PDA

View Full Version : What are your stats?



Chess435
2011-01-11, 02:39 PM
Basically, in this thread, instead of posting the basic stats of a character, you put down what you think your stats are. Try to keep it between 3 and 18, barring unusual circumstances.

Str: 10 (Solidly Average here)
Dex: 14 (Guess all those hours of gaming are good for something)
Con: 12 (Not particularly tough, but almost never get sick)
Int: 18 (Asperger's Syndrome has its benefits)
Wis: 6 (But it also turns this into a dump stat)
Cha: 12 (I'm decent with empathizing with people)

Tengu_temp
2011-01-11, 02:54 PM
Strength 18 (I [mis-]calculated it using the carrying capacity tables)
Dexterity 22 (I'm great at reflex-demanding videogames!)
Constitution 20 (haven't been sick once for 2 years)
Intelligence 24 (I aced a high school test once, I'm clearly a genius)
Wisdom 8 (I'm great at reading people but also wacky and crazy)
Charisma 18 (I can talk to a girl without running away, I'm awesomely popular)

OR

Strength 10 (I'm a professional soldier, so average for a combatant of my race)
Dexterity 11 (I can juggle five balls at once, so above average here)
Constitution 8 (I don't exercise much)
Intelligence 12 (PHD in several fields)
Wisdom 8 (I'm great at reading people but also wacky and crazy)
Charisma 6 (I'm not trained in public speaking and look unremarkable)

Choose whichever one you prefer.

Soren Hero
2011-01-11, 02:54 PM
there are a bunch of websites where u can track ur stats...

i think the one most pg'ers use is http://www.angelfire.com/dragon/terragf/

...as for my stats:
STR: 13
DEX: 17
CON: 15
INT(pt1/pt2): 13/17
INT: 15
WIS: 14
CHA: 19

snoopy13a
2011-01-11, 02:55 PM
Let's see:

Strength 16
Dexterity 20
Constitution 18
Intelligence 18
Wisdom 18
Charisma 18

As I am a RL halfling (shaving ones feet is fairly time consuming), I have to adjust for racial modifiers :smalltongue:

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-11, 03:11 PM
Oh, it's this time again?

Strenght: from 8 to 10, based on my last gym visit.
Dexterity: my agility and reflexes are pretty average, so let's say 10. I'm assuming playing Touhou nets no extra points. XP
Constitution: 11 to 12. Going by my latest fitness test, my stamina is "good" or "slightly above average".
Intelligence: assuming standard deviations of IQ and Int correspond to each other, 14 or 15.
Wisdom: going to say 14 here, based on feedback received from others and relative awareness of the world.
Charisma: boy is this a tough one. I do have a tendency to attract attention (mostly unwanted, though), leave a lasting impression and inspire feelings of trust in those who know me. I was picked for squad leader in the army though, and I'd imagine that to be some sort of selective process... let's say somewhere from 10 to 13.

Overall, quite close to "Elite" array, meaning I have potential to become something great. :smalltongue:

Tyndmyr
2011-01-11, 03:12 PM
Strength 18 (I [mis-]calculated it using the carrying capacity tables)
Dexterity 22 (I'm great at reflex-demanding videogames!)
Constitution 20 (haven't been sick once for 2 years)
Intelligence 24 (I aced a high school test once, I'm clearly a genius)
Wisdom 8 (I'm great at reading people but also wacky and crazy)
Charisma 18 (I can talk to a girl without running away, I'm awesomely popular)

OR

Strength 10 (I'm a professional soldier, so average for a combatant of my race)
Dexterity 11 (I can juggle five balls at once, so above average here)
Constitution 8 (I don't exercise much)
Intelligence 12 (PHD in several fields)
Wisdom 8 (I'm great at reading people but also wacky and crazy)
Charisma 6 (I'm not trained in public speaking and look unremarkable)

Choose whichever one you prefer.

Theres the problem. It's pretty hard to find a clear way to measure yourself in D&D stats.

Tenebris
2011-01-11, 03:14 PM
Strength 10 (Pretty normal)
Dexterity 8 (Who needs this one, when you can add Wis to AC?)
Constitution 14 (Just a scratch. Is it all you've got? Sure you can do better than that.)
Intelligence 12 (Good at remembering things I guess)
Wisdom 16 (But inattentive flaw :smallbiggrin:, so usually doesn't matter)
Charisma 14 (That's weird, I'm not a great orator, but can always make people do what I want. Plus imagination counts in.)

Conclusion? Cleric + swordsage 2lvl + intuitive attack feat.

Scarlet-Devil
2011-01-11, 03:17 PM
Strength: 18
Dexterity: 18
Constitution: 18
Intelligence: 18
Wisdom: 18
Charisma: 18
Modesty: 18 :smallwink:

Thorcrest
2011-01-11, 03:20 PM
Oh, it's this time again?

Strenght: from 8 to 10, based on my last gym visit.
Dexterity: my agility and reflexes are pretty average, so let's say 10. I'm assuming playing Touhou nets no extra points. XP
Constitution: 11 to 12. Going by my latest fitness test, my stamina is "good" or "slightly above average".
Intelligence: assuming standard deviations of IQ and Int correspond to each other, 14 or 15.
Wisdom: going to say 14 here, based on feedback received from others and relative awareness of the world.
Charisma: boy is this a tough one. I do have a tendency to attract attention (mostly unwanted, though), leave a lasting impression and inspire feelings of trust in those who know me. I was picked for squad leader in the army though, and I'd imagine that to be some sort of selective process... let's say somewhere from 10 to 13.

Overall, quite close to "Elite" array, meaning I have potential to become something great. :smalltongue:

Hmmm someone that gives a reason for their answers... excellent!

Let's see, if I go by your answers:
STR: 11
DEX: 9
CON: 10
INT: 17-18
WIS: 15
CHA: 12-14

Or, since none of you actually know me I can just lie and say:
STR: 30
DEX: 30
CON: 30
INT: 30
WIS: 30
CHA: 30

It's most certainly true! :smalltongue:

drakir_nosslin
2011-01-11, 03:20 PM
Strength: 11-12. Above average, but nothing special. I'm capable of lifting my own bodyweight several time with my arms only, do handstand pushups, several hundred squats, do the human flag, etc.
Dexterity: 10-11. Decent reflexes, thanks to years of gaming, but I also have good body control and I can easily put my forehead to my knees.
Constitution: 11-12. I can run for at least ten km, though I've never tested where my maximum is. I rarely get sick.
Intelligence: 10. Average. I've never had any trouble with school, and I'm decent when it comes to remembering facts and solving problems.
Wisdom: 8-9. Oh my, I've screwed up so many times just because I didn't understand what was happening. Not my strong point.
Charisma: 9-10. Not much to say. I'm the average uni student.

Ytaker
2011-01-11, 03:28 PM
Strength, 14. I can overpower most individuals, and i do moderate weight training.

Dexterity, 14. I can lock pick, pick pocket, and generally win agility contests.

Constitution, 12. My bones don't break even with immense impacts, and I normally win fortitude check games. I have a strong natural tolerance to alcohol.

Wisdom, 4. I play fortitude check games (how far can you twist my wrists before I ask you to stop?) and I generally do irrational things.

Intelligence, 13. I'm, testwise, in the 5th-1st percentile for abilities relating to intelligence.

Charisma, 7. While I have recently developed my diplomacy and bluff skills, i am a poor public speaker and a very poor leader.

Dreadn4ught
2011-01-11, 03:33 PM
Strengh:10 (Pretty average)
Dexterity:12 (Okay, not great)
Constitution:8 (Fail)
Intelligence: 14 (My best stat, guess that's not saying much)
Wisdom: 8 (Once I spent 5 min searching for a pencil I was holding)
Charisma: 10 (Not bad)

Of course, in comparison to an actual adventurer, these would all probably be about 3 lower.:smallannoyed:

Mastikator
2011-01-11, 03:34 PM
Str: 6 (I am physically weak, even compared to girls)
Dex: 5 (I am clumsy and break things all the time)
Con: 6 (When I drink I get terrible hangovers)
Int: 7 (I read about half as fast as the average person, but solve problems a bit faster)
Wis: 13 (I am self aware of my flaws and can read people, or maybe it's just paranoya, in which case I have 3 or 4)
Cha: 4 (I am anti-social and deliberately unfriendly, despite my better judgement, I usually say nothing and the only reason people ever notice me is because I am attractive)

Tyndmyr
2011-01-11, 03:35 PM
All stats: Aleph Null

The Rose Dragon
2011-01-11, 03:40 PM
Well, this is difficult. Especially since I can't have 1 or 2.

Strength: 3. I'm not really that strong, so I'd probably be 2, but since I'm not allowed that, I go with 3.
Dexterity: 3. Either that or I have high Athletics for balance.
Stamina: 3. Again, it should be 2, but I'm not allowed to have below 3.

Charisma: 3. Again, see Strength.
Manipulation: 3. Again, see Strength.
Composure: 3. Again, see Strength.

Intelligence: 3-4. Definitely not 5, but according to a lot of people, quite above average.
Wits: 3. Again, see Strength.
Resolve: 3. This should definitely be 1, but still, see Strength.

Trekkin
2011-01-11, 03:40 PM
str 7 dex 10 con 7 int 17 wis 15 cha 13 according to the angelfire test. That said, according to people who have more experience in statistics than I ADnD writers, my Int works out to 27 18 according to my last IQ test...and according to my life, I'm neither exceptionally wise nor exceptionally charismatic, so I'll adjust for that.

strength 7
dexterity 10
constitution 7 (With how often I'm ill, this is probably erroneously high)
intelligence 27 18
wisdom 10 (I have terrible spatial awareness, my eyesight is worse than average and my life experience is functionally nil.)
charisma 9

Apparently I'm heavily minmaxed.

Timeless Error
2011-01-11, 03:50 PM
Hm...

Strength: 10-12 (fairly average here, and my upper body strength is clearly better than my lower body strength as evidenced by any given gym weight room).
Dexterity: 12-13 (after a few years of fencing lessons, I would assume this stat has improved enough for me to effectively use the Weapon Finesse feat, but I can still be fairly clumsy at times).
Constitution 8-9 (I can't run for a minute without breathing heavily and possibly having to stop).
Intelligence 14-16 (straight A's last school quarter, all Advanced Academics classes, though I may not be quite as fortunate this time around, and taking Algebra in 7th grade).
Wisdom 6-8 (I would like this stat to be high, but my perception skills are disastrous and I am extremely forgetful and often oblivious to what's going on around me).
Charisma 8-9 (I'm very shy except when around friends and family and I suck at lying).

