so one of my players has a barbarian with very low intelligence/wisdom stats. they get annoyed sometimes because those are limiting, they often don't help solve puzzles and the like. so this player has requested that i kill the barbarian and let the player's backup character join. the major problem with this is that the rest of the party is a bard and a sorcerer (and sometimes a ranger) so they have a collective hp of 10 points. the backup character is a wizard. without some sort of tank im afraid the party will be killed. i'm still really new at this, so does anyone have any tips as to how i could better incorporate the barbarian or failing that, manage a party with a low hp that all rely heavily on ranged attacks?
When you say very low, do you mean lower than an 4? Even characters with a 6 or an 8 are capable of using their brains to figure out basic things. They will be able to contribute to puzzles and use logic or intuition to solve problems...they wouldn't have survived into adulthood otherwise.
The flip side is maybe the player doesn't enjoy puzzles and the likes, and simply wants to smash things. Give them things to smash, intimidate, and otherwise flex at.
Lastly, open up more dialogue about what the player is frustrated with. Sure the first response is "I'm a dumb barbarian who can't help anyone except hit things" but...maybe they just feel like they don't get enough of the spotlight.
Perhaps they feel underwhelming in comparison to the casters because they can do so many cool things. Give them fights and situations where the casters are handicapped and the barbarian has to save them.
If the problem is truly that they feel pigeon-holed into being the tank, then it's possible that you could have the party "hire" a tank to help them out. If they want to accomplish more intelligence checks, you could have them change their backgrounds to include something with proficiency in intelligence checks, such as the sage (that would be an interesting character, a sage who studies hard but doesn't grasp everything thrown at her. The frustration builds and they let it out in a rage.) or perhaps change to an Eldritch Knight (fighter subclass) to maintain the tanking ability but get some reasonable intelligence. If the problem is that the others are just given more chances to shine, provide opportunities that the Barbarian will be able to excel at. It doesn't have to just be combat. You suggest that the Barbarian uses skills like intimidation or perhaps even grappling (Athletics check) with someone while they are being interrogated to ensure their cooperation. Look at the Barbarian's highest skills and think about ways that they could shine and tweak the encounters in favor of the Barbarians involvement (higher DC checks on the rolls with the barbarian's actions acting like a help action). Also, in areas that fit the barbarian's background (the mechanical part or just the back story that the player created for them), give the barbarian advantage on those checks to help overcome the low intelligence or wisdom modifiers (similar to Dwarves' Stonecunning perhaps, which gives limited proficiency and double proficiency bonus instead of advantage).
One of the best ways to manage your problem is the way you narrate a fail. Sometimes failure can be one of the most entertaining parts of a session. Play it up. Not only did they fail, but MY GOD, how they failed! That way a characters short comings aren't as frustrating, they're more entertaining, and the whole party gets a good laugh out of it.
If they're dead set on changing, talk to them about your HP concern. Maybe they'd be happier moving to a cleric or paladin so they can still get their hands dirty but not be dumb as a post.
You could have the party find a helm of intellect which the barbarian dons to the surprise of the rest of the party. It doesn't do much in this case except raise the intelligence saving throw and relieve the barbarian of the self imposed role playing constraint. (This is also why I can't play a character with an int less than 10 ... I just don't enjoy it since I feel like I should constrain my contribution when performing intellectual tasks. This gets worse the lower the int goes.) Another choice would be to just bump the characters int to 10 ... and come up with an in game event to explain it.
If after exploring all the other options the player would still be happier playing a different character all together, then you both still have several options if you both want to keep him as a front line player. Paladins, Clerics, Fighters, and Monks all have builds that let them be front line melee characters with stronger Int or Wisdom stats. Or you can think about rebuilding the Barbarian and create a smarter or more wise character. The cliche of the dumb Barbarian does not need to be followed.
It's worth having a chat with the whole party as well. Your players might want a dramatic moment where the Barbarian leaves, or dies, or something cool to roleplay through one character leaving and another arriving. But some groups are totally ok with just letting people switch characters if it makes them happier and rolling with the new PC as if they were there all along. Chat with the whole group and see what would make everyone happy. In my experience most players are happy to sacrifice some "realism" in order to facilitate a friend having more fun.
