| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm the only person here that thinks measuring "Intelligence" is futile.
Part of the reason it bothers me so much is because it's ill defined. There are three things I have seen that are often attributed to being Intelligence.
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.
You know, each such eculubration is killed by a simple concept: Pathfinder (like many -or all- other games) is not a reality simulator, it is just a game that uses some mechanic standards made arbitrary so that it can be played. No need to spend sleepless nights thinking of how accurately realistic one such mechanic is, as long as it does its work in the game.
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.
I beg to differ.
Strength is not just how much you can lift over your head or how hard you can swing. Some people appear stronger than they are because they understand leverage. Some people, myself for example, can't bench press much but I can work out with 450# on the triceps pull down. Being overweight has given my triceps and my legs more strength. What should me strength score be?
Dexterity is also not really something that can be easily quantified. I know people with cat-like reflexes who can balance on thin wires and always land on their feet. I know people who can catch almost anything thrown their way. I know people who can shoot exceptionally well. I know very few who can do all of those things. Then there's the whole "going before others" reaction speed. I qualified expert with every weapon I handled in the Army the first time I handled any of them. I rarely go first in a fight.
None of the stats are meant to be all-encompassing. They are intentionally meant to be vague. It gives the GM more leeway while still maintaining structure.
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.
I think that ALL abilities are vague.
Luckily we know how we should use each ability score for experience achieving activities.
One of the reasons strenght or dextarity don't seem as vague is because they are more directly linked to experience achieving activities.
A fighter can literary measure out exactly how useful these stats have been in each combat encounter.
|
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.I beg to differ.
Strength is not just how much you can lift over your head or how hard you can swing. Some people appear stronger than they are because they understand leverage. Some people, myself for example, can't bench press much but I can work out with 450# on the triceps pull down.
Tell me how much weight you're doing with your skullcrushers and tricep extensions (free weights). And, how many dips can you do? That would give me a better idea. Machine pulldowns? Not so much. They just mean you can use a pulley to move weight. Triceps are a pretty big part of a benchpress, actually.
Sorry, that was just a bad example, dude.
Ability to Reason - My problem with this is that Wisdom is also used to reason. Also, is there really a way to measure reason?
Well for one, Wisdom is more about intuition and reason is not intuitive. So, no, Wisdom is not used for reason. Secondly, yeah an IQ test. That's all it is, really, testing your ability to reason through spatial logic puzzles, analogies, and the like.
Or did you mean in the game?
I know people with cat-like reflexes who can balance on thin wires and always land on their feet. I know people who can catch almost anything thrown their way. I know people who can shoot exceptionally well. I know very few who can do all of those things.
One has to distinguish between talent and skill; a dexterity ability score represents inborn talent while skills can be learned and improved through practice. A character being able to balance on a wire is a combination of talent (Dex) and practice (skill ranks). Likewise, being able to shoot really well is a combination of talent (Dex) and practice (BAB). The reason the people you know differ in their abilities is because they put their build points into different things. ;)
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.I beg to differ.
Strength is not just how much you can lift over your head or how hard you can swing. Some people appear stronger than they are because they understand leverage. Some people, myself for example, can't bench press much but I can work out with 450# on the triceps pull down.
Tell me how much weight you're doing with your skullcrushers and tricep extensions (free weights). And, how many dips can you do? That would give me a better idea. Machine pulldowns? Not so much. They just mean you can use a pulley to move weight. Triceps are a pretty big part of a benchpress, actually.
Sorry, that was just a bad example, dude.
It's been a long time since I've been to the gym. When I was trying to lose weight, I was benching about 125# (barely). I could do all of 5 push ups, girlie style. As for dips, I can dip but not get back up. Moving heavy weights with pulleys is the same as moving heavy weights without pulleys as long as the machine takes it into account. If the designer of the machine takes the ratios into account, it can be equivalent.
In any case, strength is more than just how hard you can hit someone or how much gear you can carry. It encompasses a lot.
I know people with cat-like reflexes who can balance on thin wires and always land on their feet. I know people who can catch almost anything thrown their way. I know people who can shoot exceptionally well. I know very few who can do all of those things.One has to distinguish between talent and skill; a dexterity ability score represents inborn talent while skills can be learned and improved through practice. A character being able to balance on a wire is a combination of talent (Dex) and practice (skill ranks). Likewise, being able to shoot really well is a combination of talent (Dex) and practice (BAB). The reason the people you know differ in their abilities is because they put their build points into different things. ;)
Every one of those skills can be used untrained, which is why I picked them.
|
|
I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.I beg to differ.
