At level 1? 20. Obviously.
That's no monk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Realistically, probably a 14 at most. Fantastically, whatever you want it to be, though I do really like 5E's idea of limiting all stats to 20.
Whatever the player wants their strength to be if they're willing to pay for it in a point-buy system.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say a 12 or a 14.
Honestly, it will be hard to find yourself a picture of a fantasy girl with sufficient muscles to back up her weapon/s.
Like just look at her, she seems to be using some kind of crazy claymore made of light and she doesn't even have biceps or any kind of lower arm muscle. Only her hands even seem to have any musculature behind them and that is most likely the glove texture. Her abs are covered by that weird corset thing so we can't tell if there are any muscles there but I suspect that is as smooth and flat as the rest of her.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
20 max, just like any other human being. There is no correlation between appearance and attributes whatsoever.
If she was a commoner I'd say 10 since there is no apparent muscularity. However PCs are Heroic and their abilities are generally supernatural. This goes especially for monks since they have all sorts of bonuses that are essentially mystical.
So she could be a 20 for all we know.
Whatever you want?
I've never understood this trend of people finding some random picture somebody drew on DeviantArt and then going "I must make a character who fits EVERYTHING about this random drawing someone made. No deviation! Must be identical!".
Right, but the thing is that TC asked about how much Strength she would have BASED upon her appearance.
Sure, she can have 20 if he wants because PCs are awesome but TC wants a strength score similar to his picture.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah she doesn't look like a strength-based character at all, or even a dex-based character (agility still requires muscles, just differently shaped and structured than strength). She looks like a charisma-based spellcaster with dumped strength and no more than 14 Dex.
Based on appearance? 20 Strength. Looks like she dropped Charisma and Int as dump stats to fuel a pre-racial bonus of 18. Look at those dead eyes <shudder>. Dex? Low. Doesn't even look like she's very agile. Just standing there ready to take a sword slash to the gut. Con? Forget about it.
First off: SKRONK!
Second: People on DeviantArt are stupid, why bother pointing it out for this specific case?
Well, if you want some female monks that a pretty buff:
There you go.
Links
http://ninjacrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/5/9/16.jpg
http://d3.gameguyz.com/sites/default/files/pictures/1359610026_3.jpg
The D3 monks is pretty baller.
Id go to that at 14 like the few reasonable people before me, even 12 seeing how you can't see much muscle at work.
Then theres the issue that a martial artists strength is not just that of her muscles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the player that chose Ultimate Warrior as their pic base doesn't ramble like a maniac, I riot.
If you want to be cute, you could just say that when that picture was taken, she had just been hit by a Ray of Enfeeblement.
Id go to that at 14 like the few reasonable people before me, even 12 seeing how you can't see much muscle at work.
Then theres the issue that a martial artists strength is not just that of her muscles.
Oh Absolutely, it is largely about knowing how to strike rather than just how hard you strike. The difference between moving before striking and properly translating your momentum vs not is impossible to describe until you have done it yourself. Then there is also how you strike and working with leverage and...
Well, the point is that Strength isn't the END ALL BE ALL for real life martial artists that Pathfinder makes it. Therefore, I'd give some allowances in body size and musculature because a lot of what makes a martial artist is training on HOW to strike not just how hard you strike. That could give you a "higher strength score" than your body might seem to indicate.
Well, if you want some female monks that a pretty buff:
There you go.
Links
** spoiler omitted **The D3 monks is pretty baller.
Dat muscle tone.
I know right? Well drawn muscle tone is hard to draw so those all look awesome.
I'm still not sure why the character has to look exactly like the drawing. Can't you just say, "Like that, but with more muscle tone."
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Korra is a pretty good female monk that doesn't look like a stick. Actual muscle tone, realistic proportions, etc.
If 10 is a person with average ...Average for a medieval peasant. Not average for a modern human being.
Not really. It's a fantasy anachronistic peasant. They're about the same as a modern person.