Is the player themselves really that low in intelligence/wisdom? If not then there's no reason why they should be completely unable to play their part or have any input into what's going on based on a couple of low stats. A character with low charisma for example wouldn't have to be completely silent in a social engagement they're just likely to blurt something out that isn't the best option but that doesn't mean that they're making an important roll with a minus 4 modifier that derails the whole game and ruins everything. The same would go with low intelligence or wisdom or indeed any stat. A barbarian is interesting as their proficiency options aren't particularly built around enhancing what they're already good at which can allow them to have dump stats with specialties that balance it out. He's got low charisma but when he needs to be he's very intimidating, he's got low intelligence but he really knows about nature and has a great awareness of how to survive/track in the wild. Depending on back ground there's a lot of combinations that you can take to play with things that aren't great and they theoretically won't stop the barbs ability to smash things into oblivion.
One thing a player with low intelligence/wisdom can do is take advantage of the fact the player isn't a clueless dolt as well. While the character isn't wise he's not necessarily going to blondly trust everyone and the player can interpret that in their own ways. So if the player isn't sure the character trusts someone he doesn't NEED to roll an insight check, it's quite plausible that the character thinks something is off and he's convinced he's right so why ask "can I see if he's telling us the truth?" when you can just say "he's lying, you can tell because he's got yellow boots on. Never trust a man in yellow boots". After all even the best inquisitor characters can roll a 1 so might as well play up to it.
To take the intelligence thing and the fact the player feels he can't take part in puzzles and stuff. Why not? Is there nobody on the table who has ever watched a film? One of the oldest tropes in entertainment is the dumb character cracks the code with something innocuous that happens to solve the problem. It doesn't require a roll to say something that hits the nail on the head. Let's say they're walking through snow and they're asked the riddle "The more you take, the more you leave behind. What am I?" the low intelligence barbarian doesn't have to be completely out of it, they can still listen to the party discussing it and think about it. If they get the answer before the rest do ("footsteps") they could pipe up with "Bjorn has been pacing around for some time and kneels down to take a breather. I've been walkin' for ages while you lot gabber but we ain't got anywhere, Look 'ow many footsteps I've left be'ind me! Can we get a bloomin' move on?" The player has got a character that's not bright, it doesn't mean they have to be intelligence 5 IRL. Part of the fun of D&D is playing around bad luck whether that's at rolling the character or that key roll and seeing how you handle those. By no means should the DM feel they can't include riddles because of a low intelligence character and by no means should the low intelligence character be completely out of them. If they feel they are not taking a part sometimes that's just because the ideas haven't occurred to the player. A couple of examples and ways they can work around it and hopefully it'll bring their gameplay and the enjoyment back to the table.
Ability scores are a very linear one dimensional view of the characteristics they represent, but they don’t have to be treated that way. Intelligence spans memory, reasoning and analytics, executive functioning (sequencing/cause and effect), creativity, intuition, and more.
A low intelligence doesn’t have to mean all of these are deficient.
Perhaps the character has almost no executive functioning. He’d be an impulsive, reactionary, unfiltered daydreamer who has trouble following multi step instructions, but is otherwise neurotypical.
He could be pathologically literal, like Drax.
He could be unable to imprint long term memories.
These would all be reasonable interpretations of low intelligence in D&D that accomodate role play without the player having to pretend to be ‘dumb.’
I created a uber strong and charismatic, but "thick as pig ..." tortle, due to some really good and some really bad rolls when generating his stats.
how i have played him, is not stupid, but oblivious (hense my name) and just does things without thinking, like picking up a halfling player and putting him on the counter in a shop. i RP that he is kinda oblivious of his surroundings, following other party members instead of going off on his own. when he does have to speak to people, i make it that he trys but gets a head ache and a nose bleed if he starts to use big words. eg when asking about some cultist he asked "do you know of any one who is simp.. sympath... friendly to them" then wiped his nose.
in my most recent session, instead of listening at the door to a room to check for enemy's, he just walked in, when all the goblins turned around he just said he had brought the supplies (other party members had killed a hunting party the night before) handed the supplies over then sat down at the table and started eating with the goblins. this then kinda caused a problem as the rest of the party was in the hallway and couldn't really use AOE spells due to me chowing down in the middle of the hall.
