. Maybe throw in tool proficiencies as well? (You'd have to cut the languages/tool proficiencies from backgrounds in order to compensate, or at least make it only one instead of two, but that would be okay.)

I'm also considering a house rule that Intelligence, not Charisma, is a Warlock's prime attribute. It fits better thematically with a master of weird forbidden lore, and increases the relevance of Intelligence. (And if you don't think the Archfey is "weird forbidden lore," look deeper into the Fae...that's some scary stuff.)

 Warlock is CHA because its the deal with the patron giving magic, similar to a paladin oath, getting the magic has nothing to do with knowing lore

There's a common misconception that the patron is "giving" the magic directly, like a god gives magic to a cleric. In reality they're usually more of a teacher, showing the character how to use strange magics, or (like the Great Old One) just providing a source of power. That's why in many cases a warlock could feasibly turn on their patron and keep their magic.

But we're getting a bit off-topic. Feel free to private message me if you want to discuss it more!

Quote from TabaxiRogueFighterClericWarlock >>

Quote from NaivaraArnuanna >>

In some older editions of D&D, higher Intelligence characters learned additional languages, while lower Intelligence characters couldn't read or write. The latter might not work for today, since medieval realism is less important, but I think the first might be smart. Maybe throw in tool proficiencies as well? (You'd have to cut the languages/tool proficiencies from backgrounds in order to compensate, or at least make it only one instead of two, but that would be okay.)

I'm also considering a house rule that Intelligence, not Charisma, is a Warlock's prime attribute. It fits better thematically with a master of weird forbidden lore, and increases the relevance of Intelligence. (And if you don't think the Archfey is "weird forbidden lore," look deeper into the Fae...that's some scary stuff.)

 Warlock is CHA because its the deal with the patron giving magic, similar to a paladin oath, getting the magic has nothing to do with knowing lore

 This makes sense, Wizards are INT because the magic is learnt, reading books, practice and effort. Warlocks don't necessarily have any idea where their magic comes from, it just appears, you can be a low int low wisdom person who signs a deal with a devil for power (in fact some patrons will look for people like that lol). An intelligent person is probably less likely to sign some of the contracts Patrons require signing. 

Quote from Flare76 >>

I haven’t ever put in in action, but I’m considering floating a rule where you can choose Dexterity or Intelligence for Initiative rolls. Your speedy assessment of the conflict let’s you act faster. This also has the nice side effect of making Dexterity slightly less dominant in all characters.

 This at least makes keeps all Monsters to the same level of danger, but, it does mean wizards will be more likely to be higher up the initiative order, so be prepared to have a wizard mess up your monsters before they get to have a turn :). 

Quote from DeltaMikeDeltaLima >>

The idea nerfing a player's plan because their character is dumb doesn't sit well with me. I don't mind the big lunk having the occasional stroke of genius, and I think it's probably appropriate that even the smashiest of barbarians should have picked up some combat tactics along the way. If they were consistently guiding the party through complex political situations, I might start to take issue. Of course use of pure meta-knowledge is absolutely verboten.

Overall, I'd rather buff a high intelligence PC with in-game knowledge that they'd have even though the player doesn't.

I have a group of players entirely new to D&D, so they have no prior meta knowledge. I'm experimenting with giving my high intelligence players information about creatures they are facing (based on their passive intelligence scores). I'll also let them roll for more with a lookup table - the higher the roll, the more useful or direct the information. So far I've focused on information that could be used to roleplay a non-combat resolution, but it could branch into tactical information also. Thus far, it's worked quite well - letting the wizard think them out of a couple of encounters that could have gone quite badly for them. It will interesting to see what they could do with tactical information.

Thinking about it, there's more that can be done with this approach. It's reasonable that a high intelligence PC could learn much faster from an encounter, so even if they start with no real information, after the encounter was over, I might communicate that they noticed certain characteristics that could clue them in to abilities that the creature didn't actually exhibit. Like if a venomous creature never actually successfully used their venom, a high intelligence creature may still notice glands either side of their mouth and surmise that their bite can deliver venom. Or if they enter a room with ghouls, when a ghoul leaves their rat-dinner for larger prey, the notice that although the rat is alive and free to run, it appears to be paralyzed.

It's the kind of help that parties will only truly appreciate once it is gone. "Do I notice anything useful about these creatures?" Well, James, your character's intelligence is five. You notice it has black fur. Or it could just be really dark brown, you can't be sure. Oh, and that it's charging at you with claws at the ready.

 Well James your int is 5, maybe this is a friendly monster charging at you :). 

I get what your saying and I do play Wisdom off against INT, so the Barbarian having a great tactical thought might make sense, if a player roleplays it well they might have one clever thought a day or something. I have also had tables where a player had a thought there character wouldn't and the other players called them on it in jest, Oh Chris, where did that come from that was a great idea. 

