The absolute human minimum is a person who suffer of idiocy.
Using incredibly antiquated and now offensive medical terminology is not helping your case.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The absolute human minimum is a person who suffer of idiocy.Using incredibly antiquated and now offensive medical terminology is not helping your case.
Idiocy was a medical term without connotations, other than describing people with a certain medical dissability: IQ below 30. It was the use as a pejorative term by the common people what made it an offensive word. The medical terminology that substituted it (retarded), now is also offensive due to the pejorative overuse, and thus has been changed to Intelectually Disabled. Which will be found offensive in 20 or 30 years and changed again, because people will start to use it in a pejorative way regardless. So it's not the word what is offensive, but the way people use it.
Anyways, the case is a character with INT 3 has the minimum human intelligence, which is about IQ 30. If you find "idiot" to be offensive, call him "severe mentally retarded". A character with INT 4 is slightly above that (IQ about 40). Forrest Gump had IQ 70+, so he had much more than INT 4.
All you have to do is remember how awesome you are. If only remembering things weren't so dang difficult!
As i have repeatedly established what 7 int and wis is, does anyone who donst want to have a useless and pointless argument that derails the dissction have any other ideas for roleplay and how to flesh out the character?
In PAthfinder, INT 7 is the average Harpy and average Orc. WIS 5 is the average Derro. I suggest to use those as a starting point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think 7 int/wis means you are the stereo-typical blonde from a slasher movie. Everyone loves you, but your complete lack of common sense and lack of intelligence generally means you will be the first to die, without help of the party. Luckily, your personality makes them all want to help you!
When danger appears downstairs, you run up stairs, not out the back door. When the slasher phones you, instead of calling the police, you hide under the bed. You don't learn from your mistakes, so if you do something foolish once, you will do it again, 3 or more times, until it sinks in.
In terms of RP, never be the one who remembers the conversation that happened three days ago. Never be the one who designs the battle tactics. You can lead, you are a natural leader, just don't come up with the genius ambush plan.
You dont notice much. so when the GM calls for perception checks, go ahead and roll, but don't be the one asking "did I notice...".
Develop a background, and follow it. You have very low impulse control. Follow your background You may want to write up a list of things that scare you, and a list of shiny things that attract you. On occasion, remember to ignore the possibility of traps, or the importance of group cohesion. When a shiny thing is in front of you, go for it! you want it and you have no will power! When a spider lands on your shoulder, run away! Freakin' things scare you and freak you out!
|
Black Knight: I'm 'old school' in terms of playing AD&D in the seventies. I remember first getting the DMG and reading it from front to back when I was supposed to be sleeping. The 'Int x 10 = IQ' thing was around, but Gary Gygax warned us not to think of the game stat of Intelligence to be tied to IQ.
The statistics of the bell curve I used was for a simple 3d6. This is supposed to represent the 'norm' of any stat spread amongst the population. The 3d6 range of the dice gives us different proportions of the 216 possibilities for each of the 16 possible results: one 18 and one 3, three 17s and three 4s, etc. This is most definitely not the same spread of IQ scores! There are many, many fewer people with an IQ of 30 (or 180) than there are people with a D&D/Pathfinder Intelligence score of 3 (or 18). The idea that a character with an Intelligence score of 7 therefore has an IQ of 70 is a fallacy, even if it is a common fallacy.
The other thing which sticks out as just plain wrong is the idea that our mental hospitals are full of people who were born with low Int and/or Wis. That's not the case at all! There may be a handful, comparatively, but the vast majority have had something go wrong with either their brain (injury, disease, a condition or chemical imbalance) or their mind (trauma of the mental variety, mental breakdown etc), not that they were born simply with low wisdom, charisma or intelligence!
So play your Int 7, Wis 5, Cha 20 Summoner, not as mentally ill, but as 'refreshingly uncomplicated'! Focussed on the things that matter to her! Mood swings because they're a bit ADD. They were probably voted the class member least likely to finish a coherent...er...
Depending on what character I was playing, that would be a hoot to have in the party.
Skivven (Ratfolk Alchemist): "Oi, thinks that lass is a wee bit soft o' the head"
Taz (Half Orc Barb/Fighter): "She funny. She pretty. Me forget what Taz talking about."