I think that's about right.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-11, 04:07 PM
Str: 11. (Averaged over carrying capacity, climb, jump)
Dex: 15 (Averaged over Dex skills, trained as a Fencer, can Juggle, etc.)
Con: 16 (Almost immune to illness, have run marathon distances.)
Int: 18 (IQ from a Mensa test says higher, but 18 is according to the description the highest a human can expect to have. I'll assume the rest is made up via skills in logic puzzles and pattern recognition.)
Wis: 9 (Hard to quantify. I don't stand out either way afaik, but if anything it might be lower. I'm not the greatest judge of people, and I make silly mistakes.)
Cha: 15 (Also hard to quantify, I actually went back to the old NPC reaction tables in earlier editions and had a look at where I'd land.)

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-11, 04:18 PM
Theres the problem. It's pretty hard to find a clear way to measure yourself in D&D stats.

Which reminds me, I had this crazy idea of making everyone here do a standardized army fitness test and translate the results to physical ability scores. XP Anyone feel like taking 12 minute running test right now?

Zherog
2011-01-11, 04:20 PM
Which reminds me, I had this crazy idea of making everyone here do a standardized army fitness test and translate the results to physical ability scores. XP Anyone feel like taking 12 minute running test right now?

Only if you know CPR and have an iron lung on hand for when I inevitably collapse...

Vemynal
2011-01-11, 04:21 PM
Str - 12 I'm stronger then average, but not by much
Dex - 8 I have some trouble with nimble and quick footed related activities
Con - 16 I don't get sick. Period. Despite working around children and in a hospital settings. I also have a decent endurance for physical related activities
Int - 13 I'm smart but just shy of a +2 bonus ;)
Wis - 10 I commonly have bad ideas that I usually end up doing simply because I find it funny.
Cha - 14 I'm...well I'm Elan but not quite as good looking or annoying, but I do have his ability to captivate and entertain an entire room of people effortlessly.

heh and for a side bit of fun:

10 DR/ Slashing or Piercing - I have proven myself to have a *huge* pain tolerance and physical immunity to blunt for trauma.
But damn it all if paper cuts don't hurt like hell!

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-11, 04:22 PM
Which reminds me, I had this crazy idea of making everyone here do a standardized army fitness test and translate the results to physical ability scores. XP Anyone feel like taking 12 minute running test right now?

I think I did that....what would the conversion rate be?

TinselCat
2011-01-11, 04:24 PM
I'll play.

Str: 7 (I'm a weakling)
Dex: 13 (I've got decent reflexes)
Con: 15 (pretty tough and not often sick)
Int: 16 (I'm bright, but no genius)
Wis: 11 or 12 (sometimes I notice things others don't, but occasionally I miss the obvious)
Cha: 12 or 13 (I'm personable and a decent negotiator, but no master)

I'd play a character like that. In a few levels I'll probably raise my Con. With Str and Dex like that, the more hit points the better :smalltongue:

Drynwyn
2011-01-11, 04:24 PM
STR 8- Not very strong, but not super weak.
DEX- 15 Pretty good reactions, but terrible handwriting.
CON 10 About average,
WIS 10 A little impulsive... Good hearing though. Must have Listen Ranks.
INT 18 AP student.
CHR 16 Also, a bajillion ranks in bluff.
At Venymal- you probably built up a resistance from your work.

Tyndmyr
2011-01-11, 04:26 PM
Which reminds me, I had this crazy idea of making everyone here do a standardized army fitness test and translate the results to physical ability scores. XP Anyone feel like taking 12 minute running test right now?

No thanks. I've got to do the air force one already every six months, and those are already un-fun enough.

I'm in the freaking air force reserves, and they act like it's the real military. Sheesh!

Kuma Kode
2011-01-11, 04:36 PM
According to Soren Hero's link....

STR: 10
DEX: 6
CON: 11
INT: 9
WIS: 10
CHA: 8

I am not adventurer material.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-11, 04:37 PM
I think I did that....what would the conversion rate be?

For 12 minute running test specifically, average expected minimum of both genders for "good" result would be 2500 metres, which I'd flag as Constitution 10 and 11 (no modifier), with every 200 metres to either direction changing the score by one. (So Con 18 would be 3900+ metres, and Con 3 would be 1100- meters)

For relative muscle strenght tests, I don't remember the ranges. I'd have to fetch my soldier's handbook and check them.

Tvtyrant
2011-01-11, 04:38 PM
It gave me an 8 in strength... I can squat 800 pounds! Stupid broken questions...

Chess435
2011-01-11, 04:39 PM
Int: 18 (IQ from a Mensa test says higher, but 18 is according to the description the highest a human can expect to have. I'll assume the rest is made up via skills in logic puzzles and pattern recognition.)


Yay, Another Mensan! I don't feel so lonely now!

FelixG
2011-01-11, 04:40 PM
I have no stats as I am not a character in a game. Thank you. :smallbiggrin:

DukeofDellot
2011-01-11, 04:43 PM
ST 13 (I can walk around with three hundred pounds on my back no problem.)
DX 10 (While quite coordinated enough to perform in a fight, I can't juggle or dance.)
IQ 11 + Mathematical Ability 4 (IQ tests say I'm one of the smartest people in America, but I have trouble with many things others do not.)
HT 12 (Did I mention that I'm a Mountain man?)

Addi
2011-01-11, 04:46 PM
Str - 12 (>50 push-ups)
Dex - 16 (definitely above average Reflexes; done parkour for a while)
Con - 10 (I rarely get ill and have never been poisoned)
Int - 14 (last intelligence test gave me this amount :smallsmile:)
Wis - 14 (I've got a lot of common sense and most Wis-related skills are above average)
Cha - 06-14 (I'm a terrible liar, average orator and an excellent diplomat)

...uhhh... more than I thought

Siosilvar
2011-01-11, 04:47 PM
Well, if it's that thread of the year again... *assumes D&D3.5 stats, breaks out elite array*
LG Grey Elf Wizard
Str 6
Dex 16
Con 8
Int 17
Wis 12
Cha 13

Or, if you want what the test gave me:
LG Elf Wizard
Str 10
Dex 14
Con 10
Int 19
Wis 15
Cha 13

And if you want a slightly more "realistic" interpretation (for what it's worth):
LG Human Expert 1
Str 6
Dex 14
Con 8
Int 18
Wis 13
Cha 11

Yora
2011-01-11, 04:50 PM
Str 10
Dex 14
Con 9 - (I underperform at stamina.)
Int 11 - (I suck at math and memorizing abstract data)
Wis 15 - (But I'm really good at how things are related and interconnected)
Cha 13

Malfunctioned
2011-01-11, 04:55 PM
Strength: Probably about a 10 with someone to increase carrying capacity without anything else. I'm 5'7" and weighing about 9 1/2 stone. I'm also known to run around with friends weighing around 14 stone on my back.

Dexterity: 16-18 with a flaw to give a penalty for hand-eye coordination. I am incredibly flexible with very fast reactions. Dyspraxia seems to counter that for small scale actions however.

Constitution: 12. I get ill about twice a year. I'm resistant to pain but that's more of a DR thing.

Intelligence: 14, I'm clever and grasp new subjects very easily. Nothing massively special though.

Wisdom: 8. Ditzy, long-sighted and clumsy. Preeeetty much sums me up here.

Charisma: 16, yeah. I'm generally considered quite attractive as well as being very good at public speaking and leading/manipulating others.

Derjuin
2011-01-11, 05:03 PM
I got:

Str: 5
Dex: 13
Con: 10
Int: 13
Wis: 9
Cha: 7

using the one Soren Hero provided. I think it's about right, though my Dex is higher than I thought it might be.

Yora
2011-01-11, 05:07 PM
What does "Sine(PI/2) [Radians]" even mean?
I know Pi/2, but what's Sine and Radians?

That test in the third post isn't any good. Widsom requires knowledge of obscure english phrases and Charisma only asks for politeness.

The Rose Dragon
2011-01-11, 05:16 PM
What does "Sine(PI/2) [Radians]" even mean?
I know Pi/2, but what's Sine and Radians?

Sine is a mathematical function. Radians is the value of an angle in real numbers, rather than degrees and stuff.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-11, 05:24 PM
Test:

STR: 12
DEX: 17
CON: 17
INT(pt1/pt2): 17/17
INT: 17
WIS: 12
CHA: 14

Is it me, or are there two boxes that can fulfil the first pair given?


As for the running thing, I can do 2 miles in 11 minutes (despite every effort, I can't break 10 :smallfurious:)

That would put me at Con 15, I guess.

drakir_nosslin
2011-01-11, 05:32 PM
Which reminds me, I had this crazy idea of making everyone here do a standardized army fitness test and translate the results to physical ability scores. XP Anyone feel like taking 12 minute running test right now?

Hey! I'm interested. Is it possible to find online?

Callista
2011-01-11, 06:01 PM
Expert 5
STR 10/DEX 8/CON 13/INT 19/WIS 16/CHA 6
Expert Class Skills: Diplomacy, Knowledge (Engineering), Knowledge (Mathematics), Knowledge (Science), Heal, Swim, Handle Animal, Survival, Listen, Spot, Profession (Writer).
Cross-Class ranks in Speak Language (English), Perform (Piano).

Feats: Negotiator, Self-Sufficient, Alertness

So yeah, I'm a min-maxed skill monkey, pretty much.

gallagher
2011-01-11, 06:12 PM
STR: 8, i can carry as much as required for a UPS driver assistant this past holiday season

DEX: 13, i am flexible enough, stretch often, get a decent aerobic workout a few times a week

CON: 16, i havent been sick since... the 90s i think. i run well, and i recovered from getting poison in my system incredibly quickly compared to what modern medicine thinks i should

INT: 13, i am a history pre-law student, i need to be able to be smart

WIS: 8, the things i did not learn at first, i learned by doing twice

CHA: 14, i make my money by talking. i have zero fear of public speaking. i dress well and have been told i am rather charming

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-11, 06:13 PM
Hey! I'm interested. Is it possible to find online?

