Playing to your stats
Being intentionally incompetent

My question essentially is, at what level of skill do you consider it appropriate to allow yourself to not suck at something?

Is it when you hit the curve? A bit before? A bit after?

I ask because it is important to me as a player to create "realistic" characters. Not just a set of optimized stats and skills.

This is especially relevant in the context of soft skills. Intelligence and Charisma mainly.

Sindome and most games do a good job of putting guardrails in place around hard physical skills. While a player can present their character as being the pinnacle of physical fitness, the coded systems around Endurance, Strength, etc. will quickly sus out the truth of the matter.

Consider Charisma. That's really something that the player either has, or doesn't have. If you're a charismatic people person IRL, at what point do you intentionally go against your natural instinct because your character has a low charisma? When do you mock and get annoyed with someone that you, as a person, otherwise would naturally befriend? When do you say intentionally cringe and unacceptable things because your character, based on their stats, doesn't know any better?

Same with Intelligence. If you're naturally 120+ IQ and because of that are able to scheme and plot and strategize, what do you do when you're playing a combat character with a low Intelligence skill? Do you keep asking "Why?" when the why is evident to every other character in the room? Do you tell the smart people that they're stupid because you ICly don't understand anything beyond... smash face, steal loot?

The questions I asked are to provide context and examples of going against your character's best interests.

At what point is it "okay" to decide, I've put enough UE into this stat so that it's not a hinderance to my character's ability to function "normally"?

Check out 'help stats', specifically the 'STAT ROUGH SIZING' section. It provides ballparks of average, above average, good, etc. The skills file also has a similar section, I believe.

Sorry was just sharing personal experience and accidentally used pronouns for my character, if staff wants to edit that to 'they', feel free.

When playing to INT I find it more important to play to the character's history and skills rather than their overall knowledge. Like to me it's wholly conceivable that, for the sake of argument, someone who focuses on long blades may have a level of knowledge above what their general INT might dictate, but because they have skills or experience which relates to this, they can go deeper.

When playing to CHA, when I've been 'aspiring' to high CHA but still below the curve, it doesn't mean I can't say charming things to me--but what it does mean, is that I may slip in an intentional fuck-up, create a faux pas when I try to get out of my depth, or otherwise insert a mistake where I might not intentionally.

I don't think high INT should necessarily be required at all to scheme, as long as the elements of the character's skills and history support how the scheme goes down. I also don't think that low INT characters necessarily need to present like blithering idiots externally, or that high INT characters need to speak all erudite. Really I consider INT to relate more to technical and scientific skills rather than if a person is dumb or not. I think of that as an intangible 'Wisdom' stat that is really decided by the player more than anything.

Agreed Veleth, smart people can be idiots IRL, stunning people can be air heads, disgusting or vile. You create the story!

I find it difficult to stunt intelligence or charisma in rp too. Perception, agility and the other more physical skills seem much more straightforward. I build in physical obstacles to help myself. Deformaties, trauma or scars, etc can help you act according to your charisma level and Withmore is full of ways to remove these obstacles (even very quickly). Intelligence I interpret in a sort of street smarts way usually, or dumb to "the ways of the city". As the previous poster mentioned, rping below average to above in weeks just needs a different take take than someone going from drooling and talking like an idiot to some kind of genius. I think it takes a REALLY smart player to thoughtfully rp low int longterm that is still intelligently communicated. I'm always impressed when I see it.

I like to build perception problems into my characters too to make it more interesting, so playing to high perception is hard. But I figure even the sharpest people are delusional somehow :P

I do consult the stat rough sizing guide A LOT. Definitely a good resource. If its not in the tipline maybe it should be!

Personally, I feel like people are a bit overplaying their Charisma. Just because you have zero self-presentation skills and has the social grace of a Vogon poet doesn't mean that the staff will descend upon you and @void you if you stop being an abrasive fuckwad for a moment.

I do think, though, that if your charisma is low, when you're being polite or following protocol, you should make an effort to sell that it comes across as pretentious, or as something you're not used to, or something that's causing your character distress to keep up. Think of a street samurai who spends most of his days cutting people apart and has zero friends having to put on a suit and go talk with some ViriiSoma exec while being hyperware at all times how easy it would be to vat the client, and so on. That person would obviously have the basic self-control to not threaten the client, no matter how low their Charisma might be, but they might not be able to hide their disdain.

I agree that finding the balance between coded stats and authentic roleplay can be tricky, especially with softskills like Intelligence and Charisma.

What stands out to me:

Roleplaying Effort: Playing to low CHA or INT doesn’t mean your character can’t try to improve. They may stumble with faux pas, misunderstand social cues, or struggle with plans, but effort can show growth, whether or not you're actively spending UE.

Stats as Guidelines: The stat rough sizing guide is a great resource. It helps tether expectations to what your character reasonably can or can’t do based on current skill levels.

Creative Obstacles: I love the idea of incorporating hygiene, deformities, or lack of social grace to reflect low CHA, and overcoming these can show progression.

INT Isn’t Just “Smarts”: Intelligence can lean on practical knowledge, street smarts, or expertise in specific fields, while still portraying gaps outside those areas. A combat-focused brute can strategize for a fight but be utterly clueless in a boardroom.

Characters Aren’t Stats Alone: A low-INT or CHA character doesn’t need to be a caricature. You can be polite but awkward, smart in niche areas but oblivious elsewhere, or charmingly off-putting without breaking immersion.

Overall, it’s about creating a personality that evolves with your character’s growth. You can reflect weaknesses realistically without leaning into extremes, while coded systems handle the rest.