Rotten pregenerated PC's at WotC

[Rystil Arden]

I've heard of the IQ "Rule of Thumb" before, but all of the other people who brought it up admitted readily that it broke down beyond the 8 to 12 range (and it does). You are correct that IQs above 140 are highly unusual, but in D&D, even using 3d6 stat rolls where you don't get to pick stats, almost 1 in 25 characters will have 15 Int or higher. Using 4d6 drop, this increases to almost 1 in 6. Neither of these is even remotely reasonable for a distribution of 140+ IQs, and so we are left realising that IQ is not and never was meant to be used as a x10 equivalent for D&D Intelligence scores.

 

[Amal Shukup]

I've heard of the IQ "Rule of Thumb" before, but all of the other people who brought it up admitted readily that it broke down beyond the 8 to 12 range (and it does). You are correct that IQs above 140 are highly unusual, but in D&D, even using 3d6 stat rolls where you don't get to pick stats, almost 1 in 25 characters will have 15 Int or higher. Using 4d6 drop, this increases to almost 1 in 6. Neither of these is even remotely reasonable for a distribution of 140+ IQs, and so we are left realising that IQ is not and never was meant to be used as a x10 equivalent for D&D Intelligence scores.

Or, optionally, that D&D Player Character Generation methods don't result in a set of characters that realistically model the abilities found in a normal human population?

Mechanically, this is a function of using too few die .

Actually, human populations often show empirical distributions that don't closely match the curves predicted by the standard deviation model either... Like I said, they're ALL blunt tools.

ANYWAY, while the systems obviously don't match well statistically, particularly at the extremes (again, too few die), I'd argue that from a functional perspective (what a person of a given INT ought to be able to DO/be like), it's a reasonably useful comparison.

At any rate, I think a 6 INT character is still a very playable character. In many ways, I'd argue that a 6 (or 14) INT character is much closer to most players' experience than the Newton/Hawking-like 18's...

I've never figured out how people were supposed to 'realistically' roleplay characters with a 26 INT (buffed, Itemed et al). It gets silly...

A'Mal

 

[Tarril Wolfeye]

I've heard of the IQ "Rule of Thumb" before, but all of the other people who brought it up admitted readily that it broke down beyond the 8 to 12 range (and it does). You are correct that IQs above 140 are highly unusual, but in D&D, even using 3d6 stat rolls where you don't get to pick stats, almost 1 in 25 characters will have 15 Int or higher. Using 4d6 drop, this increases to almost 1 in 6. Neither of these is even remotely reasonable for a distribution of 140+ IQs, and so we are left realising that IQ is not and never was meant to be used as a x10 equivalent for D&D Intelligence scores.

There exists another rule of thumb for Int to IQ:
IQ = Int Score x 5 + 50
Using this you get IQ 140 for Int 18, which would occur in 0.5% of the people.
This sounds about right.
Oh, btw Int 26 equals IQ 180 in this system, which is still below Einstein.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I like the second rule of thumb for upper-end, but a mildly retarded friend of mine might be insulted to discover that thsi system places the IQ of the common garden snail above his (garden snail gets 55 IQ). Any IQ-mapping needs to take into account the fact that IQ tends to range farther below 100 more usually than it does above 100.

 

[Staffan]

Feats: Deflect Arrows (b), Dodge, Improved Grapple (b), Improved Unarmed Strike (b), Weapon Focus (longsword), Combat Reflexes, Improved Initiative.

Since these are supposed to be Eberron characters, I'd swap out one of the feats for Whirling Steel Strike, a feat from the Eberron campaign setting that lets a monk use a longsword as a double weapon (there are also equivalent feats for the longspear and double-bladed sword).

 

[Rystil Arden]

Since these are supposed to be Eberron characters, I'd swap out one of the feats for Whirling Steel Strike, a feat from the Eberron campaign setting that lets a monk use a longsword as a double weapon (there are also equivalent feats for the longspear and double-bladed sword).

That's fine. Perhaps Dodge would be best, since we didn't actually use it to get Mobility. If these are Eberron characters, then I also need to change the Paladin's patron to something Eberronish...hmm, I seem to recall there's a Silver Flame in Eberron that has Paladins. I'll pick that.

 

[WizO_Dabus]

I'm not sure what Action Boost is, but I'll assume that it is important for the playtest, so it stays.

Action Boost allows you to roll d8s instead of d6s when using an action point.

I'd like to stress that VDD is not playtesting, it's just an opportunity for people to get a taste of online gaming. When Eberron debuted, I thought it would be nice to showcase some of the new rules, so I converted the existing event over to the setting.

Oh, and you may want to switch out Improved Initiative for either Lightning Reflexes or Iron Will (the loss of Wisdom hurt the Will saves.)

We only roll for initiative once at the beginning of VDD to save time, so Improved Initiative helps out. I'll keep it.

Sareth, Paladin of the Silver Flame Human Fighter 1/ Paladin 2: CR 3; Medium Humanoid (human); HD 3d10+6; hp 27; Init +4; Spd 20 ft.; AC 20 (+0 Dex, +8 masterwork full plate, +2 masterwork heavy steel shield), touch 10, flat-footed 20; Base Atk +3; Grp +5; Atk/Full Atk +7 melee (masterwork longsword 1d8+2, 19-20/x2); SA smite evil 1/day; SQ aura of good, detect evil, divine grace, lay on hands; AP 2; AL LG; SV Fort +10, Ref +3, Will +3; Str 14, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 6, Wis 11, Cha 16.
Languages: Common.
Skills: Climb +2 (-6 armor), Concentration +4, Hide +0 (-7 armor), Knowledge (nobility and royalty) +3, Listen +0, Move Silently +0 (-7 armor), Search -2, Sense Motive +6, Spot +0.
Feats: Action Boost, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (longsword), Improved Initiative.

Looks good...I'll switch it out when I have a chance. Thanks, Rystil Arden!

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Man, I dont see any problem with the character, some people I think are to used to power gaming or stacking. If it was rolled thats what you make of it, a good player can take what hes given and turn it around, like the armor can come off, things can be found etc..

I think there is a big difference between playing what you rolled and playing a hamstrung character. This guys stats are actually pretty good (a 14, 15 and 16) but not for a paladin (at least not they way they are laid out here). A Cleric or even Druid would be better. Heck I could probably make a Bard out of him (albiet a clumsy one). The paladin would be expected to be int he frontlien fighting and this guy would have a hard time taking down an Orc (and he's third level no less!). In a non-comabt setting he would be fine however as his lack of combat ability wouldn't hamstring him and he could rely on a good Wisdom for 'divine' inspiration.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

As the WizO who created the characters and is in charge of VDD, I will shed some light on the mystery...I created them all with Jamis Buck's NPC Generator and the NPC Equipment Generator v2.0, available on this site.

In my memory, no one has chosen to play the paladin, so it may very well be an unappealing character compared to the others.

Well that does explain it - I can't imagine anyone deliberately making a paladin like that.

 

[diaglo]

Apparently I don't have the eye that you do ... what is the problem with this character again?

(And on an unrelated note -- the WizOs are basically all volunteers, still, right? Thus the Geocities address?)

iirc, the wizos get paid now. they are semi-employed at wotc.

i agree with EN about the PCs.