Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mean DM" data-source="post: 611832" data-attributes="member: 700">Having just finished administering an IQ test, I thought that I'd jump in....<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Actually, the “Average” range of the most common IQ test (WISC-III/WAIS-III) falls from 90-109.&nbsp; “Average” in these tests are defined as 50% of the normative sample. There are other tests (SB-IV, DAS, CAS, TONI, CTONI, UNIT, MAT, etc), but they are all more the less the same in terms of what &quot;Average&quot; is.Small nit pick.....&quot;Offically&quot; by who's standard?.&nbsp; The standard that is most commonly used in the US is from the AAMR.&nbsp; And I believe most other countries share the same model.&nbsp; They define Mental Retardation&nbsp; having an IQ below 70.&nbsp; There are other conditions for this, but they are not pertinent here.&nbsp; IMO, IQ and D&amp;D are disassociable measures for two reasons. Firstly, traditional IQs are a very limited measure despite the importance society puts in them.&nbsp; They *do* predict academic success fairly well through about 12th grade, after that, they are not much use IMO.&nbsp; I know several people with high IQs that are not very functional.&nbsp; On the other hand, I know several more individuals with IQs in the Low Average range (about 85) that are making 3x the money that I am.&nbsp; IQ does not account for social skills in any meaningful way, and because of this, it is a very limited measure of a person.&nbsp; Secondly, IQ and D&amp;D Int are two different distributions statistically.&nbsp; Because of this, the extremes of the range (2-6/14-18) are not comparable.&nbsp; For example, an Int 2 animal is a fully functional creature and can learn and adapt.&nbsp; A 40 IQ (generally the lower limit of IQs) individual is not functional by any means and cannot adapt in any meaningful way.&nbsp; For these reasons, I encourage my player to think of IQ and Int as two very different measures.&nbsp; I feel that Int is best conceptualized as a simple indication of a character's memory and reasoning skills.&nbsp; Weaknesses in these areas are easy to roleplay.&nbsp; But it is much harder to play a character well that has an Int higher than your own IMO<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp; An Int 7 character, IMO, would either not remember facts, names, etc. or would recall them inaccurately.&nbsp; He/she would not see obvious connections and would not be able to inference/deduce well (e.g., &quot;Wooosh&quot; [over the head] types).Just my 2p.Regards,Mean DM[edited for poor spelling, clarity, and errors]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mean DM, post: 611832, member: 700"] Having just finished administering an IQ test, I thought that I'd jump in....:) Actually, the “Average” range of the most common IQ test (WISC-III/WAIS-III) falls from 90-109. “Average” in these tests are defined as 50% of the normative sample. There are other tests (SB-IV, DAS, CAS, TONI, CTONI, UNIT, MAT, etc), but they are all more the less the same in terms of what "Average" is. Small nit pick....."Offically" by who's standard?. The standard that is most commonly used in the US is from the AAMR. And I believe most other countries share the same model. They define Mental Retardation having an IQ below 70. There are other conditions for this, but they are not pertinent here. IMO, IQ and D&D are disassociable measures for two reasons. Firstly, traditional IQs are a very limited measure despite the importance society puts in them. They *do* predict academic success fairly well through about 12th grade, after that, they are not much use IMO. I know several people with high IQs that are not very functional. On the other hand, I know several more individuals with IQs in the Low Average range (about 85) that are making 3x the money that I am. IQ does not account for social skills in any meaningful way, and because of this, it is a very limited measure of a person. Secondly, IQ and D&D Int are two different distributions statistically. Because of this, the extremes of the range (2-6/14-18) are not comparable. For example, an Int 2 animal is a fully functional creature and can learn and adapt. A 40 IQ (generally the lower limit of IQs) individual is not functional by any means and cannot adapt in any meaningful way. For these reasons, I encourage my player to think of IQ and Int as two very different measures. I feel that Int is best conceptualized as a simple indication of a character's memory and reasoning skills. Weaknesses in these areas are easy to roleplay. But it is much harder to play a character well that has an Int higher than your own IMO:) An Int 7 character, IMO, would either not remember facts, names, etc. or would recall them inaccurately. He/she would not see obvious connections and would not be able to inference/deduce well (e.g., "Wooosh" [over the head] types). Just my 2p. Regards, Mean DM [edited for poor spelling, clarity, and errors] [/QUOTE]

Verification