As many other people mention, it's a little hard to figure out what really needs to change. Playing a low intelligence character can be a lot of fun, but for your player, there's something about the experience that they aren't enjoying. I'd talk to him and ask about the things he enjoys about his character and what he'd like to do with him; then ask him if he gets to do more of what he enjoys, will he want to stay with his character.
Sometimes a player's interests change and they decide they want to try a new PC. I would never force a player to continue playing a character they don't enjoy any longer. If that's what he wants to do, talk to him about how he'd like his character to exit the party. You can then take that character and turn him into an NPC which shows up every now and then, or that the PCs hear about his continuing exploits. Or you can turn him into a villain they come into conflict with later in the game.
As for not having a tank, I'd say that's up to you to adjust encounters a bit until they get used to how to win encounters without melee characters - they will need to be much more cautious. They can always hire some muscle as well.
I also never force players to be dumb just because their PC has low intelligence. Maybe the barbarian just has a knack with puzzles without quite knowing why. As long as you or they narrate it appropriately for low intelligence, I'd still let them contribute solutions.
I suspect the problem is less low Intelligence per se than having all mental stats be low. A general issue with Barbarians and Fighters is that there simply aren't that many out of combat problems that can be usefully solved by Strength or Constitution.
How does the rest of the party have 10 hp? Or do you mean less than 10 hp each. In any case, a 'tank' is not absolutely required, though in terms of having a well rounded party a cleric would likely be better than a wizard, and still has the ability to usefully contribute to non-combat situations.
I think you should look at some Conan the Barbarian resources. I recently started re-reading Howard and I fondly remember the Arnold movies when I was a kid. Conan overcomes the obstacles with help. You could design the the puzzles to be (partially) physical in nature. While the character might not understand them he can participate by lifting, smashing, jumping or twitching a pec at the right moment. You could also have the party fail the puzzle and then have to fight - to which the Barbarian has the advantage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
so one of my players has a barbarian with very low intelligence/wisdom stats. they get annoyed sometimes because those are limiting, they often don't help solve puzzles and the like. so this player has requested that i kill the barbarian and let the player's backup character join. the major problem with this is that the rest of the party is a bard and a sorcerer (and sometimes a ranger) so they have a collective hp of 10 points. the backup character is a wizard. without some sort of tank im afraid the party will be killed. i'm still really new at this, so does anyone have any tips as to how i could better incorporate the barbarian or failing that, manage a party with a low hp that all rely heavily on ranged attacks?
When you say very low, do you mean lower than an 4? Even characters with a 6 or an 8 are capable of using their brains to figure out basic things. They will be able to contribute to puzzles and use logic or intuition to solve problems...they wouldn't have survived into adulthood otherwise.
The flip side is maybe the player doesn't enjoy puzzles and the likes, and simply wants to smash things. Give them things to smash, intimidate, and otherwise flex at.
Lastly, open up more dialogue about what the player is frustrated with. Sure the first response is "I'm a dumb barbarian who can't help anyone except hit things" but...maybe they just feel like they don't get enough of the spotlight.
Perhaps they feel underwhelming in comparison to the casters because they can do so many cool things. Give them fights and situations where the casters are handicapped and the barbarian has to save them.
-just some thoughts, hope they spark something :)
If the problem is truly that they feel pigeon-holed into being the tank, then it's possible that you could have the party "hire" a tank to help them out. If they want to accomplish more intelligence checks, you could have them change their backgrounds to include something with proficiency in intelligence checks, such as the sage (that would be an interesting character, a sage who studies hard but doesn't grasp everything thrown at her. The frustration builds and they let it out in a rage.) or perhaps change to an Eldritch Knight (fighter subclass) to maintain the tanking ability but get some reasonable intelligence. If the problem is that the others are just given more chances to shine, provide opportunities that the Barbarian will be able to excel at. It doesn't have to just be combat. You suggest that the Barbarian uses skills like intimidation or perhaps even grappling (Athletics check) with someone while they are being interrogated to ensure their cooperation. Look at the Barbarian's highest skills and think about ways that they could shine and tweak the encounters in favor of the Barbarians involvement (higher DC checks on the rolls with the barbarian's actions acting like a help action). Also, in areas that fit the barbarian's background (the mechanical part or just the back story that the player created for them), give the barbarian advantage on those checks to help overcome the low intelligence or wisdom modifiers (similar to Dwarves' Stonecunning perhaps, which gives limited proficiency and double proficiency bonus instead of advantage).