Yes... in Finnish. (http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/7bd1b600411b559e925afbe364705c96/suorituskykytestit.pdf?MOD=AJPERES)

Shortly, there are two tests: 12 minute running test and muscular fitness test. The muscular fitness test consists of crunches, push-ups, back extensions, pull-ups and jumping with your feet together.

In case of crunches, push-ups and back extensions, the goal is to make as many flawless repeats as you can in a minute's time.

In case of pull-ups, the goal is to make as many flawless reps as you can as a continuous performance, no time limit.

Jumping with feet together is just that - seeing how far you can leap without taking any steps. You get two tries, best one counts.

12 minute running test should be pretty self-explanatory. You run, and when time runs out, they see where you keeled over unconscious. :smalltongue:

Jallorn
2011-01-11, 06:28 PM
Obligatory link that should be placed in the first post. (http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html)

For myself, I prefer a range, since it does work that way, one can be better at math than, say, history, simply because they're smarter at it. So I'd go with these ranges:

Str: 8-10, I'm not weak, but I'm certainly not better than average.
Dex: 11-13, I have excellent hand eye coordination and play plenty of video games. Still, I'm nothing overly impressive in this category.
Con: 10-12, I don't get as much exercise as I should, but I eat well, and don't kill germs in my environment before my immune system can get practice, so I feel that I'm at least average here.
Int: 16-18, if 18 is Einstein(see link above), well, I'm loath to compare myself to him, but since he did say that genius is 99% perspiration, it is possible that I'm near to his level. In any case, I am definitely smarter than most people, I test incredibly well, and I slide by in school doing very little work.
Wis: 8-12, used to be lower, but since that was my deficiency, I overcame it eventually, and, for the most part, tend to be more understanding of things than my peers. It's such a wide range because I still have deficiencies that others don't... darn ADHD.
Cha: 10-14, this is a hard stat for me to pin down. I can often be annoying, but that is more due to a deficiency in by ability to read others than because I'm terribly irritating, and I am more conscious of my nature than others. On the other hand, I am fairly diplomatic, and am a good actor. If I had to pick a single stat, I'd go with the lower end, and chalk my capabilities up to skill points instead of stats.

If I have to pick a single stat, I probably end up with the average mostly, something like this:

Str: 9
Dex: 12
Con: 11
Int: 17
Wis: 11
Cha: 10

some guy
2011-01-11, 07:02 PM
That one test gave me:

STR: 8
DEX: 8
CON: 12
INT: 13/14
WIS: 10
CHA: 11

I winged strength, though. Could be higher or lower. Mind you, I can hold out in a wrestling match and armwrestling, so I would give myself an 10 for being avarage. And for wisdom:

Widsom requires knowledge of obscure english phrases and Charisma only asks for politeness.
wich is a problem for non-native English speakers. But 10 sounds alright for my wisdom, though.

As a level 1 expert my skill list would probably be:
My skills would be bluff 4, concentration 2, diplomacy 4, , jump 2, knowledge (biology) 4, knowledge (art) 3, perform (acting) 4, perform (dj) 4, research* 4, speak English
move silently 1 (cross class)
handle animal 1 (cross class)

My feats could be Run and Trustworthy* (+2 on diplomacy and gather information).
Wow, I'm terribly unoptimized.

*A CoC d20 skill/feat.

BenInHB
2011-01-11, 07:02 PM
It's funny seeing all the 18 INT scores people are posting. I think that high INT people are naturally attracted to D&D because of the problem solving and thought experiment aspects the game involves.

Some of the Stats and Skills don't line up for me like i think they should. Your memory is based off of WIS but Knowledge checks are INT based? I think INT is more about processing ability and figuring things out than recalling things from previous experience or a text book, those things should fall under WIS to me. Open Lock and Disable Device do have an aspect of DEX involved but i think INT is far more important to those checks. Swimming to me is way more DEX or CON based than STR.

Con is a grey area to me when it comes to physical stats in RL comparison. I know a lot of highly trained athletes that have great endurance but horrible fortitude when it comes to drinking or getting sick (over training often weakens the immune system). By the same token there are some guys that come into the gym (especially little mexicans) that couldn't run for 5 minutes without stopping but you could put them in the boxing ring and beat them over the head with a two by four and they wouldn't drop. They may not have the gas in the tank to keep fighting back but your not going to get them to quit, they will just stand there and eat punch after punch. So High CON ends up looking two different ways, on one side you get the marathon, iron man, Lance Armstrong looking guys but at the same time if i was stating out The Blob from X-men he would have super high CON as well. Then to throw a monkey wrench in this whole business look at the Sherpa on MT Everest, they don't have either physique but they are pretty super human in what they can endure.

Callista
2011-01-11, 07:20 PM
Here's how I estimate stats when I'm trying to figure out what things might represent in real life:

I start with the assumption that people roll their stats on 3d6. This gives us an average stat of 10.5 and something that's roughly equal to the normal curve. (Elite array gives an average that's too high; standard array gives too little variation to be realistic. So 3d6 it is.)

The probability of having a certain result on 3d6 can be matched with the percent of people who have that stat, with the middle set at 10.5. So the most probable results are a 10 or an 11. Way up at an 18 or a 3, you have only a 1:216 chance of rolling that high or that low, so if you're in the top or bottom half percent of the population, you can say that you have an 18 or a 3 in that stat.

So you can match the probabilities to the percentiles, which are:

3 Below .5%
4 .5%-2%
5 2%-5%
6 5%-9%
7 9%-16%
8 16%-26%
9 26%-38%
10 38%-50%
11 50%-63%
12 63%-74%
13 74%-84%
14 84%-91%
15 91%-95%
16 95%-98%
17 98%-99.5%
18 Above 99.5%

So that means that most people will be somewhere in the middle--you see how the ranges for the 10 and 11 are huge compared to the percentiles for the 3 or the 18? That's because average scores are way more common than extremely high or low ones.

But the system breaks down for very low and very high scores. Yes, it's just the top half percent, a very small fraction. But half a percent is actually huge. 18 DEX includes both the gifted amateur dancer and the Olympic gymnast. It includes the guy who got 2350 on the SAT as well as the guy who got an absolutely perfect score. 18 CON includes both the recreational marathon runner and the guy who survived getting Ebola...

And the +4 or -4 actually doesn't give you that much of a benefit. A +4 gives you a 20% advantage over the norm--you're not leagues ahead; you just have a natural talent and you're more likely to succeed, that's all. It's your experience and your training (i.e., your class levels) that make the real difference.

Is an 18 rare? Comparatively, yes, but being 1:216 isn't the same as being one in a million. And about one in 36 people will have at least one 18.

Hawk7915
2011-01-11, 07:22 PM
According to the link...

STR: 3
CON: 8
DEX: 8
INT: 13
WIS: 12
CHA: 14

So not much of an adventurer. I could swing being a bard or sorcerer with those stats, but honestly I'd be a huge liability to a party :smalltongue:. I actually don't think this is far off reality; I'd be inclined to say...

STR: 4 (I'm disabled. I have average upper body strength but with a busted back and weak legs I don't have a lot of strength in general. I'm weak.)

CON: 10 (I don't get sick often, but when I do I get lethally sick. I'm resistant to pain due to my disability, but I also have crummy endurance and stamina from being in mediocre shape. On balance I'm around average)

DEX: 12 (I'm a decent shot, a decent "pilot" in my chair, and I play a lot of games. My reflexes are slightly better than normal, although nothing to write home about)

INT: 15 (Graduate school, and I have a good head for numbers, although I'm far from the smartest guy I know or even the smartest guy in my program. A 14 might be better; I think a 13 seems too low though.)

WIS: 12 (I'm a decent judge of character and tend to have good intuition and attention to detail, but I'm also a bit of a space cadet so that limits this stat)

CHA: 14 (Complicated. I'm a good public speaker, I'm naturally likable and charming when I make even a little effort, I'm polite and well-mannered, I'm empathetic towards others, and I am stubborn and strong-willed. I'm also painfully shy and a bit of a lurker even in real life. In addition, because I get so caught up in people and helping them I'm not a natural leader. I spend too much time tending for the trees to keep an eye on the forest. A 14 "feels" right to me).

TheWhisper
2011-01-11, 07:33 PM
Snip discussion of bell curve and distributions.

Is an 18 rare? Comparatively, yes, but being 1:200 isn't the same as being one in a million.

Well put.

By this standard, an 18 intelligence, particularly, isn't that special. It corresponds to an IQ score (if we, for the sake of argument, accept that as a good measure) of about 140.

Well, at most good universities, it's hard to heave a rock without hitting at least one person with an IQ over 140.

Emmerask
2011-01-11, 07:37 PM
Uh that thread again.
I predict lots of people with 18 int
Str: 1
Dex: 1
Con: 1
Wis: 1
Int: 1
Cha: 2 <-- Im quite the charmer so I gave me a two there :smallsmile:

Ozymandias
2011-01-11, 07:46 PM
Int: 16-18, if 18 is Einstein(see link above), well, I'm loath to compare myself to him, but since he did say that genius is 99% perspiration, it is possible that I'm near to his level.

That was actually Edison. Einstein was the one who had incredibly insightful intuitions and then worked that through in purely mental exercises, which is kind of the opposite, I guess.

And besides, Tesla (and I think other people) noted that Edison tended to work far too hard on things because he didn't fully understand what he was doing a lot of the time (he was a good inventor and excellent businessman but a relatively poor scientist). And Tesla was easily ten times the genius Edison was, when it comes to that...

yldenfrei
2011-01-11, 08:04 PM
The test gave me this:

STR 7
DEX 16
CON 13
INT 13
WIS 12
CHA 12

Looks just about right. I was a surprised with DEX and CON though, thought they'd be lower than that. (I can't juggle, and I can't run for longer than 5 minutes.)

But rather than just stats, why not include skills? Which do you have ranks in, and which are class skills? That would be much more fun. :smallsmile:

Temet Nosce
2011-01-11, 09:44 PM
From AngelFire first...

LE Elf Wizard

Str: 6
Dex: 14
Con: 7
Int: 17
Wis: 15
Cha: 11

Overall, I found the character test more accurate than the stat one. The physical stats describe me well, the mental ones much less so in my opinion. Regardless, I'll go ahead and give my view of the issue. Along with a brief indication of why.