Gauntlet (Waforged BP/UF): *turns head* ....*looks at Blondie. Facepalms*
The Path (Warforged Paladin): "Forsooth! The wench is mad and touched! Stand behind me while I defend you from these vile creatures!* (A Paladin that's a ham? Where? :P)
Int 7, Wis 5, Cha 20... This to me suggests a guy who is on the surface a shining beacon of hope or terror (depending on how he presents himself and skills purchased). But a lot of it's on a superficial level, when you get to know him better, you realize he's not entirely playing with a full deck.
For example, take a high-society wannabe. He has this great smile that makes people flock to his banner (perhaps justifying the Leadership feat in a 'we can follow this guy and steer him to our whims' sorta thing) and can use really big words to razzle dazzle people (if you put your few skill points into Bluff or Diplomacy), but often uses said words in the wrong context and even the wrong definitions (see the Three Stooges in all their high class situations).
I'd also play the character as infinitely suggestible (he'll succumb to outside forces often with that low Will save). Perhaps moody and flighty, prone to believing others will tell him (as you mentioned, overly trusting). This will probably necessitate relying on the other PCs to help direct him (and thus, give an excuse for adventuring with the group- since you can't leave this guy alone or he might get into trouble). If he has ranks in Intimidate, this instability might make him all the more scary ('this guy's crazy, man, he'll do anything his bosses tell him!')
In your fetchling example, service to the Master might be one outstanding example of his suggestibility. Your concepts and speeches don't necessarily have to be simple (indeed, this is often an overplayed gimmick) but may be ridden with misapplications and misunderstandings. If you are going with the "seek advice from the horse" gimmick, you may go with a Caligula-esque attachment "my animal should be in the Senate" sort of delusion. The day-dreaming aspect you mention in your description is a good reason for how he misses details, and usually isn't too disruptive to gameplay (and may be a good way for your gm to hook you with adventures).
Depending upon the group's composition, the fetchling's master may insist he accompany them b/c the Master might want other, more intelligent beings to keep an eye on him.
A Wisdom of 5, even in a race without a wisdom penalty, is no more remarkable than a wisdom of 16.
Assuming the bell graph of 3d6 represents how the different abilities are spread around the population (and that's what the game does), then a score of either 4 or lower, or 17 or higher, exists in one in 54 stats. Each person has six stats, so one in every nine people has a stat of 4 or less, and one in nine people has a stat of 17 or more. The numbers are magnified for scores of 5 or 16.
How many people do you know? More than nine?
Stats of 5 do not require medical supervision.
If you want a correlation to a score of 20, then that is a score of 1! Now that person would need medical supervision!
Except that it is not 3d6. It's 4 d6 drop 1. That makes a 5 a lot less likely than a 16.
4d6 is standard if you roll.
Thus your bell curve is wrong.
4d6 is standard for PC's, not NPC's. The basic NPC array of 8/9/10/11/12/13 is meant to simulate typical results of a 3d6 roll.
|
|
A Wisdom of 5, even in a race without a wisdom penalty, is no more remarkable than a wisdom of 16.
Assuming the bell graph of 3d6 represents how the different abilities are spread around the population (and that's what the game does), then a score of either 4 or lower, or 17 or higher, exists in one in 54 stats. Each person has six stats, so one in every nine people has a stat of 4 or less, and one in nine people has a stat of 17 or more. The numbers are magnified for scores of 5 or 16.
How many people do you know? More than nine?
Stats of 5 do not require medical supervision.
If you want a correlation to a score of 20, then that is a score of 1! Now that person would need medical supervision!
Except that it is not 3d6. It's 4 d6 drop 1. That makes a 5 a lot less likely than a 16.
4d6 is standard if you roll.
Thus your bell curve is wrong.
I'm not sure if your joking with me or not... : /
PCs are meant to be 'better' than the mass of the population. The 'mass' rolls 3d6. PCs roll 4d6 drop one, or 2d6+6, or whatever.
Are you seriously suggesting that, if an adventurer has 13 Int (average on 2d6+6) that therefore he has 'average' intelligence, the same as one of the masses with an intelligence of 10 (and a half)?
When we judge what 'average' intelligence is, or low (like a 7), or high (like a 14), we judge it, and what a person with that intelligence can do, on the absolute scale relative to the mass of humanity. A 7 Int is a 7 Int no matter how the stats are rolled.
The 3d6 bell curve is the correct one for understanding how the different scores are spread around humanity, and also what each score means as an absolute, irrespective of advantageous game mechanics used to generate good scores.