Strength is not just how much you can lift over your head or how hard you can swing. Some people appear stronger than they are because they understand leverage. Some people, myself for example, can't bench press much but I can work out with 450# on the triceps pull down.
Tell me how much weight you're doing with your skullcrushers and tricep extensions (free weights). And, how many dips can you do? That would give me a better idea. Machine pulldowns? Not so much. They just mean you can use a pulley to move weight. Triceps are a pretty big part of a benchpress, actually.
Sorry, that was just a bad example, dude.
It's been a long time since I've been to the gym. When I was trying to lose weight, I was benching about 125# (barely). I could do all of 5 push ups, girlie style. As for dips, I can dip but not get back up. Moving heavy weights with pulleys is the same as moving heavy weights without pulleys as long as the machine takes it into account. If the designer of the machine takes the ratios into account, it can be equivalent.
In any case, strength is more than just how hard you can hit someone or how much gear you can carry. It encompasses a lot.
Dude, if you couldn't do one dip, you couldn't move 450 pounds without a lot of mechanical assistance. Unless you weighed well over 450 pounds. And I mean well over. Pushing weight with your tris is pushing weight with your tris. Again, bad example.
Every one of those skills can be used untrained, which is why I picked them.
True. But if your friends are good at tightrope walking or marksmanship it's more likely to be because they practice those particular skills rather than being due to their inherent Dexterity.
just so you know, you're not the only one having problems with defining intelligence.
Psychologie normally has a few subcategories like fluid intelligence (the one I like the most) or crystalline intelligence.
Also the IQ most people use means only the average to the people of that time, the average person from the middle ages or inner sea or whatever will probably not have an IQ of 100 (if you take our scale with 100 as average).
so I completly agree, all discussion about character intelligence score in relation to any other intelligence is futile.
Every one of those skills can be used untrained, which is why I picked them.True. But if your friends are good at tightrope walking or marksmanship it's more likely to be because they practice those particular skills rather than being due to their inherent Dexterity.
I was the marksman. I had never held a firearm before in my life. It just came naturally to me. I can't stay balanced on a beam. I don't have great reflexes. I can shoot and I can shoot well.
My point is that none of the attributes are meant to be 100% accurate or all encompassing. They cover a wide range of things and there is probably some spill over. That's perfectly fine and the way it is meant to be. It gives the players and GMs freedom within some guidelines.
Dude, if you couldn't do one dip, you couldn't move 450 pounds without a lot of mechanical assistance. Unless you weighed well over 450 pounds. And I mean well over. Pushing weight with your tris is pushing weight with your tris. Again, bad example.I understand it's use as an attribute, and I'm not asking Pathfinder to rehaul their entire system; I'd just like to point out that's it's a lot more vague than something like Strength or Dexterity.I beg to differ.
Strength is not just how much you can lift over your head or how hard you can swing. Some people appear stronger than they are because they understand leverage. Some people, myself for example, can't bench press much but I can work out with 450# on the triceps pull down.
Tell me how much weight you're doing with your skullcrushers and tricep extensions (free weights). And, how many dips can you do? That would give me a better idea. Machine pulldowns? Not so much. They just mean you can use a pulley to move weight. Triceps are a pretty big part of a benchpress, actually.
Sorry, that was just a bad example, dude.
It's been a long time since I've been to the gym. When I was trying to lose weight, I was benching about 125# (barely). I could do all of 5 push ups, girlie style. As for dips, I can dip but not get back up. Moving heavy weights with pulleys is the same as moving heavy weights without pulleys as long as the machine takes it into account. If the designer of the machine takes the ratios into account, it can be equivalent.
In any case, strength is more than just how hard you can hit someone or how much gear you can carry. It encompasses a lot.
From personal experience (since this was all my experience, and I was/am still morbidly obese at 375#), I know that you are mistaken. Since this was me having to do all these exercises. It doesn't really matter though. We can argue this until the world ends and it won't change a thing.
What's important is that Strength is not simply how hard you can hit something or how much weight you can carry. The attribute is not meant to be 100% accurate in gauging how strong someone is. It is a rough number that is meant to give the player and GM some guidelines on what to expect from their characters but not to be all encompassing.
