"Some folks call it a Sling Blade, I call it a Kaiser Blade."
I reckon' that's about a 7 int.
That seems more like a 5 to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that isn't how averages work. George should have reviewed measures of central tendency. :P"Consider just how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!"
~ George Carlin
"Consider just how stupid the median person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!"
Much funnier.
Pick a couple of things that seem less than smart and stick to your guns when roll playing them. I've played a dumb character that was impatient to a fault and didn't always think his actions through before committing to them. Being blindly devoted to something, having poor self control, having a bad temper, being overly gullible, not being able to read or not being able to speak common as well as the other characters are all also easy ways to convey dumbness.
It depends on the character, for me, as well as the other mental statistics the character possesses.
If I have a character with low Intelligence but above-average Wisdom and Charisma, then that means while he's not overly bright he also is not going to put his foot in his mouth all that often.
He just needs to work a little harder at coming up with a solution that the "average" person might grasp more instantly.
A combination of low mental scores is where things get interesting. I have an 8 Intelligence character that I play as "dumber" than my 7 Intelligence Fighter, if only because he also has a low Wisdom as well; his "dumbness" is mostly reflected in being overly trusting of everyone and everything. He has a high Charisma, however, so he remains positive, cheerful, and upbeat even when he suspects he might've been taken advantage of.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
It's remarkable how little people are interested in referencing the rules of the game when trying to determine the meaning of a game mechanic.
Fully one-third of the entire naga race has an INT of 7 or lower. They are functional people, able to have a society and everything.
If your idea of 7 INT doesn't allow a race like that to exist, you're just wrong. (At least, for Pathfinder. If you're talking about other systems, then I have no comment.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Int 7 is the dumbest guy you know that isn't actually disabled/impaired. It may take you some time to realize that the Int 7 guy is actually pretty stupid - it's not always immediately obvious. (Like, he'll actually know his stuff if you're dealing with his field of expertise, and then may just be wildly and stubbornly wrong once you're outside of his field of expertise.)
(Lenny from Of Mice and Men, Forrest Gump, and the Sling Blade guy I would all put below a 7 -- they all have something obviously wrong with them. The actual Int 7 dude doesn't.)
"Consider just how stupid the median person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!"
Much funnier.
Touche.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
4 & 5 are mentally challenged for a human. A real special ed. Perhaps momma dropped themon thier heads.
6-9 is below average but not needing a helmet and special care.
"Mother dropped them on their head" "need to wear a special helmet". These kinds of attitudes towards learning disabilities are disgusting.
I'm always really wary of threads discussing intelligence. This one has been better than most but the ableism runs fast and strong normally.
A 7 Int would be someone a bit slower to pick up new ideas and asks you to repeat something a few times before its twigs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Intelligence always seemed pretty book learning to me. I feel a 7 INT is more like the kid who never went to school or lived out in the wilderness. Not going to have a lot of academic skills or knowledges, but they could be world smart if they have a high wisdom or charisma they could easily be the face of the party or the most perceptive on the group.
What I feel most people are thinking of as a direct analogue for intelligence in the real world where in many ways you would need several low mental stats to equal that.
low int is more uneducated to me, those are the people who think the world is flat or all wizards are necromancers.
Low wisdom is lacking common sense or naive i think severe autism might be an example of extremely low wisdom (right?)
charisma would be uncouthness i guess, it could be ugliness, I think extreme examples might be people like sociopaths?
anyway I think low INT can actually be played in ways other then dumb.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
minoritarian Its from a song bro Stephen Lynch
Some people can't laugh at themselves and the world. Some people are over sensitive. Different strokes for different folks. Its why some people form friendships with like minded people.
Lets a good representation of Intelligence. There was a Movie Called Idiocracy. One of my favorite movies. It is about the army test on suspended animation to keep the best soldiers alive and ready when they are needed. During the test they chose Joe who is the most average person in the entire armed forces and froze him. He wakes up in the way future and everyone else has become rather stupid. Using Joe as an average 10 here is a Clip of a 10 talking to about a 5 intelligence group of people. trying to convince them to stop watering the crops of food with Brawndo (gatorade) and use water (which they only use now to flush toilets and call toilet water.)
A 7 would be much better off and I liked what one person gave an example of Joey from the friends show. He is a perfect 7 in terms of intelligence.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Intelligence always seemed pretty book learning to me.
The rules gainsay you. "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons." Nothing suggests that that's limited to book-learning.
Low intelligence means that there are things that you don't pick up, even though you've seen them before or they've been showed to you multiple times. The example upthread -- "wait, which die do I roll again?" -- is a good one. If you see someone doggedly making the same mistake over and over again, because they haven't realized that's the wrong thing to do, that's low intelligence.