Str: 6

(I believe this one was done relatively accurately, even lifting that amount of weight is hard for me due to physical disabilities)

Dex: 14

(I regularly perform acts of balance which unnerve people such as jogging along the tips of sharp rocks, I'm a passing shot even with guns I'm unfamiliar with, and I've also played competitively in reflex based video games. However, I have an early case of arthritis and haven't especially developed these abilities)

Con: 6

(I've been sick six times in the last month, I've broken so many bones in my life I've lost count, I suffer from numerous disabilities and several birth defects...)

Int: 18

(I score in the 99.997% percentile on the Cattel B IQ test)

Wis: 8 or 16

(Despite extremely strong willpower and at least a small measure of common sense well... I have extraordinarily bad eyesight, am completely deaf in one ear and partially deaf in the other, and tend to be unaware of things going on around me. Albeit this might be better represented by a high Wis with the flaw that reduces awareness)

Cha: 10

(This is another mixed bag, I avoid groups like the plague which reduces my score substantially, but I'm relatively persuasive one on one, have a strong personality, and am attractive enough that I've never had to worry about it)

Combat Reflexes
2011-01-12, 04:45 PM
Str 9-10
(can't lift very heavy weights but I travel by bicycle a lot. Approx. 15 miles a day)

Dex 11
(average. I can't juggle but I can make coins disappear. Also, good hand-eye coordination because of countless FPS games)

Con 10-12
(I'm NEVER sick, but my pain treshold is not that high)

Int 14
(and rising - going to university next year and beyond)

Wis 10
(I'm very alert, but common sense is not so common for me, so that's average for me)

Cha 11 (I'm quite attractive [and also very modest:smallbiggrin:] but not a great speaker, and a TERRIBLE liar.

Also:
Feats
-Skill Focus (Swim)
-Run!!!

ZeltArruin
2011-01-12, 05:03 PM
These always make me think that people often think far to highly of themselves. Well, in regards to their mental stats and dexterity, strength and constitution are generally pretty close.

I hate subjectively judging myself...
Str 11-12 based off of a few dnd things from adnd and 3.5
Dex 13-14 I am quick and stuff
Con11-13 haven't been sick in a long time and don't get hungover easily
Int 14-15 I'm clever
Wis 12-13 and perceptive
Cha 12-14 and people don't leave me alone

The best way to objectively generate your stats are to ask a friend that thinks you're okay, otherwise they will biased too.

Octopus Jack
2011-01-12, 05:31 PM
Str: 14

Dex: 10

Con: -

Wis: 10

Int: 12

Cha: 16

true_shinken
2011-01-12, 05:56 PM
Well, this is difficult. Especially since I can't have 1 or 2.
OK, everyone knows you don't play D&D already, you don't have to repeat stuff like this on every thread.

some guy
2011-01-12, 06:38 PM
Con: -


Gulp. Should I bring adamantine weapons or holy water?

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-12, 07:27 PM
Wouldn't a scroll of disentigrate or anti-material*) ordance be best?

*) not referring to anti-matter, but type of explosives meants specifically for destroying vehicles and other non-personnel resources. Don't know English military jargon well enough to tell if it's correct term.

Dubious Pie
2011-01-12, 07:35 PM
STR: 6 (By carrying capacity)
DEX: 12 (I'm no gymnast, but I do have fast reflexes)
CON: 8 (I always have a cold. :smallfrown:)
INT: 14 (I am very good at math and Trivial Pursuit.)
WIS: 8 (My friends call me the bad idea machine.)
CHA: 6 (I have had 12 friends in my entire life.)

Temet Nosce
2011-01-12, 08:12 PM
The best way to objectively generate your stats are to ask a friend that thinks you're okay, otherwise they will biased too.

Unfortunately, they still might not be objective, nor would they have a normalized measure to hold you to. If we really cared about objectivity it would be best to have one person who knew none of those being measured to apply a standardized set of tests.

As it is however, we essentially have to attempt to peg stats by comparing them with things in RL that are relatively unimpinged by personal opinion (IQ tests, specific weights, competitive environments - things which provide a meaningful comparison with others capabilities), but even so there is of course a good deal of inaccuracy expected to say the least.

AtlanteanTroll
2011-01-12, 08:51 PM
Strength: 8 (Not strong, nor *very* weak)
Dexterity: 12 (I own at Dodgeball, but trip A LOT)
Constitution: 10 (...)
Intelligence: 14 (ME SPEAKY GOODLY ENGLISH)
Wisdom: 12 (Im smart (I think) but I'm a tad emotional)
Charimsa: 15 (I can sweet talk my way out of places, and have been told I have beautiful hair)

The Rose Dragon
2011-01-13, 01:04 AM
Wouldn't a scroll of disentigrate or anti-material*) ordance be best?

*) not referring to anti-matter, but type of explosives meants specifically for destroying vehicles and other non-personnel resources. Don't know English military jargon well enough to tell if it's correct term.

Anti-materiel, not material.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-13, 04:39 AM
It's funny seeing all the 18 INT scores people are posting. I think that high INT people are naturally attracted to D&D because of the problem solving and thought experiment aspects the game involves.

It is a little-known fact that reading stick figure webcomics increases your Int.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-13, 06:39 AM
Anti-materiel, not material.

. . .

One letter?

Good grief.

Ytaker
2011-01-13, 11:01 AM
Unfortunately, they still might not be objective, nor would they have a normalized measure to hold you to. If we really cared about objectivity it would be best to have one person who knew none of those being measured to apply a standardized set of tests.

I did ask a friend. They said I was being far too modest. I suspect that friends want to think they have higher stats, so they are generally going to rate you highly too.

drakir_nosslin
2011-01-13, 11:28 AM
Yes... in Finnish. (http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/wcm/7bd1b600411b559e925afbe364705c96/suorituskykytestit.pdf?MOD=AJPERES)

Shortly, there are two tests: 12 minute running test and muscular fitness test. The muscular fitness test consists of crunches, push-ups, back extensions, pull-ups and jumping with your feet together.

In case of crunches, push-ups and back extensions, the goal is to make as many flawless repeats as you can in a minute's time.

In case of pull-ups, the goal is to make as many flawless reps as you can as a continuous performance, no time limit.

Jumping with feet together is just that - seeing how far you can leap without taking any steps. You get two tries, best one counts.

12 minute running test should be pretty self-explanatory. You run, and when time runs out, they see where you keeled over unconscious. :smalltongue:

When doing the pull ups, should the back of your fists face towards you, or away from you? i.e should I be using my arms/chest or my back?
The running test will have to wait, I thought I had a indoors track around, but it turned out I didn't :smallannoyed:
I'll do everything but the pull-ups tonight, don't have a bar at home any longer either.

Kuma Kode
2011-01-13, 11:43 AM
I'll do everything but the pull-ups tonight, don't have a bar at home any longer either. Semi-sturdy door works, too.

Aurenthal
2011-01-13, 11:55 AM
Mmmmm....
Str: 10 I am not fully grown, so lets put average
Con:8-9 Asthma -.-
Dex:14 Good Reflex
Int:16 Great at math
Wis:8-9 I have a very bad listen, and a very good spot
Cha: 14 im good at controlling people

Callista
2011-01-13, 11:58 AM
Don't try it unless you weigh less than about 120 pounds. That door'll never be the same otherwise.

BTW: the problem with using pull-ups to gauge strength: The tiny 80-pound, 4'10" girl is going to find it really easy. But the 250-pound, 6'6" guy is not going to have such an easy task.

Judging how much weight you can lift and carry is an easier way to figure it out.

Your Light Load is how much you can carry, say, in a backpack, and still walk at your normal speed.

Your Medium Load will slow you down somewhat, but won't hamper you ridiculously.

Your Heavy Load is what you can carry at maximum effort, or lift over your head.

So I evaluate my Strength score like this:
I regularly hike with a 30-pound pack. This is my Light load.
Carrying 50 pounds is no problem for me, but it does slow me down. Medium load.
I can, if I need to, lift 100 pounds over my head (I've done this with 100-pound bags of grain), but that's about the limit of what I can carry.

So my Strength score would be 10--average.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Carrying_Capacity

Oddly enough, if you are an elite bodybuilder, that gives you a strength score above 18. This can probably be explained by Human Paragon levels or putting points in Strength at 4th, 8th, etc.

Mecharious
2011-01-13, 11:59 AM
The only thing I like less in these topics than someone giving themselves really high stats is someone giving themselves really low stats but saying all these incredible things they can do. Makes me feel bad about myself :smallredface:

Kuma Kode
2011-01-13, 12:02 PM
Don't try it unless you weigh less than about 120 pounds. That door'll never be the same otherwise. I weigh 200 lbs. and my doors are fine. :smallamused:

Calmar
2011-01-13, 12:02 PM
Str 15 - I'm not judging this according to any arbitrary chart, I'm eyeballing it by comparing myself to the dudes I encounter throughout everyday life and the heavy 18+ Str athletes from my gym.
Dex 12 - Dex is anything from manual dexterity to overall grace and agility - I have no clue how to judge that. :smallconfused:
Con 16 - I'm almost never sick; I do a lot of running and sports; sucking it up seems to be my main activity. :smallbiggrin:
Int 8 - I'm not particulary smart when it comes to academic/natural scientific knowledge. (Yes, there is no '1' in front of the eight! :smallbiggrin:)
Wis 14 - I don't have difficulty with philosophical and spiritual things*; I have to make the right decissions all the time
Cha 12 - Compared to many people I see I'm less shy about talking to strangers and crowds, and I can be convincing, but my eloquence clearly has it's limits. This is not about beauty.


* I still have some difficulties with the expression of the finer nuances of English language, however. :smallfrown:

stabbitty death
2011-01-13, 12:04 PM
str 10 physically average
dex 18 I take taekwondo
con ? i have mild allergy to mold so always sniffling, but rarly get anything worse
int 18 smarter than most in class.
wis 6 talk when i shouldn't prone to losing things
charisma 8 fat know it all though really loyal.

Callista
2011-01-13, 12:06 PM
The only thing I like less in these topics than someone giving themselves really high stats is someone giving themselves really low stats but saying all these incredible things they can do. Makes me feel bad about myself :smallredface:Well, statistically, it's not at all uncommon to have at least one quite good stat, even on 3d6. About 1/4th of the population will have a 16 or higher, and 65% will have a 14 or higher. Of course, that also means 1/4th of the population will have a 5 or lower, and 65% will have at least one 7 or lower.

