Your personal stats per standard array?

[The Sigil]

Reminds...

Required reading for anyone who, for some reason, takes these "stat yourself" threads seriously:

Unskilled and Unaware of It

Reminds greatly of the Peter Principle.

I don't take the thread all that seriously... it IS just a game, after all... but I do have a question about the article...

Expert ratings revealed that jokes ranged from the not so funny (e.g., "Question: What is big as a man, but weighs nothing? Answer: His shadow." Mean expert rating = 1.3) to the very funny (e.g., "If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is 'God is crying.' And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is 'probably because of something you did.'" Mean expert rating = 9.6).

My question is, "Why were they asking experts who were mean to rate things that are funny? Isn't that a bad criteria to use? Similarly, why compare a riddle to a Jack Handley Deep Thought? Everyone knows that riddles are much funnier!

The other worry I have is this...

those in the top quartile once again tended to underestimate their ability

Since, on average, those in the bottom quartile estimated that they were in about the 60th-70th percentile and those in the top quartile also estimated that they were in the 60th-70th percentile, if I rate myself in the 60th-70th percentile, how do I know whether I'm really in the top or bottom quartile? I really worry that I'm underestimating my own abilities... perhaps I *DO* have all 18's! Yes!

In sum, we present this article as an exploration into why people tend to hold overly optimistic and miscalibrated views about themselves. We propose that those with limited knowledge in a domain suffer a dual burden: Not only do they reach mistaken conclusions and make regrettable errors, but their incompetence robs them of the ability to realize it.

Of course, that these people felt competent to make the study shows that they were obviously incompetent. Therefore, they have reached an invalid conclusion without realizing it. Thus, we must conclude the opposite of their conclusion... those with limited knowledge in a domain do not reach mistaken conclusions nor make regrettable errors, and furthermore, their incompetence allows them the ability to realize that they are not making errors. :cool

Although we feel we have done a competent job in making a strong case for this analysis, studying it empirically, and drawing out relevant implications, our thesis leaves us with one haunting worry that we cannot vanquish. That worry is that this article may contain faulty logic, methodological errors, or poor communication. Let us assure our readers that to the extent this article is imperfect, it is not a sin we have committed knowingly.

They recognize that error is possible but do not recognize it. Again, this classes them as incompetent.

And if they are incompetent, should the article REALLY be required reading?

--The Sigil

(Trying to add to the general "funniness quotient" of the thread)

 

[Ace]

What's your stats if you have to conform to the standard array (15,14,13,12,10,8)?

Me:

Edit

I just perversely changed my mind about the post. Sorry

 

[hong]

Re: Reminds...

Reminds greatly of the Peter Principle.

I don't take the thread all that seriously...

[ BOZO ]

(Trying to add to the general "funniness quotient" of the thread)

[ MEGABOZO ]

 

[Sabaron]

All numbers aside, isn't this method fundamentally the same as this:

Rate your stats from lowest to highest:

Str: 6
Dex: 4
Con: 3
Int: 1
Wis: 2
Chr: 5

 

[hong]

All numbers aside, isn't this method fundamentally the same as this:

Rate your stats from lowest to highest:

Str: 6
Dex: 4
Con: 3
Int: 1
Wis: 2
Chr: 5

Yes. It's essentially just ranking what you consider your strengths and weaknesses.

Of course, this didn't stop some diehard swellheads from trying to post their "real" stats anyway.

 

[The Sigil]

Re: Re: Reminds...

[ BOZO ]


[ MEGABOZO ]

*sighs, rolls eyes*
"You are raising your voice when you should reinforce your argument."

Hong, often you are funny, but unfortunately, just as often, you border on trolling and being a complete pain in the neck (and several other places). I appreciate your wit, but your two size 8 posts have been anything BUT witty. If you're going to insult me, at least do it with some flair; I know you have better in you than that. In fact, I could quote you on some other threads... "This has been said a million times by people far more eloquent than you." If you're going to try to flame me, I'd appreciate a LITTLE more effort. This latest effort falls well below your high standards.

--The Sigil

 

[The Sigil]

Isn't it also...

Yes. It's essentially just ranking what you consider your strengths and weaknesses.

Of course, this didn't stop some diehard swellheads from trying to post their "real" stats anyway.

Explain to me how this is different than...

Str 13
Dex 15
Con 18
Int 17
Wis 12
Cha 14

I posted my strengths, I didn't post my weaknesses because, frankly, I'm not interested in letting everyone know how imperfect I am. Most people already know they are imperfect and would prefer to dwell on the positive forms of their personality.

I have weaknesses, I admit... reflected in the fact that I ranked Wisdom and Strength and Charisma lower than Dex, Con, and Int. I am NOT, however, going to bore everyone to tears by posting a list of "why I suck at things" either. And you'll note I *Wasn't* the one who started posting her/his "real" stats.

At any rate the whole topic is tired, and so I'm done posting to it. Flame me on another thread, Hong. I note that you yourself have made no effort to stat yourself even in the standard array, so obviously you are not interested in contributing anything save trolls to this thread. At least I *DID* put myself into the standard array.

--The Sigil

 

[burdett]

Facts not in evidence.

Your handling of Hong, a well known troll (I mean that in the nicest way possible!) proves that your Wisdom and Charisma stats should be quite a bit lower.

 

[SableWyvern]

Hong's "Bogus" and other discussions on people giving themselves high stats leads me to post my hypothesis on why it is so easy to do so (and, at the same time, why it is easy to rationalise that your PC should have 18s in everything).

What if you are generally impulsive and often do rash/stupid/annoying things (low Wis and/or Cha), but when the proverbial really hits the fan, you are clear-headed, make smart decisions without pause and your friends defer automatically to your leadership (high Wis and Cha).

One of the guys in my group has his hands shake uncontrollably whenever he needs to do anything requiring fine dexterity (seriously, its like he's coming down hard off something). Wouldn't ever let him near a trap, or try and get him to pick a lock. Must have low Dex (althoug, admitedly, Disable Device is Int, bit anyhoo...). However, he may well be incredibly agile, and able to doge attacks with ease (dunno, never seen him in a serious fight).

Anyway, my point is, it is very easy to require high stats of youself to represent your real strengths - and if those strengths are spread in diverse areas, most stats may need to be high - even if those same stats need to be low to represent weaknesses.

Ability scores in any game system will be able to effectively sum up very, very few real or fantastic characters easily.

Anyway, my stats, sticking as close to standard array as I could justify to myself are:

Str: 10
Dex: 10
Con: 13
Int: 14
Wis: 13
Cha: 14

 

[Nareau]

That article (Unskilled and Unaware of It) has a grammatical error in it. It's even in the section where they're discussing grammar. My head is spinning with the levels of meta-meta-snobbiness. Of course, my head will probably explode when someone points out the errors in this post.

Sigh. If you're going to publish a study about how people are dumb and don't realize it, don't make dumb mistakes.

Oh, and my stats:
S 8
D 13
C 10
I 15
W 14
C 12

And no offense, Sigil, but I'm not sure I can see a 17 Int for anyone who responds to Hong's posts. Although...maybe it's a Will save to resist the temptation...