How would you characterize and play a female character with very low INT (5 or below in D&D terms) without being a...

How would you characterize and play a female character with very low INT (5 or below in D&D terms) without being a millstone around the neck of the party?
Pic related is by far the most useful and competent member of the party.

Looks like a dumb fetish character. I kick the player who submitted them and the rest of the question is moot after that.

Just like you'd characterize a dude with 5 int

>female character
>without being a millstone around
>most useful and competent

I absolutly love humor of Veeky Forums

You see, there's this thing called "roleplaying", where even if you personally hold bitter little beliefs like that, you can play in a fantasy world that's different.

High CHA females just make checks to INT with like, a percentage of CHA.

Isn't 5 INT basically retarded? Not in the meme way, but literally incapable of higher cognitive function.

That's INT 1 or 2, and even then it depends on the definition.
The INT scale has been warped by ego fencing over the years. Remember, the original chargen had 3d6 across the board, with a real chance to get a 3 in a stat. Half-orcs could end up with 1.
Characters with an INT of 3 can speak, understand language and learn to read and write.
Animals have an INT of 0 or 1, with 1 reserved for particularly smart or magical ones. 2 is usually found in magical beasts that can plan and scheme, but not communicate in abstracts.
If a spell or curse makes you incapable of doing something (the original Feeblemind, for example), it drops you to 0 or 1.
3 to 18 encapsulates the "functional spread" of attributes. Someone with STR, DEX and CON all at 3 would be a mess, sure, but he can stand, walk and even try to run.
When you cross below 3, it means you're crippled or otherwise below the natural spread for humans.

Women aren't anything to be scared of, bro. Most of them want to get laid just like you.

And just like me, they only want to get laid by hot women. Except, you know, they have the advantage of being that.

Then rape them, as God intended

INT alone is not enough. What are her planned WIS and CHA?

You can choose.
There are only the criteria in the OP.
If you're one of those types who gets creative paralysis fast, assume they're 10 and 12.
Hell, or 6 and 16.
Or 15 and 9.
There are as many concepts to extrapolate from stats as there are stat lineups, which is one of the reasons I suspect that the people digging their heels in just don't want to think about characters who remind them of people they hate.

Just play it in the same scheme of a construction site crew.
Out of 5 people 1 has an actual brain, the other 3 have average to just below average intellect but their education could be lack luster, and then there's you, the Steve.
As a Steve you're the idiot of the group and you more than likely realize this. You know you don't always see or comprehend what others do so if they tell you to do or don't do something you know you should listen to them even if you more than likely don't understand why just like the Stooges do when Brainiac tells them what to do.
This isn't a bad thing and it doesn't make you a bad person it just shapes the group dynamics and there's plenty of Steve's who make up for this one weak point with general common sense, ethic, attitude, skill set, etc. That makes up for their lack.

Tl;dr just be a person that doesn't quite get what's happening around them always but ask more questions and tries to make up for this. Now make them a female.

Four hours until a proper reply.
Thank God.

int 5
str 18
dex 10
wis 18
con 14
cha 10
This is objectively the ideal female

INT 1 or 2 is animals. 0 is plants. A 0 in a stat is reserved for dead or might as well be dead. Even a person in a coma has an INT score if they are still capable of thinking at all. 0 is "all brain activity ceases. " Whereas 1 is purely instinctual, 2 is instincts with some low animal cunning and 3 has some ability to plan but still largely ruled by animal urges.

For OP I wouldn't go lower than a 5, and have the PC largely follow directions, but have some quirks about it

In my games, INT represents knowledge about the world, and the requisite skills for learning new things (knowing effective ways to study, for example) rather than "how smart you are" in some very broad sense.

Thus, this person may be as clever as anybody else, but will have trouble learning new languages and not have a very good background in various useful bodies of knowledge.

It doesn't change the fact that verbal communication is possible from 3 and up, and even some magical beasts with INT 2 can outsmart humans on their home ground.
Again, a PC made with 3d6 across the board has a relatively high chance of ending with a 3 in a stat, and I think that's why languages require 3 INT.
Even a half-orc can end up with 1, and the chances are large enough that I wouldn't really say it means animalistic intelligence.
Isn't it reasonable to assume that actual impairment or abnormality is the 0-2 bracket? That's the way that at least AD&D was written.

I just thought of this.
It isn't that common, but you do regularly see characters (the comical retard, the gentle giant, the failed experiment) who are either non-verbal or speak like the Hulk.
However, you don't see female characters like that, despite the commonality of Amazon characters and people with less flattering opinions about women.
I can assume there's some sort of socially conditioned reason for it, since you barely see it at all.
I was about to write that it might be because it was someone's fetish, but in that case you should see it pop up at least a bit.

>However, you don't see female characters like that, despite the commonality of Amazon characters and people with less flattering opinions about women.

Why are you posting on Veeky Forums without having seen Amazon Women In the Mood