4d6 is standard for PC's, not NPC's. The basic NPC array of 8/9/10/11/12/13 is meant to simulate typical results of a 3d6 roll.
And I assume that the Op's character is a PC, not a NPC.
Even so, note the lack of any numbers less than 8 in that array.
I kinda need to flesh out a personalty...
Any ideas would help
Including Common phrases
how he would act in situations,
and anything else you may find useful
My DM views 7int as the "dumb jocks, straight D student" type people...
While 14 int is straight A Honor student.
thanks for your Smurfin time :)
Black Lotus
Heh this is one of those topics that has gone around for decades now.
Lets see:
I'd say (for all the attributes in question), the number alone isn't quite enough, but the tier. So a 1 is the lowest tier, and not being dead, 2-3 is tier 2, 4-5 is tier 3, etc etc. So in this sense, having a five isn't much better than having a 4. And having a 7 isn't really much difference from having a 6.
If we use 10-11 as the 'mean' or average (arguments if this is valid or not), a 7 is 2 steps down from the norm. A 5 is 3 steps down. In a modern sense, you'd definitely have difficulty learning tasks, the simpler the better. In game sense, you're killing your ability to learn Skills with a capital S, since you end up with around 1 pt per level? Even with class skills, you're not likely to have much success with any INT related ones.
Having a Wis 5 is also difficult. By description, it implies your willpower, common sense, awareness and intuition are very under-developed compared to the norm. You're more likely to be influenced by whatever other people tell you to do, assuming you can understand them. Your common sense is also underdeveloped, leading you to dangerous, impulsive actions. You may have 'normal' senses in a physical sense, but your interpretation of stimuli is also impaired. If this were a modern situation, I'd say someone with this level of Wis would require supervision crossing the street, as a cue of "Car Horn" may not trigger a "I might be in danger" response, and like a Deer caught in headlights...well...potential tragedy.
On the other hand, that huge CHA score could mean "Inner glow". You may be attractive, and for whatever reason, people may find you endearing. People find you attractive in the sense that we find Babies attractive. That, combined with your disabilities can incline people to helping you out, but because of your underdeveloped mental faculties, you can't manipulate people beyond the basic level. As reflected by your likely dismal SKILL ratings, you lack the means to fully explore skills beyond untrained use.
Your needs and wants are simple, much like a child. You're thinking lower on the tiers of Maslows hierarchy of needs. Physiological and maaybe Safety. The danger being that you may lack the understanding on why its not socially appropriate to just try and fulfill those needs at will.
Hm, in some respects I'm reminded of some of the Special Needs population I've worked with, aside from the 20 CHA part.
And I assume that the Op's character is a PC, not a NPC.
So your argument is now that a PC with 7 INT is stupider than an NPC with 7 INT?
Evangelist.
A question that my group had a hard time answering that I'd open to debate--
What would you say a 14+ Wis 8 Int character would act like?
A question that my group had a hard time answering that I'd open to debate--
What would you say a 14+ Wis 8 Int character would act like?
This one's not too difficult. Int wise he's not much lower than average, so his ability to learn/reason isn't significantly impaired. He's a bit slower and potentially more rigid in his worldview just cause the inspiration of 'other options' doesn't really pop up as much as it does for 'brighter' people. Reflected in actual skill purchases, this could also be seen in 'decides to focus on a few things' and lacks a rounded development. Decreased learning could be reflective of 'poor memory'.
His Wis is about 2 Steps better than average, so decent common sense, initiative, etc. He may perceive human behavior better, even notice things, but may lack the ability to articulate what he's noticing. He is likely also 'bright enough' in terms of common sense and intuition to know that he's slightly deficient in intelligence and that it could lead to embarrassment if he's not careful. I could easily see this guy as the 'wise enough to know to keep his mouth shut' oh and for willpower, 'strong enough in character to not take his lesser intellect as a crushing handicap'.
|
And I assume that the Op's character is a PC, not a NPC.So your argument is now that a PC with 7 INT is stupider than an NPC with 7 INT?
No, they just stand out more. You see a dumb person in a job that normally requires lots of intelligence or attracts intelligent people, you are more likely to notice how dumb that person is.
Malachai, I agree with your take on IQ. The range of Int scores is superficially similar to IQ, but statistically it's a different spread. An Int 7 is in the bottom 16% before applying racial modifiers, which translates to an IQ of roughly 85. That's dumb, but not in itself dumb enough to need constant supervision.
