Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6860192" data-attributes="member: 16814">Firstly, this argument, while valid by itself, doesn't address my response to your argument about the gradual steps and lack of a line.  That argument is quantitative, this one is qualitative.  My objection still stands.That said, of course you can roleplay a 5 INT as a genius.  I still maintain that it is objectively bad to do so.  This goes right back to my previous arguments about 5 INT being definitionally below human average INT.  And how INT, while not the same as intelligence, is a subset of the things intelligence means.  Observing someone is a genius generally means that you observe that they are well above average in those things that INT measures, in addition to some other thing.  Someone with below average INT abilities would be observed to have a below average performance in general intelligence (while they may still excel at some facets).  The 5 INT Sherlock may excel at investigation, and even prove to be a limited genius at it (despite the trivial ease with which others can be notably better), however he cannot be a genius.  Any INT check that can't be squeezed into a INT(Investigation) check will be very poor, and it is impossible for this character to succeed at hard challenges at all (or whatever 18+ challenges are classified as, I'm away from books).  That's not a genius, that's a savant.  Sherlock wasn't a savant, he was a genius that enjoyed solving cases.</blockquote>

Verification