I think this makes sense in real life. Real people have strengths and weaknesses; we're not point-buy creatures where the lowest score is an 8 and you want at least one 18.

drakir_nosslin
2011-01-13, 12:53 PM
Semi-sturdy door works, too.

Yea, I only have one of those and to use it I'd have to hang in the corridor outside my apartment blocking the way for my neighbors and looking ridiculous. Besides, it's not the same at all to do pull ups on a door and on a bar.

gbprime
2011-01-13, 04:33 PM
These are always fun. Why not. :smalltongue:

STR - 13 - it was higher, but I'm over age 40 now.
DEX - 7 - I have proved through empirical evidence that I have a -2 modifier. Don't ask. :smallfrown:
CON - 11 - ditto with the over 40 thing
INT - 16 - IQ 153 and over 40, this time a positive thing.
WIS - 12 - again the over 40 at work, I have graduated to not putting my foot in my mouth... nearly as often. :smallwink:
CHA - 14 - I haz leadership skillz.

I am thankful that the craft skills I rely upon to make my living are INT based, and not DEX based, and I would place myself as about a 4th level Expert. :smallsmile:

cd4
2011-01-13, 04:45 PM
Str - 4 - I had a hard time carring 30lbs of books
Dex - 6 - Not good at moving
Con - 8 - High Fortitude Save against Disease but little endurance
Int - 15 - Able to understand quite a bit and come up with intelligent plans.
Wis - 14 - Good common sense
Cha - 8 - I don't like speaking and try to stay away from parties like that


I probably could join an adventuring party, probably as a Mystic Theurage buffer/controller.

AtomicKitKat
2011-01-13, 09:21 PM
According to that Angelfire page:

STR: 13
DEX: 15
CON: 13
INT(pt1/pt2): 16/14
INT: 15
WIS: 17
CHA: 13

That's rather high, if we go by the crazy assumption that "everyone is a 5th level Commoner at best".:smallyuk:

Siosilvar
2011-01-13, 09:34 PM
INT - 16 - IQ 153 and over 40, this time a positive thing.

*cough* You mean 18 + aging modifiers. 153 is top .5% of the population, and so is an 18. If you're going to use IQ as an indicator for Intelligence score, you ought as well go whole hog.

gbprime
2011-01-13, 09:47 PM
*cough* You mean 18 + aging modifiers. 153 is top .5% of the population, and so is an 18. If you're going to use IQ as an indicator for Intelligence score, you ought as well go whole hog.

No point in going whole hog. I'm either an NPC, or I'm in the most mind numbingly boring campaign ever devised. :smallwink:

My hope is that one of my KIDS (http://www.cafepress.com/orderofthestick.486950726) will be one of the PC's.:smalltongue:

Ytaker
2011-01-13, 09:56 PM
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/call/call_01-15_ch11.htm


The average cold weather soldier's load is 101.5 pounds.

It mentions this slows them down, but not signifigantly.

By the encumbarance rules, with a medium weight, they must be 14 strength. So the average soldier in a modern army is 13-14 strength.

DisgruntledDM
2011-01-13, 10:34 PM
Str: 12
Dex: 14-15
Con: 15
Int 12
Wis 13
Cha 8

Blue Ghost
2011-01-13, 11:02 PM
Str 12, Dex 9, Con 8, Int 15, Wis 7, Cha 10. Sounds about right.

Ajadea
2011-01-13, 11:24 PM
Str 10, Dex 10 (I am good with small things but my hand-eye coordination is...lacking), Con 10 (good running endurance, but allergies kill this score), Int 18 (180+ IQ), Wis 9, Cha 10.

So...yeah.

zorba1994
2011-01-14, 12:35 AM
According to the quiz posted by one of the first posters:

STR: 10
DEX: 15
CON: 8
INT(pt1/pt2): 16/15
INT: 16
WIS: 14
CHA: 12

However, I would point out that despite the fact that I'm constantly getting sick, I have a high pain threshold, so CON might be off.

Also, most of the time my Charisma is low because I simply don't care to bother with people I don't like. I can be very charming and persuasive (natural orator!) if I want to.

Callista
2011-01-14, 01:27 AM
That's rather high, if we go by the crazy assumption that "everyone is a 5th level Commoner at best".:smallyuk:I never particularly agreed with that, at least not when it comes to skill checks. Many of us are Experts, for example; we focus more on improving our skills than on earning a living, as the Commoner tends to do. I'm also pretty sure some of my profs are 8th-10th level, from the Knowledge checks they're capable of making given only a well-equipped lab (+2) and a graduate assistant (+2). Give them an 18 INT (+4) and full ranks (+12 for 9th level), that's a +20 to their Knowledge check, which allows them to answer a DC 40 question--beyond the "very hard/obscure" level and into the "new knowledge" level; i.e., they can answer questions that nobody has answered before (and are, incidentally, required to do this for their PhD thesis).

Of course, they will only do this successfully one out of twenty tries! Most of the time, they are simply confirming things that are already known but very few people are familiar with (DC 30). A very experienced researcher could be a 10th level Expert easily, and Nobel prizewinners are hovering around 15th on average.

So why aren't they out there using their attack bonuses to win fights? Well, D&D is made to simulate combat primarily and tactically-oriented skills in general, and the system breaks down if you try to apply it to people who don't automatically get better at fighting at the same rate they get better at programming a computer or researching ancient Persia. That's one part of D&D that's not realistic, though the lack of realism only matters if you try to apply it to life in a non-D&D world.

Within D&D, those stat blocks are mostly used for combat, and non-combat stuff is mostly role-play that doesn't really need stats, so you don't really need to worry about the possibility that somebody can get better at non-combat stuff rather than learning to fight. On the other hand, in real life, you make much more use of non-combat skills--even if you're in the military! This focus means that you practice and learn non-combat skills to an expert level while your combat ability is anywhere from nonexistent to the equivalent of a low-level Fighter. Very few, if any, people in the Real World will ever be capable of fighting like a mid-level D&D character does. But quite a lot of us will be able to duplicate those mid-level, high-level, or occasionally even epic characters in the realms of skill checks like Knowledge, Craft, Profession, Perform, and other things that we spend our lives learning to do.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 02:34 AM
When doing the pull ups, should the back of your fists face towards you, or away from you? i.e should I be using my arms/chest or my back?

Back of the fist facing away. :smallsmile:



BTW: the problem with using pull-ups to gauge strength: The tiny 80-pound, 4'10" girl is going to find it really easy. But the 250-pound, 6'6" guy is not going to have such an easy task.

Oh, I know. That's why it's only one fifth of the test. Relative muscular strenght still tells a lot about fitness of a person.

And since the move has you quite literally lifting your own weight, take your weight into notion and suddenly it can be made to make sense in context of D&D too. :smallwink:


Oddly enough, if you are an elite bodybuilder, that gives you a strength score above 18. This can probably be explained by Human Paragon levels or putting points in Strength at 4th, 8th, etc.

True. In lots of these threads, arguments often break out when some people say high scores should be much rarer than 3d6 roll would indicate, or say 3 to 18 range should hold all people. This becomes problematic when we run to Reality is Unrealistic (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic) and realize people can indeed be more amazing than a low-level commoner.



Within D&D, those stat blocks are mostly used for combat, and non-combat stuff is mostly role-play that doesn't really need stats, so you don't really need to worry about the possibility that somebody can get better at non-combat stuff rather than learning to fight. On the other hand, in real life, you make much more use of non-combat skills--even if you're in the military! This focus means that you practice and learn non-combat skills to an expert level while your combat ability is anywhere from nonexistent to the equivalent of a low-level Fighter. Very few, if any, people in the Real World will ever be capable of fighting like a mid-level D&D character does. But quite a lot of us will be able to duplicate those mid-level, high-level, or occasionally even epic characters in the realms of skill checks like Knowledge, Craft, Profession, Perform, and other things that we spend our lives learning to do.

Remember to calibrate for feats, flaws, traits and so on!

If each of the scientist take Non-combatant flaw and get Skill Focus in its place, they can suddenly make those knowledge checks three levels earlier while being two levels behind in combat abilities. Combine this with potentially average-to-low physical scores, and you suddenly have scientist who can be very, very good in research and really bad in combat. :smallwink:

While the idea of "everyone is at most 5th level commoner" is an useless exaggeration, the general message of Alexandria, "calbirate your expections", is still a good one, because of the reminder that there's more to the game than just levels and ability scores, and some things can be modeled in multiple ways,

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 03:52 AM
That's rather high, if we go by the crazy assumption that "everyone is a 5th level Commoner at best".:smallyuk:

Since that is, indeed, a crazy assumption, why on earth would we go by that? I am neither a commoner nor am I below 6th level.

Ytaker
2011-01-14, 06:22 AM
True. In lots of these threads, arguments often break out when some people say high scores should be much rarer than 3d6 roll would indicate, or say 3 to 18 range should hold all people. This becomes problematic when we run to Reality is Unrealistic (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RealityIsUnrealistic) and realize people can indeed be more amazing than a low-level commoner.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-06/25/content_342496.htm

I've seen small children modelled as strength 2 commoners. I think that's reasonable. So, he's stronger than the average adult. That would make give him a racial bonus to strength of 10. Probably a bonus to every strength point put into his stats. No side effects so 0LA. The reason you can't be that is for balance purposes.

There's also the fact that dnd doesn't model weight lifting because then your characters would be weight lifting rather than adventuring. We don't have adventures so we can weight lift and gain strength bonuses.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 07:34 AM
Since that is, indeed, a crazy assumption, why on earth would we go by that? I am neither a commoner nor am I below 6th level.

There was an analysis done which made the conclusion that those characters of fantasy who do things normal humans cannot are best represented by D&D classes below level 10. He then made a fairly good argument that the majority of humans are Commoners, with a few Experts, and even fewer class levelled people, and that almost nobody who has existed could be considered to be a higher level than 5-6.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 07:53 AM
There was an analysis done which made the conclusion that those characters of fantasy who do things normal humans cannot are best represented by D&D classes below level 10. He then made a fairly good argument that the majority of humans are Commoners, with a few Experts, and even fewer class levelled people, and that almost nobody who has existed could be considered to be a higher level than 5-6.
Yes, and that so-called "analysis" is the crazy assumption we're talking about. The article in question is not based on any serious research, gets its facts dead wrong, and blatantly cherry-picks only the examples that support its theory, while ignoring every example that contradicts it.