What really concerns me is the combination of Int 7 (a little dim) with Wis 5 (quite loopy). Wis 5 is as you said the bottom 5% of the population. That translates to a "Wisdom Quotient" of 75, which is dangerously close to the level at which your lack of smarts is considered a legal disability. Someone with little logic and even less common sense is going to have serious problems, especially in the demanding job that is adventuring. If you are going to RP this character, be prepared to RP those problems.
Also important to note: yes, mental illness has a strong environmental component, but it is also in some cases tightly linked to genetics or prenatal environment - being born with a strong predisposition to mental illness, which will almost certainly manifest under stressful conditions. Like, for example, being told to go on harrowing adventures by your master, a dragon.
I really like Dreaming Psion's Caligula idea. Your horse should definitely run for office. After all, it's smarter than you, and look what a good leader you are!
And I assume that the Op's character is a PC, not a NPC.So your argument is now that a PC with 7 INT is stupider than an NPC with 7 INT?
Well, there are (other than racial modifiers) no NPC with a 7 int, if you go by the rules. And if you go by the STANDARD rules for rolling PC's, then a 7 is quite rare, and a 5 (putting racial modifiers aside) is very very rare. 4D6 drop one does tend to weed out the low rolls.
Next, the class of what we're comparing him too is other PC's, not other NPCs. Weirdo is correct.
|
|
An Int of 7 is the same as any other Int of 7, no matter if the creature is a PC or NPC, human or ogre, dragon or mind flayer, intelligent sword or awakened animal.
If you want to know how smart something is you look at it's intelligence score. You don't need to ask how these stats were rolled!
Being less intelligent than an average PC in no way determines what you are capable of mentally. If the average PC has an average score of 13 and an average commoner has an average score of 10, are you really telling me that a PC with 12 Int is not as smart as a commoner with 11 Int? The PC is below average for PCs, and the commoner is above average for commoners, so who is smarter?
Go on! I dare you!
An Int of 7 is the same as any other Int of 7, no matter if the creature is a PC or NPC, human or ogre, dragon or mind flayer, intelligent sword or awakened animal.
I
Being less intelligent than an average PC in no way determines what you are capable of mentally. If the average PC has an average score of 13 and an average commoner has an average score of 10, are you really telling me that a PC with 12 Int is not as smart as a commoner with 11 Int? The PC is below average for PCs, and the commoner is above average for commoners, so who is smarter?
Yes, indeed a 7 is a 7. But that's not what is being argued here*. What is being argued is how common a 5 is and also how common a 5 is compared to a 16.
The standard NPC doesn't have a 7 or a 5, can't have a 7 or a 5 (racial modifiers aside). The lowest that occurs is a 8.
On a PC, a 5 is far less common than a 16. This is due to the Standard 4d6 drop 1 getting higher results than 3d6.
*[quote=] Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
"A Wisdom of 5, even in a race without a wisdom penalty, is no more remarkable than a wisdom of 16.
Assuming the bell graph of 3d6 represents how the different abilities are spread around the population (and that's what the game does), then a score of either 4 or lower, or 17 or higher, exists in one in 54 stats. Each person has six stats, so one in every nine people has a stat of 4 or less, and one in nine people has a stat of 17 or more. The numbers are magnified for scores of 5 or 16.
"
No one has a "bell graph" of 3d6 in any "standard" system. NPC's have a standard set array of 8/9/10/11/12/13 and PC get 4d6.
Thus - in either STANDARD system, 5 & 7's are very rare.
how come people keep saying racial modifiers aside, when the 5 is because of racial modifiers...
.
True, but that still makes it TWO 7's.
By PF standards he's a drooling fool, not even able to keep the job of Village idiot.
|
|
how come people keep saying racial modifiers aside, when the 5 is because of racial modifiers...
seems... unlogical.
We're ignoring the racial modifiers because we're trying to get an accurate picture of this character's abilities compared to the average human. Doesn't matter how he got the 5, that 5 means the same thing in terms of his mental abilities.
Since the NPC arrays exist to save the DM the trouble of generating unique scores, I don't think we can use that as evidence that NPC stats don't go below 8. After all, the NPC heroic array caps at 15 - does that mean that only PCs even get a chance at an 18? So I think it's correct to use 3d6 as the stat distribution for the average person.
DrDeth, I'm not saying that we should compare the character to adventurers instead of the abilities of the average person. I'm saying we need to look at both.