Peasants are also 'hella' buff.
Like seriously, they work a field all day for their entire lives, the muscles on these people are not something you should joke about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The average medieval peasant had things pretty easy. Hollywood makes being a peasant sounds worse than it really was. The main difference between us and them was nutrition, which we take for granted because all of our foods are vitamin fortified.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're right man, day laborers are living the easy life.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Day laborers have little in common with the historical medieval peasant.
Going by the picture I say 7 or 8. No muscle tone even though she is a really small girl.
BVut the real answer is whatever you want.
It depends, how tall is she? There isn't anything in the picture to compare her to.
My Pathfinder group loves to find pictures for character. But sometimes I feel they are out of whack with art and reality. What do you think the strength of this character would be assuming she was NORMAL human monk without any enhancements to strength? what would be the max strength you think would fit in that form assuming no augmentations.
http://mariowibisono.deviantart.com/art/Salvation-104167819
Thanks for your time guys!
She is skinny, holding up her arms, and i see no muscles draw on her at all.
I would give her a 10, 12 tops... although i could see her being a lot lower than that, due to the way she is drawn.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There i an easy way to figure this out.
1) Find a girl in real life with a similar build.
2) do some general timing of her walking around doing stuff
3) load her up with a backpack with 35 pounds in it and have her repeat the timed actions. If her time increases by 50% or more her str is 10 or less
4) if not repeat the process with 45 pounds, and compare to the unencumbered time results.
5) scrap all data, because you aren't sure if modern backpacks count as regular or masterwork backpack
Seriously, its up to your group if characters looks should match their stats. Some groups will take issue with a waiflike girl having a high strength, it breaks immersion. Others will think it's really cool and fun. If they can't come to a consensus, then there is only one solution... THUNDERDOME!
I'm going to join the chorus of folks saying "below-average." When I think of high strength, I think of things like the images posted by ShroudedinLight (especially that second one) and Umbral Reaver. The character in the OP is... outside of that range for me. In fact, I'd have a hard time buying that character as anything but a caster of some kind, although, I feel conditioned to buy a dex based build too for some reason.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is part of the reason I liked the Tri-stat system. There is a score that is noted as "Maximum humanly possible" -- and then it notes that what the "maximum humanly possible" is a very nebulous concept since at one point a sub X minute mile was considered past "Maximum humanly possible" and now we have plenty of people that can run that.
Considering we can easily have someone with a strength over 30 by level 5 at the latest I would argue for a much more... bent curve than the old average of "3 ~ 18 with 7~14 being the first 68%".
There is a category mistake being made here. The crunch is not there to describe the fluff. "STR 18" is not a description of appearance, nor is a description of past nutrition, training exercise and so on.
What it implies is stuff like +4 to hit and damage in melee.
RPG rules are not theories of nature.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
8 str and 8 con. Unless there's some supernatural power, she has no muscle mass and really looks like she could use a cheeseburger. She's not moving a couch across a room without considerable effort, forget about lifting her own weight over her head.
Looks alone would be 14 cha, only lower if she's socially inept or has 'issues' dealing with people. She'd probably get more than one free drink at a pub before she opened her mouth.
You can't tell Wis and Int by looking. You also actually can't tell Dex by looking, since even someone of apparent grace can still be a total butterfinger, and even a muscular person in heavy armor can have surprising reflexes and sense of self-position.
You also can't tell Con above 10, since there's no way to really tell the difference between 'healthy' and 'vibrantly resilient'. If she didn't look almost bulemic I'd cut her the 10.
If you're going by japanese RPG standards or teen-boy standards, she's straight 18-20's across the board with an AC of 20+.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So I heard you like female STR-based characters who didn't dump CHA?
Note that if we go with "STR is a linear function of muscle mass" I won't give her more than 16. Unless we count steroids & Co. as alchemical bonus, which might bump her to 18 or even 20.