Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9823913" data-attributes="member: 7035894">Okay.[USER=6906980]@AlViking[/USER],  I had to calm myself before responding because you wrote something profoundly upsetting and derogatory about my child, but I know that you did not mean to do so and so I am extending you grace.What I wrote about intepretations of the arbitrary attribute scores used by games like D&D being totally subjective? Your post could not be a more perfect illustration of what I mean.Because human intelligence is not remotely  like the intelligence of a mastiff or cat, nor are they much similar to each other, for that matter. Their brains are all very different in size relative to mass, structure, and evolutionary function. This comparison is so nonsensical that it is not even wrong.They do mean something, and I explained exactly what they mean: the characters competance at narrowly prescribed tasks described in the rules of D&D. Many of which are only tangentially related to the attached attribute and some of which, e.g. spellcasting, are imaginary and attached to different atributes for different reasons. These were arbitrary decisions originally made by game designers in the early 70s who had absolutely no idea of any science behind intelligence, or anything else, for that matter.Look at how many people who have used a bow have argued, on this forum, that strength should be the most relevant attribute and not dexterity.My son has autism and you don't know what you are talking about. It is classified under neurodivergence for a reason. Please do not play low wisdom characters as if they are on the autism spectrum. I'll leave it at that.No, they represent your character's competance at narrowly defined game mechanics. We do have extremes in human aptitudes, both physical and mental, and they are so much more vastly complex that they cannot remotely be represented by silly D&D numbers, so any interpretation of them derived from those numbers is necessarily vastly subjective and interpretative.YES! THAT IS MY EXACT POINT.  That is why we should not use D&D ability scores to police each other's roleplay choices.But also, according to the rules, stronger than another species of great ape, such as a chimpanzee or gorilla. I refer you to the recent glut of YouTube videos examining what would happen if a "top tier athlete" human tried to fight an adult male silverback.But that aside...strong at what? As it turns out, humans are much stronger than other apes, at certain tasks. Walking, for example. We're faster than horses...over a long enough distance. And so on.All D&D atributes are woeful simplifications of ill-defined concepts.In your intepretation.In your interpretation. And, again, at what tasks?I have a very high tested IQ. I am dumb as a stump at all kinds of things. I am very good at the kinds of thinking that IQ tests measure. That is all.We can assign a number to anything in a game. We can take alll of the zillion variables that go into surviving a battle and call it "hit points." You're making my point for me.That can mean anything. Which, again, is my entire point."And that's just, like, your opinion, man" (The Dude).Which, again, is my point.  But, crucially, unlike adjustments to rolls for skill checks and so on, taking ability scores into account for RP is not in the rules, which was all I originally stated.If they were at the rock bottom for human intellectual capacity they would be incapable of movement and on a ventilator.What you actually mean is"they are at the rock bottom for D&D character capacity for narrowly prescribed game functions while still being fully capable of a thriving career as an adventurer."Which was my entire point, and why we shouldn't force others to RP according to our personal assumptions and reasons.</blockquote>

Verification