When comparing Int 7 Wis 5 to the average person, we see that they are dumb. Maybe not dumb enough to need constant supervision, but someone who learns slowly, cannot understand complex concepts, has dismal self-control and awareness of their surroundings, and will likely under stress become depressed, delusional, or obsessive to the point of having what in the modern day we would call mental illness. That is what Int 7 Wis 5 means in absolute terms.
Now you put this person in an adventurer's guild, where everyone is above average in most respects and even those who weren't selected for their brains at least have enough common sense and self control not to pick up the shiny and probably trapped statue in the dungeon. Heroic stats mean there's only a 6% chance of randomly rolling a 7 or lower in Int, and only a 1% chance of rolling a 5 or lower in Wis. As for racial modifiers, no core race has a Wis penalty and for all races the net Wis modifier is +8. It's the second most racially boosted stat after Dex. And as someone previously mentioned, many people are hesitant to dump Wis due to the Perception penalty and Will saves - low Wis can be fatal. For these reasons, low Wisdom is very unlikely among adventurers
Adventurers might value the fetchling's contributions, but they are certainly going to supervise him. He's able to function in normal society with some difficulty, but the adventuring life is high stress and high stakes. Since he is so unwise compared to the normal range for adventurers, his companions will be worried that he'll get them killed. His fanatical devotion to the Umbral dragon will only increase others' tendency to see him as somewhat unstable. With his high charisma he's likely to find himself in the role of the lovable team pet.
|
I am astonished that people think a 7 in WIS (or even a 5) will be a crushing disability comes Will save's time.
A 7 in wisdom gives a penalty of 2 compared to the average 10.
A Sorcerer (or a Summoner) starts with a base Will save of 2, compared to the base Will save of 0 for a Fighter.
In other words, a Summoner with WIS 7 has the same starting Will save as a Fighter with WIS 10. And his Will save will keep on improving over the Fighter's, to a +4 in favor of the WIS 7 Summoner at level 20.
Not that much of an issue really.
|
I am astonished that people think a 7 in WIS (or even a 5) will be a crushing disability comes Will save's time.
A 7 in wisdom gives a penalty of 2 compared to the average 10.
A Sorcerer (or a Summoner) starts with a base Will save of 2, compared to the base Will save of 0 for a Fighter.
In other words, a Summoner with WIS 7 has the same starting Will save as a Fighter with WIS 10. And his Will save will keep on improving over the Fighter's, to a +4 in favor of the WIS 7 Summoner at level 20.
Not that much of an issue really.
Then whats the difference between 10 Con and 14 Con? Its just 2 hit points.
Losing 2 (or in this case 3) on your Will save is the equivalent of losing a feat. Can you stand to just lose a feat at level 1?
Not to mention who wants to adventure with a guy that is going to fall unconcious once a month in the middle of combat for a "battle nap" due to stat drain?
Penny from "The Big Bang Theory" is how I'd play that character.Penny has way too much common sense to have a Wisdom score that low.
Not when it comes to the men she dates/has dated in the past!
|
|
Ariel's more ignorant than stupid, even if that deal with the sea-witch did show remarkably poor judgement.
I am astonished that people think a 7 in WIS (or even a 5) will be a crushing disability comes Will save's time.
A 7 in wisdom gives a penalty of 2 compared to the average 10.
A Sorcerer (or a Summoner) starts with a base Will save of 2, compared to the base Will save of 0 for a Fighter.
In other words, a Summoner with WIS 7 has the same starting Will save as a Fighter with WIS 10. And his Will save will keep on improving over the Fighter's, to a +4 in favor of the WIS 7 Summoner at level 20.
Not that much of an issue really.
For every save that succeeds on any less than a 20 or fails on a higher roll than 1, that -3 Wis penalty gives a 15% chance of failure compared to the same character with Wis 10. Same for Perception checks and other less important Wis-based rolls. It's doesn't turn Will saves into a near auto-fail as it would for a character with a poor base save, but it's significant. Not to mention the liability imposed by proper roleplay of the character's bad decisions, if he's unsupervised.
Our OP has consulted James Jacobs on this very question.
James was most concerned about the 5 WIS, he sez that's pretty crippling in PF.
Yeah, with a 5 WIS, you've got what...the will of a wet noodle? For a Fetching that's already sorta a sycophant type character, he's almost so lacking in Will, that he's...well...almost like an NPC. Anyone tells him to do something, and he's likely to do it (to the best of his limited comprehension).