One of the best ways to manage your problem is the way you narrate a fail. Sometimes failure can be one of the most entertaining parts of a session. Play it up. Not only did they fail, but MY GOD, how they failed! That way a characters short comings aren't as frustrating, they're more entertaining, and the whole party gets a good laugh out of it.
If they're dead set on changing, talk to them about your HP concern. Maybe they'd be happier moving to a cleric or paladin so they can still get their hands dirty but not be dumb as a post.
You could have the party find a helm of intellect which the barbarian dons to the surprise of the rest of the party. It doesn't do much in this case except raise the intelligence saving throw and relieve the barbarian of the self imposed role playing constraint. (This is also why I can't play a character with an int less than 10 ... I just don't enjoy it since I feel like I should constrain my contribution when performing intellectual tasks. This gets worse the lower the int goes.) Another choice would be to just bump the characters int to 10 ... and come up with an in game event to explain it.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderA lot of good suggestions here already.
If after exploring all the other options the player would still be happier playing a different character all together, then you both still have several options if you both want to keep him as a front line player. Paladins, Clerics, Fighters, and Monks all have builds that let them be front line melee characters with stronger Int or Wisdom stats. Or you can think about rebuilding the Barbarian and create a smarter or more wise character. The cliche of the dumb Barbarian does not need to be followed.
It's worth having a chat with the whole party as well. Your players might want a dramatic moment where the Barbarian leaves, or dies, or something cool to roleplay through one character leaving and another arriving. But some groups are totally ok with just letting people switch characters if it makes them happier and rolling with the new PC as if they were there all along. Chat with the whole group and see what would make everyone happy. In my experience most players are happy to sacrifice some "realism" in order to facilitate a friend having more fun.
Find me on Twitter: @OboeLauren
Is the player themselves really that low in intelligence/wisdom? If not then there's no reason why they should be completely unable to play their part or have any input into what's going on based on a couple of low stats. A character with low charisma for example wouldn't have to be completely silent in a social engagement they're just likely to blurt something out that isn't the best option but that doesn't mean that they're making an important roll with a minus 4 modifier that derails the whole game and ruins everything. The same would go with low intelligence or wisdom or indeed any stat. A barbarian is interesting as their proficiency options aren't particularly built around enhancing what they're already good at which can allow them to have dump stats with specialties that balance it out. He's got low charisma but when he needs to be he's very intimidating, he's got low intelligence but he really knows about nature and has a great awareness of how to survive/track in the wild. Depending on back ground there's a lot of combinations that you can take to play with things that aren't great and they theoretically won't stop the barbs ability to smash things into oblivion.
One thing a player with low intelligence/wisdom can do is take advantage of the fact the player isn't a clueless dolt as well. While the character isn't wise he's not necessarily going to blondly trust everyone and the player can interpret that in their own ways. So if the player isn't sure the character trusts someone he doesn't NEED to roll an insight check, it's quite plausible that the character thinks something is off and he's convinced he's right so why ask "can I see if he's telling us the truth?" when you can just say "he's lying, you can tell because he's got yellow boots on. Never trust a man in yellow boots". After all even the best inquisitor characters can roll a 1 so might as well play up to it.