In my case, my dump stat is THAC0 reaction with dangerous cloakers charisma. Never intelligence. Occasionnally Wisdom when I play mad characters.

INT is for disarming traps.

GM: You see a pressure plate, with six or seven wires leading off, some leading to pulleys. What do you do?
Player: I determine which ones to cut to disarm the trap.
GM: Great. Can I have an INT (Thief's Tools) check please?
Player: Isn't that DEX?
GM: Only if you can tell me how a good DEX score helps tell you which wire to cut.

What's the line: "It's not criminal to be stupid, but you're abusing the privilege."?  Only in reverse. 

Unless you have an entire group of smart players all using INT as their dump stat; or one brilliant player who plays his or her character as the group's sage, I wouldn't make that much of an issue of it.

You can use the carrot, the stick, or both. If you give experience bonuses or inspiration points for playing in character (a carrot), or requiring INT checks (a stick), you are trying to do in game what might be better handled out of game.

Also, if everyone is having fun with the game, it shouldn't be a problem. You may find a workaround during an after game session. If the engineer-by-day/barbarian-at-night is developing brilliant strategies. let his player give the idea to the character playing a spellcaster, and let them execute it. 

Finally, INT isn't purely smarts.  Savy, street wise, clever, and tactical are all types of intelligence but don't necessarily fall into the category of INT.  No one minds the absent-minded wizard (unless his character forgot to order pizza).

INT is not intelligence, it's education. It's knowing stuff.

Perfectly fine for characters to lack education but they are going to need to get info somewhere. Having a scribe or savant sidekick can fill this gap.

You want players to prioritise INT? Make knowledge skills important. If they are dumping the stat it could be that you are giving away info too easily. 

You could incorporate Matt Coleville's Psionics from Strongholds and Followers. All of those abilities are based on INT. Including all the saving throws against those abilities. If you want to either have, or defend, against S&F Psionics, you need INT. If you pepper it into the world so that a sufficient number of bad-guys have it, then your players will quickly recognize that they can't dump it. Colevillian Psionics are not magic (at least, I do not run them as if they are), and therefore things like counterspell, dispel, anti-magic shell, and other things that protect you vs. magic, do not work against them. All that works against them is other Psionic abilities or, gasp, high INT (for the saving throws against the abilities). And some of his Psionic powers can be devastating (though only something like a Psionic dragon would have them).

I have made them available to my players with a custom feat, which I allowed them to take after they visited the Astral Plane (my realm of Psionics) and encountered Githiyanki (mine have some Psionics) and an Astral Dragon (Psionics, based off of Coleville's Gemstone Dragons), and had Psionics used against them. Now, because they did not know about it ahead of time and could not have known INT would matter, I have mostly confined my Psionics to the outer Planes and the Astral, so that they don't encounter them all the time.

But, if you want a world in which INT can't be a dump stat, put S&F Psionics (or something equivalent to it) into your world up-front, maybe even let the players take it (you can use the ability of Gemstone Dragonborn as a Feat -- lets them use a couple of weaker Psionic manifestations and not become overpowered), and make them aware that low INT is going to make you vulnerable to Psionics. Bye-bye dump stat.

I like using INT as a dump stat, but I generally have much higher WIS when doing that (unless going for a Brawler).  Just because someone didn't read much (or any) growing up, doesn't mean they don't have common sense.  And vice versa.  Some players put a LOT of points (or higher roll) into INT with a dump stat of WIS and act like they know things and are perfectly adjusted.  Trust me... I work in a University and we have a lot of HIGH INT people on campus, but most of them traded away their Common Sense in the bargain, and I always figure they used WISdom as a dump stat.  Every stat has a good and a bad trade off.  INT is education and has little to do with tactics (though it could if they read the right "We Were There..." books or what have you) or dealing with other people.  In combination with HIStory and INVestigation and other things like it, it broadens the stat beyond just education in specific areas.  

Quote from Scarloc_Stormcall >>

The number of times in the past a player, who dumped his low stat into INT has come up with some detailed intricate plan, has suddenly had a moment of realisation when I explain, thats great, but, your character would never come up with that so think of a simpler option.

I had this happen constantly where the player with the lowest intelligence was constantly the person who came up with really creative, intelligent plans to everything. So I reminded him his character was low INT, and for the entire campaign he would come up with an idea, tell his group, but then we would have a different character with higher intelligence Role Play pitch the plan again to the party, so that in character someone else was ALWAYS getting all the credit and praise for these brilliant ideas while the guy actually coming up with the plans was constantly berated for not contributing. This allowed us to still have those great player ideas while also making a fun running joke throughout our time together.