In other words, it's dead wrong. Many fantasy characters (including in LOTR) do things that level-10 D&D characters cannot, and so do many real-life characters.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 07:57 AM
I fail to come up with any examples of people in real life who would actually be higher than 6th.

true_shinken
2011-01-14, 08:00 AM
In other words, it's dead wrong. Many fantasy characters (including in LOTR) do things that level-10 D&D characters cannot, and so do many real-life characters.
Can you give me examples?

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 08:02 AM
I fail to come up with any examples of people in real life who would actually be higher than 6th.
That's probably because you're starting from the assumption that there aren't any. That way you end up with circular reasoning.

The posts above by Callista and Frozen Feet give a few good examples. The simple fact is that any expert in a field of study (ranging from top consultants to university postdocs to marathon runners) needs way more than 8 points in their skill of choice plus skill focus - otherwise he'd lose to some random high school kid approx two times out of ten, in an equal competition.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 08:07 AM
Can you give me examples?

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73839

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 08:08 AM
Human Paragon comes to mind, as do the other feats that provide additional bonii to skills. There's feats to increase the cap on skill points for one skill, there's traits that give bonii to a particular skill, and there's other and better ways to improve it.

The problem is that classing them as a 10th level expert would make them better at combat and endurance than a trained fighter without any training. This is just not realistic, whereas assuming 6th level Expert3/Human Paragon3 with Skill Focus, Skill Specialisation, and maybe another feat, a trait, would get him there.

Someone who has focused their entire career into one skill doesn't get represented by class X with Skill focus. That's barely more than a hobby.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 08:17 AM
Human Paragon comes to mind, as do the other feats that provide additional bonii to skills.
For starters, the plural of "bonus" is not "bonii". No, not in Latin either.

Furthermore, your suggestion requires more feats than a fifth-level character would have.


The problem is that classing them as a 10th level expert would make them better at combat and endurance than a trained fighter without any training.
It follows, then, that your "trained fighter" needs to be higher level than you first assumed. That's not a problem: spending a year or two in the army should easily make you a 4th or 5th level fighter, considering how much better you'll be at fighting than the average high school kid.

That's what I mean by circular: you assume that "trained fighters" are level one, and that assumption contradicts with having 10th-level experts. However, this contradiction doesn't mean that there are no 10th-level experts: it means that your assumption is wrong.

Go to cracked.com for some more examples of stunts done in real life that a low-level D&D character couldn't do.


Someone who has focused their entire career into one skill doesn't get represented by class X with Skill focus. That's barely more than a hobby.
Yes, but that's precisely what that article you mention claims: that someone's entire legendary career can be adequately explained by up to eight ranks in a skill, skill focus, and some fudging with circumstance modifiers. Clearly this is false.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 08:23 AM
While you can disagree with conclusion the article made, the points it brought up were still good.

For example, one of the major points brought up early is that a character doesn't need to be high-level to be good at things - even a mid-to-low level D&D character can be very skilled, even inhumanely so. This was in contrast to the referred practice of people saying their favorite characters must be high-level, even if they wouldn't need to be within context of D&D rules.

Another was that the system has multiple ways and factors for representing things, and you should seek a way that fits instead of trying to force a square peg in a round hole. One given example was non-magical etherealness - going strictly by core rules, only level X monk has such ability. But if work of fiction has a character that has the etheralness but no other abilities indicative of being a monk, trying to model that character as a X level monk is foolish. Another example was mounted combat: anyone in D&D world can ride past an enemy and strike them, just not in the same round. That there are specific feats or abilities for improving certain actions sometimes blinds people to the fact that such feats or abilities are not always needed for said actions.

Another example I could give, which I'm not sure was in the article: combat ability and proficiencies. Being non-proficient with a weapon gives -4 penalty to attack rolls; being non-proficient with armor gives you ACP to attack rolls, which in case of heavier armors utterly rapes one's ability to fight. These penalties are greater than the effect of BAB or ability scores on low levels. A level 1 Fighter with moderate strenght (let's say 13 with +1 modifier) will kick an average level 1 Commoner's ass in nearly all cases, because proficiency + BAB + strenght give him a +6 bonus over the commoner. Because of this, said level 1 Fighter would look like a master swordsman to commoners despite of not being hugely powerful within the context of the system.

Overall, the basic premise, "Calibrate your expections", is a sound one. d20 system has a lot of nuances, and it's easy to forget what they all even mean. I feel the system often gets unnecessary flak for "not being able to do this and this" because people are ignorant of the part that would allow the system to do just that.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 08:39 AM
Overall, the basic premise, "Calibrate your expections", is a sound one. d20 system has a lot of nuances, and it's easy to forget what they all even mean. I feel the system often gets unnecessary flak for "not being able to do this and this" because people are ignorant of the part that would allow the system to do just that.
Yes, but it's ironic that the article itself does the precise thing that is premise is warning against.

Setting your expectations so that your favorite movie hero is level 20 is wrong. But setting your expectations so that even the most skilled real life person cannot be higher than 5 is equally wrong. Both start with making an (incorrect) assumption and then ignoring any and all facts that contradict the assumption.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 08:46 AM
The simple fact is that any expert in a field of study (ranging from top consultants to university postdocs to marathon runners) needs way more than 8 points in their skill of choice plus skill focus - otherwise he'd lose to some random high school kid approx two times out of ten, in an equal competition.

You're talking like this can't happen in real life. :smalltongue: You're also ignoring many nuances of the rules that would prevent this from happening even without anyone being super-high level.

First, running and contests of strenght are poor examples, because within the rules, mosts of those would be dealt by ability checks - which explicitly can work on "bigger score wins, period". In case of knowledge checks, remember what the die roll represents! Even the best of the best do mistakes and have bad days - it's entirely possible for, say, a professor to forget some nuance of his field while his student remembers it by chance. This happens every day in real life - at least, it's happened to me. :smalltongue:

Furthermore, in case of knowledge checks, an untrained person can't recall anything more than trivia - a professor would always beat him in anything more advanced. In non-stressed, casual circumstances where the professor and the student could be assumed to Take 10 ot Take 20, the professor would always come ahead of the student due to his skill ranks.

Besides, you're not giving enough credit for random school kids. :smallwink: Remember, part of your own argument is that people are more amazing than D&D would seem to let them be - why would you ignore a rule which lets normal people sometimes achieve the improbable then?

Ytaker
2011-01-14, 08:50 AM
The posts above by Callista and Frozen Feet give a few good examples. The simple fact is that any expert in a field of study (ranging from top consultants to university postdocs to marathon runners) needs way more than 8 points in their skill of choice plus skill focus - otherwise he'd lose to some random high school kid approx two times out of ten, in an equal competition.

A marathon runner would just have high constitution. DnD is not good at modelling fatigue well though. Because fatigue isn't an exciting mechanic.

From my experience as a university chemist, dnd doesn't model intellectual studying well. A post doc doesn't make a knowledge check to find out some new piece of knowledge. They and a number of other scientists pool their knowledge to research a subject, like you might research a spell, and if their combined skill is great enough they may succeed. We also stand on the shoulders of giants, and use the tools invented by past scientists to give us huge circumstance bonuses.

Also.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Knowledge_Skill


An untrained Knowledge check is simply an Intelligence check. Without actual training, you know only common knowledge (DC 10 or lower).

A highschool student wouldn't know the technobabble for science, and thus would not be able to talk to them.

Thealexandrian article is modelling einstein as a guy who can make a science thesis out of thin air. He's way too high level.

Kurald Galain
2011-01-14, 08:51 AM
In non-stressed, casual circumstances where the professor and the student could be assumed to Take 10 ot Take 20, the professor would always come ahead of the student due to his skill ranks.
Sure. But we're not talking about non-stressed, casual circumstances. We're talking about football matches, stock market crazes, and physics tests.


Besides, you're not giving enough credit for random school kids. :smallwink: Remember, part of your own argument is that people are more amazing than D&D would seem to let them be - why would you ignore a rule which lets normal people sometimes achieve the improbable then?
Because one-in-twenty is not improbable. Archieving the improbable starts with not being able to be beaten by a random nobody one time out of twenty.


DnD is not good at modelling fatigue well though. ... dnd doesn't model intellectual studying well.
That's more or less my point. It follows, then, that anything involving fatigue or intellectual studies is not accurately modeled by a level-5 D&D character.


A highschool student wouldn't know the technobabble for science, and thus would not be able to talk to them.
You can get skill ranks in Knowledge (Physics) from high school - after all, the whole point of high school is to learn stuff. A senior needs to have significantly more skill ranks than a freshman, otherwise it's an epic fail for the school.

Ytaker
2011-01-14, 09:02 AM
That's more or less my point. It follows, then, that anything involving fatigue or intellectual studies is not accurately modeled by a level-5 D&D character.


Most would probably be better modelled with a level 2 or 3 character. A level 5 character like that einstein is smarter than anyone in this world. You'd have to house rule in some way of doing research.


You can get skill ranks in Knowledge (Physics) from high school - after all, the whole point of high school is to learn stuff. A senior needs to have significantly more skill ranks than a freshman, otherwise it's an epic fail for the school.

One of the things you learn later at university is that everything you learned at high school is a lie. Basically. It's simplified nonsense that bears almost no resemblance to real science. Some of the objective facts are true, more as you go up in education, and you might be able to contest a scientist on objective well known facts, but your knowledge just wouldn't apply to a serious scientific question.

Gnaritas
2011-01-14, 09:07 AM
Here's how I estimate stats when I'm trying to figure out what things might represent in real life:
<CUT>

So you can match the probabilities to the percentiles, which are:

3 Below .5%
4 .5%-2%
5 2%-5%
6 5%-9%
7 9%-16%
8 16%-26%
9 26%-38%
10 38%-50%
11 50%-63%
12 63%-74%
13 74%-84%
14 84%-91%
15 91%-95%
16 95%-98%
17 98%-99.5%
18 Above 99.5%
<CUT>

This is what i used, and obviously then your are still estimating most abilities.

