Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8742853" data-attributes="member: 6790260">They aren't, no. But we can use the population dynamics of actual humans to consider what the population dynamics of non-human species would be.And the fact of the matter is, actual humans are much, MUCH too variable to put into boxes like this. We cover vast swathes. We contain multitudes. We cannot be put into boxes unless we are dead and buried. That is my point: the real, existing, measurable variability within humans is already VASTLY more than +2 to one stat or -1 to one stat or whatever else. ENORMOUSLY more. If natural human variability is already so high, and all mortal races are confined to the finite span of 3-to-20 stats, then whatever central tendency there might be, it will not be strong enough to prevent weird outliers.When you couple this fact with the necessary truth that adventurers are necessarily weird outliers, you get the unavoidable conclusion that, whatever their species' central tendency and standard deviation might be, adventurers are (almost literally) cut from a different cloth. Whatever the statistics which represent their species as a whole will fail to accurately describe the sub-population of "adventurers," because "adventurers" are by definition meaningfully different from the overall population of their species.</blockquote>