What is YOUR level?

[Celebrim]

LL42: I've long ago realized that there is no telling who you are going to meet online, so far be it from me to close the option of being 180 IQ or higher to a stranger simply because it is rare. However, experience has shown me that alot of people who think that they are really smart are merely swimming in a small pond. My point was to try to bring some perspective to what the highest end of human intelligence might actually be for those that aren't actually there and possibly haven't even seen it.

One of the problems with assuming that the 3d6 bell curve approximates the range of human achievement is as you pointed out that 19 INT (higher than is possible for a starting character) would equate to roughly only normal genius. As you pointed out, 145 IQ is not _that_ rare (I know literally dozens). There are several standard deviations up above and beyond that (Of which I've known 2 fairly well, and had the fortune to meet several others. Incidently, none of the incidents related to high intelligence is made up in the slightest. The names have just been removed to protect the innocent.)

Therefore I prefer to assume that 1 INT equals roughly 10 IQ, or at least some degree of problem solving ability/memory retention as determined by some standard granting you that no single standard is going to be perfect. If heroes have better than ordinary intelligence more often than would be expected, well then, that is just the nature of being heroes.

Besides, the system is moving towards point buy anyway, which completely undermines the basis of such discussions. How many 12-15 point pb characters have 18 int? What is the standard deviation of point buy?

While I agree that quite abit of what I said is not merely raw intelligence, but education and other factors as well, however I would counter that the average genius having all those skill points to spend would usually stuff quite a few into knowledge skills. That is I think just part of the general restless couriousity of being a genious. I've yet to meet someone intelligent that didn't have a large number of ranks in some form of knowledge, albeit often a rather obscure one.

 

[Nifft]

Exactly! I prove my 18+ Int by avoiding the whole discussion!

Erp, except just now...

-- Nifft, smarter than the average penguin

 

[LGodamus]

I guess I would be a monk3/expert1

str12
dex14
con14
int 16
wis7
cha9

feats:weapon focus unarmed, weapon finesse unarmed,dodge
skills : knowledge(useless trivia), Craft (pencil sketches),Knowledge(d20 rules),tumble,jump,climb,swim

I spend about 25 hours a week studying with my martial arts teacher, and the rest of my time( that I am not with my woman) reading non-fiction and rpg books

 

[Celebrim]

Blackdirge: Actually, I disagree. The two most overestimated stats are WIS and CHR, with CON coming in second.

STR and INT are actually fairly easy to assign to some real world achievement. Most people - and especially us 'geeks' - feel clumsy, so they tend to limit the DEX they assign unless they really can justify it with atheletic ability (although there are always a few who think there skill in video games is proof of 15 DEX, despite being other wise aware of thier clumsiness, slow feet, and inability to dance).

WIS is completely different. There is no standard of what wisdom means. Most importantly, in order to properly assess your own wisdom, you have to have high wisdom in the first place. Incompotent people are actually much more likely to see themselves as compotent than compotent people, and conversely a wise person is more likely to see himself as foolish than a fool is. One litmus test might be, if prior to reading this paragraph you thought your wisdom was above average then your wisdom is probably below average (especially if the line of reasoning had not occurred to you before).

CHR is different for a different reason. Noone really likes to think of himself as an unlikable person. As social animals, CHR is the trait by which we judge our own worth, whether we would or not. It takes a pretty brave and wise person to realize and admit that his charisma is far below that of an average person. No one wants to think of himself as having a 4 or 5 charisma, though personal experience tells me that such people are not that uncommon in the RPG world.

CON is another one of those stats that I think ends up being a ego booster for unatheletic people. If experiences on the playground have led you to the crushing conclusion that you aren't above average DEX and STR, then at the least you can claim above average CON through percieved disease resistance, pain tolerance, or what not.

I note that noone is claiming stats like STR 8, DEX 8, CON 8, INT 14, WIS 8, CHR 8 even though experience has lead me to believe that such stats are not at all unreasonable for average RPer's (geeks). Or maybe the only people brave enough to claim stats are those that are proud of them.

 

[BLACKDIRGE]

Blackdirge: Actually, I disagree. The two most overestimated stats are WIS and CHR, with CON coming in second.

STR and INT are actually fairly easy to assign to some real world achievement. Most people - and especially us 'geeks' - feel clumsy, so they tend to limit the DEX they assign unless they really can justify it with atheletic ability (although there are always a few who think there skill in video games is proof of 15 DEX, despite being other wise aware of thier clumsiness, slow feet, and inability to dance).

WIS is completely different. There is no standard of what wisdom means. Most importantly, in order to properly assess your own wisdom, you have to have high wisdom in the first place. Incompotent people are actually much more likely to see themselves as compotent than compotent people, and conversely a wise person is more likely to see himself as foolish than a fool is. One litmus test might be, if prior to reading this paragraph you thought your wisdom was above average then your wisdom is probably below average (especially if the line of reasoning had not occurred to you before).