To take the intelligence thing and the fact the player feels he can't take part in puzzles and stuff. Why not? Is there nobody on the table who has ever watched a film? One of the oldest tropes in entertainment is the dumb character cracks the code with something innocuous that happens to solve the problem. It doesn't require a roll to say something that hits the nail on the head. Let's say they're walking through snow and they're asked the riddle "The more you take, the more you leave behind. What am I?" the low intelligence barbarian doesn't have to be completely out of it, they can still listen to the party discussing it and think about it. If they get the answer before the rest do ("footsteps") they could pipe up with "Bjorn has been pacing around for some time and kneels down to take a breather. I've been walkin' for ages while you lot gabber but we ain't got anywhere, Look 'ow many footsteps I've left be'ind me! Can we get a bloomin' move on?" The player has got a character that's not bright, it doesn't mean they have to be intelligence 5 IRL. Part of the fun of D&D is playing around bad luck whether that's at rolling the character or that key roll and seeing how you handle those. By no means should the DM feel they can't include riddles because of a low intelligence character and by no means should the low intelligence character be completely out of them. If they feel they are not taking a part sometimes that's just because the ideas haven't occurred to the player. A couple of examples and ways they can work around it and hopefully it'll bring their gameplay and the enjoyment back to the table.
Ability scores are a very linear one dimensional view of the characteristics they represent, but they don’t have to be treated that way. Intelligence spans memory, reasoning and analytics, executive functioning (sequencing/cause and effect), creativity, intuition, and more.
A low intelligence doesn’t have to mean all of these are deficient.
Perhaps the character has almost no executive functioning. He’d be an impulsive, reactionary, unfiltered daydreamer who has trouble following multi step instructions, but is otherwise neurotypical.
He could be pathologically literal, like Drax.
He could be unable to imprint long term memories.
These would all be reasonable interpretations of low intelligence in D&D that accomodate role play without the player having to pretend to be ‘dumb.’
I created a uber strong and charismatic, but "thick as pig ..." tortle, due to some really good and some really bad rolls when generating his stats.
how i have played him, is not stupid, but oblivious (hense my name) and just does things without thinking, like picking up a halfling player and putting him on the counter in a shop. i RP that he is kinda oblivious of his surroundings, following other party members instead of going off on his own. when he does have to speak to people, i make it that he trys but gets a head ache and a nose bleed if he starts to use big words. eg when asking about some cultist he asked "do you know of any one who is simp.. sympath... friendly to them" then wiped his nose.
in my most recent session, instead of listening at the door to a room to check for enemy's, he just walked in, when all the goblins turned around he just said he had brought the supplies (other party members had killed a hunting party the night before) handed the supplies over then sat down at the table and started eating with the goblins. this then kinda caused a problem as the rest of the party was in the hallway and couldn't really use AOE spells due to me chowing down in the middle of the hall.
As many other people mention, it's a little hard to figure out what really needs to change. Playing a low intelligence character can be a lot of fun, but for your player, there's something about the experience that they aren't enjoying. I'd talk to him and ask about the things he enjoys about his character and what he'd like to do with him; then ask him if he gets to do more of what he enjoys, will he want to stay with his character.
Sometimes a player's interests change and they decide they want to try a new PC. I would never force a player to continue playing a character they don't enjoy any longer. If that's what he wants to do, talk to him about how he'd like his character to exit the party. You can then take that character and turn him into an NPC which shows up every now and then, or that the PCs hear about his continuing exploits. Or you can turn him into a villain they come into conflict with later in the game.
As for not having a tank, I'd say that's up to you to adjust encounters a bit until they get used to how to win encounters without melee characters - they will need to be much more cautious. They can always hire some muscle as well.
I also never force players to be dumb just because their PC has low intelligence. Maybe the barbarian just has a knack with puzzles without quite knowing why. As long as you or they narrate it appropriately for low intelligence, I'd still let them contribute solutions.
I suspect the problem is less low Intelligence per se than having all mental stats be low. A general issue with Barbarians and Fighters is that there simply aren't that many out of combat problems that can be usefully solved by Strength or Constitution.
How does the rest of the party have 10 hp? Or do you mean less than 10 hp each. In any case, a 'tank' is not absolutely required, though in terms of having a well rounded party a cleric would likely be better than a wizard, and still has the ability to usefully contribute to non-combat situations.
I think you should look at some Conan the Barbarian resources. I recently started re-reading Howard and I fondly remember the Arnold movies when I was a kid. Conan overcomes the obstacles with help. You could design the the puzzles to be (partially) physical in nature. While the character might not understand them he can participate by lifting, smashing, jumping or twitching a pec at the right moment. You could also have the party fail the puzzle and then have to fight - to which the Barbarian has the advantage.