STR 9, but probably due to a -1 size penalty.
DEX 13 (i put myself at 75, i am pretty agile and a good shot)
CON 12 (sick, but not too often, my basic endurance is pretty good)
INT 16 (i believe i am in the top 5% in intelligence)
WIS 13 (i feel i am wiser than most people, but by no means exceptional)
CHA 12 (my looks are average and i think i am pretty ok to be around with, where i think a lot of people are plain awkward or annoying to be around.)

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 09:08 AM
An ordinary school test or game would not be a single roll, but multiple rolls - a test would likely have a roll for each question. This would reduce chances of the "random student" winning a specialist from 5% to something dismall. Consider a test with 10 questions, where each question has a check of its own; with a DC 10, an untrained person isn't able to answer any, a random student will maybe get half right with the chances of him getting all right being pretty small, while the professor is unable to fail any.

Remember, with skill checks, 1 is not auto-fail and 20 is not auto-success.


Thealexandrian article is modelling einstein as a guy who can make a science thesis out of thin air. He's way too high level.

Not too sure about that. Consider that he did, in fact, pull many parts of his theory out of his hat. Consider Isaac Newton did the thing with classical mechanics.

Obrysii
2011-01-14, 09:13 AM
Strength 8 [I'm not weak but below most]
Dexterity 8 [I'm not graceful in any manner of the word]
Constitution 14 [I am tough, though]
Intelligence 14 [140 IQ score translates to this.]
Wisdom 8 [Not too wise]
Charisma 4 [Can't talk to anyone without pissing them off, people look at me in disgust when I walk through a store]

Gnaritas
2011-01-14, 09:19 AM
For 12 minute running test specifically, average expected minimum of both genders for "good" result would be 2500 metres, which I'd flag as Constitution 10 and 11 (no modifier), with every 200 metres to either direction changing the score by one. (So Con 18 would be 3900+ metres, and Con 3 would be 1100- meters)

For relative muscle strenght tests, I don't remember the ranges. I'd have to fetch my soldier's handbook and check them.

Note that the best runner in the world would be able to run over 4700 metres in 12 minutes (calculated from world record on 5 km).
This would lead to to a score of 22, which in my opinion is too high.

Ytaker
2011-01-14, 09:25 AM
Not too sure about that. Consider that he did, in fact, pull many parts of his theory out of his hat. Consider Isaac Newton did the thing with classical mechanics.

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

Einstein was working on this theory since he was 16, and you can see his various influences there. He then used maths to prove his theories.

http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Science/Newton1.htm


Newton specifically stated in his work that he was advancing beyond the philosophical to the mathematical. His statements were not based on assumptions or suppositions, but rather on mathematical proof set out in detail.

One of the sad limitation of the dnd stat system is that it only has one stat for intelligence. There are actually many types of intelligence. Their genius was in holding incredibly complicated mathematical models in their head and manipulating them, working them out.

true_shinken
2011-01-14, 09:33 AM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73839

This post is wrong from the first line. Most NPCs don't roll stats, they have 10s and 11s across the board.
It gets even more wrong when it says a PhD has 'understood a problem no one has ever understood before'. Wait, what? Most thesis are not about solving problems. They are about discussing topics. And besides what they will tell you at your local university, they can and will have repeated topics.
It gets yet even more wrong when he assumes Aragorn killed 17 trolls at once. He killed 70 trolls during the battle, sure. That's not an EL 17. That's 70 times an EL of 5. And D&D trolls are nothing like LotR trolls, so the comparison is ridiculous.

The Alexandrian has mistakes and makes a lot of assumptions, but at least he gets the rules right.



Note that the best runner in the world would be able to run over 4700 metres in 12 minutes (calculated from world record on 5 km).
This would lead to to a score of 22, which in my opinion is too high.
You can get 22 in level 1. Start with 18 and add DMG2's 'great constitution' template. It goes without saying - the best runner in the world is a special case.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 09:39 AM
Note that the best runner in the world would be able to run over 4700 metres in 12 minutes (calculated from world record on 5 km).
This would lead to to a score of 22, which in my opinion is too high.

Why?

Also, never forget awesome power of feats and class features! :smallwink: Remember that if we were to actually stat an endurance runner in D&D, he'd be more than just his ability scores. Taking that into account in a playful test like I outlined would be too much work, but it's something to keep in mind


This post is wrong from the first line. Most NPCs don't roll stats, they have 10s and 11s across the board.

The arrays are a tool for a GM to make his job easier. Considering the arrays are still based on a 3d6 roll, for the purposes of excersises like this the premise that everyone rolls for stats is a sound one.

His post has other problems, though, like assuming moving on in life necessarily requires gaining levels, gaining a student necessarily requires a Cohort, plus the highly dubious re-definition of "legendary".

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 09:51 AM
You want to be able to not be beaten by a newb 1/20 times? Skill Mastery. Done. Unless he's at least comparable in skill, he can't do it.

However, you're misrepresenting a physics test. It's nowhere NEAR a single skill check that takes one round to complete. It's more like half a dozen checks minimum per question, with multiple questions.

And anyway, it's more than possible for a PHD professor to be out-thought by someone far below him. I solved a mathematics problem myself that my professor for proabability hand't been able to solve. I came up with a smart trick to make the solution easier to find that he hadn't come up with.

I am telling you that I could build a D&D character at 6th level for ANYONE you care to name.

As for the other points: A 10th level expert would be better at combat than your average street thug. Yeah, no. He would also be better than someone who had anything less than 5 levels in a warrior class, which would include anyone still in training for armies, or possibly even new soldiers. Not accurate in the slightest.

A 10th level expert would be able to endure a remarkable amount of physical harm before losing consciousness. This is not a representation of reality.

When you are given the choice between two representations, one of which requires less work and is more intuitive, but which introduces a dozen or more inconsistencies, and another one which is harder to understand and requires more work, but is accurate to reality, you want the simple option? Seems a silly thing to do.

Here's a question for you. Our 10th level expert has taken 1 feat for his skill. He has at least 4 other feats, and a huge pile of other skill points. What do all these PHD professors do outside of their work that is represented by all this other potential?

Ytaker
2011-01-14, 09:53 AM
This post is wrong from the first line. Most NPCs don't roll stats, they have 10s and 11s across the board.

The article assumed that npcs rolled stats, and used this to estimate what people were like. The author sucks at maths, and so, his rulings were wrong.

With stat generation, if I roll a 3 or something in a core stat like strength, our general ruling is that like in real life your hero spontaneously aborts in the womb or is unable to stand and thus can't adventure.


It gets yet even more wrong when he assumes Aragorn killed 17 trolls at once. He killed 70 trolls during the battle, sure. That's not an EL 17. That's 70 times an EL of 5. And D&D trolls are nothing like LotR trolls, so the comparison is ridiculous.

Yeah, it was Hurin who killed the trolls. Your maths is right though.

Also, I like your use of great constitution template.

Skjaldbakka
2011-01-14, 10:11 AM
D&D stats really fail for me, since I can make ranged attacks accurately, but can't dodge (I dodged something once, but was so stunned the follow up attack got sneak attack dice). I guess that means I have Zen Archery.

I also can run for very long, but have a high pain tolerance, so I must have a low Con with some feat that lets me use another stat for HP... is there one?

Anyway, I usually guess about this:

Human Bard 4* (in a dead magic zone, what a great pick)

Str 13
Dex 8
Con 12
Int 14
Wis 14
Cha 14
(level bump went here. I had a friend tell me the day after I was mugged that I seemed more outgoing and charismatic than before, so I must have leveled and put my bump there)

Traits: Brawler*, Nearsighted, Polite
Flaws: Murky-Eyed
Feats: Power Attack, Zen Archery, Alertness, Weapon Focus: Spell Packet
*Most people that think they have improved unarmed strike actually just have this trait.

Skills:
Not going to list these, because that is too much work.
I have Hide but not Move Silently
I have Spot and Listen
I have a few ranks each in Appraise, Gather Information, Heal, Survival, Use Rope, and most d20 modern knowledge skills. I have knowledge history at 5 ranks, and knowledge philisophy at max ranks.
I also have Profession: Tech Support and Craft: Jewelry with a few ranks each.


note the lack of any perform skills on this bard. totally suboptimal, I should demand a rebuild

*HP wise, it makes sense. I had an encounter at 3rd level where a guy jumped me from behind with a knife and cut me across the face hard enough that the knife snapped off in my cheekbone. I figure a level 1 rogue, 1d4+1d6+1str. So avg 7dmg, at level 3, I'd have ~15hp. Felt like I was at about half hp at the time, so it fits.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 10:40 AM
Again, skill checks do not auto-fail or auto-succeed on 1 and 20! Having a modifier of +5 allows you to do stuff those with less training couldn't no matter how hard they tried. That's achievable at level 1 with max ranks and a +1 modifier in ability.

Skjaldbakka: Being a poor dodger but decent with firearms: average dex with Vulnerable flaw. Depending on how accurately, it might be anywhere from just being proficient, to having Weapon Focus (etc.) or being a function of BAB.

For poor stamina but high HP, maybe you just got lucky on the HP rolls but have something like Slow or Meager Fortitude as a flaw.

Gullintanni
2011-01-14, 11:01 AM
I am telling you that I could build a D&D character at 6th level for ANYONE you care to name.


That depends on whether or not you can get a 6th level monk up to 8 attacks per round. A career martial artist can make enough attacks in six seconds to make 3.5 DnD cry.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 11:07 AM
Disregarding that a full attack isn't actually making X attacks per round, but is more representative of an exchange of blows and parries, with the number of attacks made being the number of openings the PC can take advantage of.

If you need more attacks, between a few splatbooks I can probably manage to hit 10. Wouldn't actually use Monk, though.

Gullintanni
2011-01-14, 11:12 AM
Disregarding that a full attack isn't actually making X attacks per round, but is more representative of an exchange of blows and parries, with the number of attacks made being the number of openings the PC can take advantage of.

If you need more attacks, between a few splatbooks I can probably manage to hit 10. Wouldn't actually use Monk, though.

I realize that a Full Attack is representative of parries etc. A Full Attack represents the number of effective attacks a person can make in a round. Now, the people I have in mind fighting against me, a lowly commoner 1-2, despite my every attempt to thwart them, can easily make enough effective attacks against me in a round to make 3.5 cry. I'm a decent enough fighter, they're just that good.

