Real Life Stats

[Gidien]

So I've been thinking lately about transeferring real life information into game statistics. I'm trying to think of ways to apply the rules to real-life measurements to come up with an accurate way to stat a person in DandD terms.

Some stats are easy:

The Str test- the PHB says the maximum overhead lift weight is equal to the max encumberence for each Str rating. So, your overhead press at the gym should tell you your strenght.

The Con test- the PHB says running with a move of 30 is the equivalent of running 12 mph. So, to find your con by the rules, see how long you can run at 12mph, and then figure you just take a 10 on each save until you fail. So, 14 rounds of running (1 min, 24 sec) gives a con of 12... 12 rounds without a save, round 13 succeed DC 10, round 14 succeed DC 11, fail round 15. The holding the breath test might also work, but I don't know if a lot of non-swimmers who can even hold their breath a full minute.

The rest are of course, much harder. I figure the best method is to have a more math oriented member shell out one of those tables that tells the percentage chance for getting each stat on a 3d6, and then try to rate yourself agains the general population. For instance, there is a 1/216 chance to roll and 18, so if you want to say you have an Int of 18, you should be definately the most intelligent person in a random smaple of 216 people.

What other methods could be used? Of course, the system has it's failings. It breaks down pretty fast for me... I have a max bench press of 125lbs, so I'm betting my max overhead is no more than 100lbs. So, my str is 10. But I can easily jump 2' from a standing start, DC 16, and I have had little formal training in jumping (does a year of ballet once a week count?) so I could have a str between 14 and 18.

Eventually, I think it would be fun to have clear guidelines to tell your class, level, skills and feats. So lets all play and figure out the EN World System for Self-Statting

 

[Rel]

Well I think that most people here would agree that I've got an 18 Charisma.

Let's not talk about my Wis though.

 

[Shining Dragon]

Likewise my Intelligence is off the scale. Most people here will also have high intelligence (but not as high as mine).

 

[genshou]

Yep, the system already described with overhead lifting, endurance tests, and basic checks vs. the overall population are how I determined my own ability scores. I determined my Intelligence by comparing standardized test results with the rest of the population and finding that I come out in the top 1% every time, and the fact that I have a quasiphotographic memory (Int 18).

 

[S'mon]

INT is easy, since IQ testing directly measures Intelligence as the concept is commonly understood (brains/smartness/quickwittedness). For a typical American or European population IRL, average IQ is 100 and standard deviation is 15 points, which (going by The Bell Curve) means roughly 1/6 population have IQ 115+, 1/36 have IQ 130+, and 1 in 216 have IQ 145+.
You can translate this to D&D INT, eg if D&D INT averages 10.5 and is generated on a 3d6 bell curve, IQ 100 is INT 10.5 and IQ 145 is INT 18.

 

[S'mon]

I come out in the top 1% every time, and the fact that I have a quasiphotographic memory (Int 18).

Top 1% would be INT 17; top 0.5% would approach INT 18 if we assume 3d6 bell curve. Some people would argue that 3d6 bell curve is not intended to represent the general population, but in 3e that seems to be the case.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Top 1% would be INT 17; top 0.5% would approach INT 18 if we assume 3d6 bell curve. Some people would argue that 3d6 bell curve is not intended to represent the general population, but in 3e that seems to be the case.

Problem is, even non-magically, it's possible for people to be smarter than an 18 Intelligence, and there are people who are measurably more rare than 1-in-216. We need to have some way of measuring >18 Intelligence, especially if we're going to use IQ as the standard.

My last IQ test scored me as at least one standard deviation above 145-- it wasn't designed to measure higher than that. And I'm not particularly convinced that I'm much smarter than a 16 or 17.

At least, with the physical scores, we have some kind of benchmark, some kind of objective measure beyond statisical comparison.

 

[genshou]

Top 1% would be INT 17; top 0.5% would approach INT 18 if we assume 3d6 bell curve. Some people would argue that 3d6 bell curve is not intended to represent the general population, but in 3e that seems to be the case.

The problem here is that there isn't a measurement of the top 0.5% anywhere I've seen. My IQ is above 145, though, so that makes it an 18. Sorry I didn't mention that statistic before

 

[genshou]

I think the overarching problem with assigning ability scores to real-world people is that you are assigning an arbitrary, "game balance/mechanics" scale to real-world complexities. Einstein probably wasn't high enough level to bump his Int from level advancement, but his IQ was way out there nonetheless. I think these kinds of people are rare enough that there doesn't need to be a mechanic for this in PC ability generation unless the GM specifically wants prodigies/savants. When it comes to some of the people on this board, we're more likely to see someone like Korymir who might have an Int higher than 18. In those cases a bit of tinkering is needed to accomodate such a statistic within the rules. I'm stumped on this one, though.

 

[fuindordm]

Wulf Ratbane of Grim Tales fame had this suggestion, if you're thinking about having people run in-game versions of themselves:

Assign them the standard array, and let them arrange their stats as they choose. This way everyone is balanced against each other and you won't hear arguments about what the ability scores really represent.

Ben