CHR is different for a different reason. Noone really likes to think of himself as an unlikable person. As social animals, CHR is the trait by which we judge our own worth, whether we would or not. It takes a pretty brave and wise person to realize and admit that his charisma is far below that of an average person. No one wants to think of himself as having a 4 or 5 charisma, though personal experience tells me that such people are not that uncommon in the RPG world.

CON is another one of those stats that I think ends up being a ego booster for unatheletic people. If experiences on the playground have led you to the crushing conclusion that you aren't above average DEX and STR, then at the least you can claim above average CON through percieved disease resistance, pain tolerance, or what not.

I note that noone is claiming stats like STR 8, DEX 8, CON 8, INT 14, WIS 8, CHR 8 even though experience has lead me to believe that such stats are not at all unreasonable for average RPer's (geeks). Or maybe the only people brave enough to claim stats are those that are proud of them.

Yep, now that I think about it you are probably right. No body likes to think that other people may not find them attractive or likable.

Being a genius, bodybuilder, male model, actor, politician, kung fu master myself I don't have to worry about such things, and would not want to embarass any of you by posting my own stats.

Dirge

 

[JPL]

Smart Hero 1 / Charismatic Hero 1

Saxophonist turned attorney.

My wife is a Strong Hero 1 / Dedicated Hero 1

Personal trainer turned cop.

My wife has more hit points than me...

 

[Orias]

Well, realistically I think I'm something along the lines of:

12th level Wizard/8th level Archmage

Celestial half-tarresque half-illithid

and I'm pretty sure my stats are along the lines of 28 STR 22 DEX 48 CON 312 INT 57 WIS 18 CHR (hey, I had to have a dump stat somewhere)

and my feats would include many things, most notably Weapon Focus (MEGA DEATH RAY) and Skill Focus(Knowledge: Being totally sweet)



.....why are you laughing? I'm serious!



In all reality, if I were put into an RPG the DM would force me to reroll my stats because he doesn't allow a character to play with nothing higher than a 6.

 

[LazarusLong42]

Incidently, none of the incidents related to high intelligence is made up in the slightest. The names have just been removed to protect the innocent.)

You have some cool friends then.

Therefore I prefer to assume that 1 INT equals roughly 10 IQ, or at least some degree of problem solving ability/memory retention as determined by some standard granting you that no single standard is going to be perfect. If heroes have better than ordinary intelligence more often than would be expected, well then, that is just the nature of being heroes.

Besides, the system is moving towards point buy anyway, which completely undermines the basis of such discussions. How many 12-15 point pb characters have 18 int? What is the standard deviation of point buy?

That's an excellent point. Although a 15 point pb sounds very low (the lowest I've ever seen used is 25), it does start to mangle the bell-curve system. Even worse, because the d20 is completely random (rather than a GURPS 3d6 for any given roll) it's rather hard to say that the bell curve is correct.

I'm not sure about the nature of heroes vs. non-heroes--it was always my understanding that 10 in a score was average no matter who you were.

Part of the problem of course is that asking people to tell you which standards they used for determining their scores would make their posts three times as long.

 

[Mercule]

[BTo get a sense of INT distribution, I used a standard bell-curve (normal) distribution based on 3d6 (which gives a number between 3 and 18 on dice, but leaves out those with severe mental handicap and anything above 18). One standard deviation--that is, approximately 15 IQ, depending on who you ask and whose test you're taking--is 3 INT. So, 19 INT is 145 IQ, approximately--not 190. Sorry, Sixchan.
[/B]

Unfortunately, it's not even that easy. There is more than one kind of IQ test. I don't remember which one I took, but it is supposed to be quite accurate at average and low scores, but breaks down at IQs above 130 or so.

Since most of the people here are above average, these discrepancies are important. For example, I scored a 144, but I maxed something like 10 of 14 categories. Where do I go from there? On doing some research, I found that the best _estimate_ of my true IQ is more like 165 or so.

According to the test I took, I'm in the top 0.5% or better. If you look up 144 on another index, I could be only in the top 5%, maybe less. You need to use the right index for the right test.

Anyway, in a nutshell, I'd say the distribution/bell-curve method is probably the best way to relate real-life capabilities to a game stat (if you really want to take it seriously).

As far as Celebrim's qualifiers (the non-skill ones, at least) go, I was a Nat'l Merit Finalist, I explained my IQ+ above, my Iowa Basic Skills tests were always flatlined at the top, I was sick enough to _pass_out_ during my ACTs and still scored a 29 (which was good enough to warrant not taking it over), I was reading 500+ page novels in 1st grade, I didn't graduate early but I went to a hick rural school and they were forced to develop a TAG program around me (they normally advanced kids a grade and they were unwilling to put a 1st grader in with 5th graders). As others have said, I'm really not too arrogant of my intelligence, but I'm willing to "throw down" if called to task. Then again, I was the one who posted "15 or 18 (depending on how you figure it)".

 

[CrazyMage]

I'll keep it short--see title at left.