That being said, make it happen. 10 Attacks is the challenge. Keep in mind, the build must include Human as the base race, and include only (Ex.) abilities, since we're modelling DnD after real life. No magical equipment, no SU, SLA's or spells. Good luck :smallsmile:

true_shinken
2011-01-14, 11:19 AM
The arrays are a tool for a GM to make his job easier. Considering the arrays are still based on a 3d6 roll, for the purposes of excersises like this the premise that everyone rolls for stats is a sound one.

The all 10s and 11s array is not base on a 3d6 roll and that's what most people use.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 11:22 AM
I'm too lazy to go and actually collect the various ways to do it, but you'd basically take as many levels as possible in classes that grant an additional attacks with a -2.

Barbarian dip with Whirling Frenzy. Monk. Two weapon Fighting. Possibly BAB 6 if I can find Flurry on an ACF.

There's a Paladin ACF that grants an additional attack Cha+3 times per day.

There's a few style feats that grant additional attacks, you could possibly afford one of those by 6, might not be worth it though, because of the other options: Snap Kick. Karmic reflexes. Double hit.

Gullintanni
2011-01-14, 11:29 AM
I'm too lazy to go and actually collect the various ways to do it, but you'd basically take as many levels as possible in classes that grant an additional attacks with a -2.

Barbarian dip with Whirling Frenzy. Monk. Two weapon Fighting. Possibly BAB 6 if I can find Flurry on an ACF.

There's a Paladin ACF that grants an additional attack Cha+3 times per day.

There's a few style feats that grant additional attacks, you could possibly afford one of those by 6, might not be worth it though, because of the other options: Snap Kick. Karmic reflexes. Double hit.

Well, the folk in question are definitely not paladins. Nixes that option. Karmic Reflexes (as far as I know) allows my opponent to retaliate against my attack during my attack. It doesn't actually fit an additional attack into the attacker's routine. I wish I were good enough that I could really even make one attack. But the initiative score modifiers these guys have would have to be in and around +8 or +9. Not hard to do by level 6 granted, but we're still running short on attacks.

So far it's just Snap Kick. Not sure about Whirling Frenzy or Flurry. I've never encountered them, but then I'm used to min/maxing clerics. Please share.

Frozen_Feet
2011-01-14, 11:30 AM
The all 10s and 11s array is not base on a 3d6 roll and that's what most people use.

Yes it is. 10 and 11 are the average rolls for 3d6. That's where the array comes from. It's a shorth-hand fow all average rolls.

Callista
2011-01-14, 11:45 AM
Yes. The average 3d6 roll is 10.5. 10s and 11s is a shorthand useful for quick NPC creation. It's meant to eliminate the need to add or subtract stat modifiers--it doesn't reflect the variation we see in real life. If we all used 10s and 11s, then it would be impossible to be born with a natural ability higher than other people's--everyone would be exactly as smart as everyone else, exactly as strong, exactly as agile. That just doesn't make any sense. 10s and 11s is a shortcut, no more.

true_shinken
2011-01-14, 12:01 PM
Most attacks by level 6, let's see...
Human Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2/Fighter 4. You need two flaws.
Feats: Martial Study* (any desert wind maneuver), Martial Study* (Flashing Sun), Improved Unarmed Strike, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved Two Weapon Fighting, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (eagle claw**), Eagle Claw Fury**
Attacks: 2 from BAB 6, +1 from whirling frenzy, +1 for TWF, +1 for ITWF, +1 for flurry, +1 for Snap Kick, +1 for Flashing Sun. I think 8 is the best I can get with this. Looks like a fun E6 build, btw.
* Tome of Battle
** Sandstorm

Alternatively, Lion Totem Barbarian 1/Fighter 2/Monk 3 with Run, TWF, Battle Jump*, Skill Focus (Jump), Leap of the Heavens** and Acrobatic. Trade Ride for Tumble with Cityscape web enhancement. Start with 18 Str.
Running gets you 200ft of movement. Battle Jump requires 40ft to trigger a full-attack.
Jump check: +6 Str (raging) + 9 (ranks) + 2 (masterwork item) + 2 (synergy from Tumble) + 4 (fast movement) + 3 (Skill Focus) +2 (acrobatic) +5 on running Jumps (Leap of the Heavens)= +33. You need a 7 to succeed.
Each full attack is 3 attacks: 1 normal, +1 flurry, +1 TWF. You need 50ft movement to trigger a full-attack from Battle Jump, so you can get 4 full-attacks from running. That's 12 attacks per round, though you fight like Speedball.
* Unaproachable East
** PHB2

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 12:23 PM
A Paladin would seem to make sense to me, to be honest. Just focus on an ideal instead of a god, and you suddenly have a martial class whose inner focus allows him to fight better. Doesn't seem too far off the martial artists I've known.

Flurry is a Monk ability....Core. PHB.

Whirling frenzy is a UA ACF for barbarians (changes rage) that grants an extra attack on a full attack while raging, at the cost of a -2 penalty on each attack.

As for the Karmic reflexes, you might well be playing defensive, but you'll still likely make some attempt to push the opponent back, make any kind of strike, or fight back in some way. Maybe it's blocked, maybe you're shut down the moment you begin. Would still count as you making an attack, and would give him an opening he could take advantage of, which is why Karmic would represent that so well.

Gullintanni
2011-01-14, 12:53 PM
Doesn't seem too far off the martial artists I've known.

It's pretty far off of these ones.



Flurry is a Monk ability....Core. PHB.

Noted. Used to seeing it written in full. Flurry of Blows. Flurry (out of context) could have been some other ability.



Whirling frenzy is a UA ACF for barbarians (changes rage) that grants an extra attack on a full attack while raging, at the cost of a -2 penalty on each attack.


These martial artists don't need to be enraged to make all their attacks. So this doesn't really mesh with the real world example. Which is of course the purpose of this exercise. To build a real world person within the 3.5 system. Raging simply doesn't fit the mechanics in this example.



As for the Karmic reflexes, you might well be playing defensive, but you'll still likely make some attempt to push the opponent back, make any kind of strike, or fight back in some way. Maybe it's blocked, maybe you're shut down the moment you begin. Would still count as you making an attack, and would give him an opening he could take advantage of, which is why Karmic would represent that so well.


Realistically, I'd be unconcious before my first round of combat came up. Karmic Reflexes simply wouldn't come up in this fight. Even if you want to insist that it adds the extra attack, the Feat would never come into play.

The bottom line here is that I sincerely doubt you could reach the number of attacks/round that these guys get using the 3.5 model for combat. They can strike 6 times per second. Meaningfully in combat? Probably one third of that. That's still 12 times per combat round. I highly doubt you'll get there by level 6 using the 3.5 model.

All that really proves is that 3.5 is a bad model for reality; and that the levels and progressions simply don't fit the real world...back to your regularly scheduled threading now, I guess.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 03:28 PM
No, all you've shown is that if you restrict every ability to the exact fluff that comes with it, there are things that cannot be represented. That's blatantly true, there's a limited number of abilities and each has its own fluff that goes with it.

If you want me to mechanically represent people and their abilities in 3.5, I can do so. If you want me to represent their personalities and lifestyle, too, there's no chance of that happening. Hell, what kind of 3.5 fluff would represent the couch potato gamer who works as a programmer from home and spends most of his life playing PC games. Even disregarding the mechanics, I can't represent everyone in 3.5 if you require me to fit the fluff to the person.

ZeltArruin
2011-01-14, 03:46 PM
<snippity> Int 18 (180+ IQ)<snip>

Am I the only one that found this funny? I think they were being silly, or at least I hope they were.

Talya
2011-01-14, 04:05 PM
Str: 7-ish. I'm very small, and I have a desk job, and I don't weight-train.
Dex: 14. I'm rather agile and and have good coordination.
Con: 10. i don't get sick that often.
Int: 15-ish. 145 on my last IQ test, always did well in academic pursuits.
Wis: 14-ish. I'm observant and seem to be good at reading people.
Cha: 12-ish. I'm tempted to make this higher, but as well as I can rally people or make them laugh, I'm also good at making them violently oppose me.

Gullintanni
2011-01-14, 04:16 PM
No, all you've shown is that if you restrict every ability to the exact fluff that comes with it, there are things that cannot be represented. That's blatantly true, there's a limited number of abilities and each has its own fluff that goes with it.

If you want me to mechanically represent people and their abilities in 3.5, I can do so. If you want me to represent their personalities and lifestyle, too, there's no chance of that happening. Hell, what kind of 3.5 fluff would represent the couch potato gamer who works as a programmer from home and spends most of his life playing PC games. Even disregarding the mechanics, I can't represent everyone in 3.5 if you require me to fit the fluff to the person.

It's just simple. The subject in this example doesn't act like a Paladin. Frankly, if he had to abide by the code of conduct, he'd have fallen several times. That precludes him having any paladin abilities.

He's also not a barbarian. He's not illiterate, nor does he get better in combat when he's angry. He can't find traps. Ultimately he's not a barbarian so, sadly, no barbarian class features.

Quite neatly, he's a monk. That's his closest class parallel within 3.5. It also follows from his own fluff...personally. He's spent his life in unarmed martial training. He could also be a fighter, by that logic. So I suppose in terms of class feature's those are the classes you're permitted to make use of. The idea is to translate the person's abilities, including back story and fluff as accurately as possible into a character. That leaves you without access to barbarian and paladin. So far, everything else is golden, if you want to try and stat up a level 6 fighter/monk with 12+ attacks per round.

If you operate outside of those boundaries, then you've failed to accurately represent this martial artist inside the boundaries of 3.5.

Mr. Couch potato is easy to stat up. Level 1-2 commoner with maxed ranks in profession (programmer). Possibly Skill Focus as well.

term1nally s1ck
2011-01-14, 05:03 PM
Regardless, it's impossible to represent everyone mechanically and simultaneously match the fluff. The ONLY class without fluff is the commoner.

If you want me to match mechanical abilities at level 6 with irl abilities, I can do that. If you want me to match the fluff as well, then I can't, and no matter how many levels you give me there will be people with abilities that are not available with matching fluff.

You've not made any convincing point that anyone is higher than 6th level, all you've shown is that fluff+mechanics isn't flexible enough to match reality.