And that's largely why intelligence controls skill points. Despite the fact that you've lived in this town all your life, you can still get lost in the marketplace [no points in Knowledge (local)]. Despite having worked in a bakery, you still forget what temperature you make muffins at [no points in Profession (baker)]. Despite going sailing every weekend, you still can't remember how to tie a bowline knot. And you still don't fully understand the offsides rule in association football.
I think Homer Simpson is probably in the 7-8 Int range.
I was thinking that upthread. Ditto for Fred Flintstone.
They're both "functional" adults -- they can hold down jobs, raise families, keep themselves from doing immediately self-damaging things -- but they're also always doing stupid things and being blindsided by consequences that are obvious to Marge and Wilma, respectively.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also wouldn't them being able to get rid of the invaders by planning a successful rebellion later on unless some special once in a life time leader was born.Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.^And it's an innuendo.^
Just a reminder a hero can arise from unlikely circumstances. Also it seems Golarion Orcs are really hard to pacify
What I was saying was that someone had to be born who could make it happen. So my statement is still true.
Imagine trying to rule a kindergarden. You are clearly smarter than every single one of your INT 7 (or less) "subjects" but I would still deem it impossible.
|
If your idea of 7 INT doesn't allow a race like that to exist, you're just wrong. (At least, for Pathfinder. If you're talking about other systems, then I have no comment.)
Much depends upon their wisdom as well. Any time you're thinking of someone with an Int low enough to be truly disabled (probably not until 5ish) they probably have issues which would make their Wis equally low.
The same may not be true of non-humans.
Though it is of orcs to some degree. And orcs - being lower in every mental stat - generally don't have that much of a society. (Though they still average 8-9.)
|
|
I agree with the thought mentioned upthread that "idiotic behavior" is more of a question of low wisdom rather than low intelligence.
Intelligence is about little more than how fast can you learn something new.
Wisdom is about figuring out what's a Smart thing to do. Or alternately about not doing stupid things.
The absentminded professor is an excellent example of how this works. He may know everything there is to know about esoteric subjects, but doesn't know to look both ways before crossing the street.
Seperate thought:
Whether you say "dumb" is related to intelligence or wisdom, here's a few ways how I've played a 7 in the "dumbness" stat (context: a barbarian. Who's not surprised)
Believes that beauty is indicative of goodness and trustworthiness.
Generally feels that every problem could be solved by hitting it with an earthbreaker.
Won the test of strength in the Murder's Mark module, and subsequently believed he really was King of the Carnival when they presented him with his construction-paper crown.
Thinks that clowns are the best thing ever.
|
I like to put it in perspective of IQ
IQ = int * 10
The average human IQ is about 100. an above average human is 110-120
"genius" begins around 130 (but thats just based off of the bell curve's significant figures.)
so your wiz with an int of 19 is quite literally a Einstein in comparison to the layman, as he should be. He has the mental aptitude to comprehend 9th level spells! s##$ that can literally redefine reality.
I think you need 6 Int to speak a language fluently.
5 is Hodor territory.
7 is the guys from Dumb and Dumber.
3 to speak a language as per core.
Hodor is 3...or less. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to put it in perspective of IQ
IQ = int * 10
The average human IQ is about 100. an above average human is 110-120
"genius" begins around 130 (but thats just based off of the bell curve's significant figures.)
so your wiz with an int of 19 is quite literally a Einstein in comparison to the layman, as he should be. He has the mental aptitude to comprehend 9th level spells! s&@~ that can literally redefine reality.
Genius is 145+.
Also, the IQ = int * 10 doesn't really work; the distribution is all wrong.
I like to put it in perspective of IQ
IQ = int * 10
The average human IQ is about 100. an above average human is 110-120
"genius" begins around 130 (but that's just based off of the bell curve's significant figures.)
so your wiz with an int of 19 is quite literally a Einstein in comparison to the layman, as he should be. He has the mental aptitude to comprehend 9th level spells! s@~~ that can literally redefine reality.
It's even more crazy because Einstein should have 16 int at most (his IQ was 159 on posthumous analysis)
While I do agree that 10 int should equate to 100 IQ i think the scale should be toned down a little
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to put it in perspective of IQ
IQ = int * 10
The average human IQ is about 100. an above average human is 110-120
"genius" begins around 130 (but that's just based off of the bell curve's significant figures.)
so your wiz with an int of 19 is quite literally a Einstein in comparison to the layman, as he should be. He has the mental aptitude to comprehend 9th level spells! s@~~ that can literally redefine reality.
It's even more crazy because Einstein should have 16 int at most (his IQ was 159 on posthumous analysis)
While I do agree that 10 int should equate to 100 IQ i think the scale should be toned down a little
16 Int, Skill Focus, max ranks, a trait (+1 and class skill), and perhaps one of the split-focus skills (like Prodigy) can stack up fast. You don't always need an int 30 to blow everyone's minds and move far beyond the normal. Which is exactly why comparisons to such people are often poorly founded.
A lvl 3 character with the above would have a modifier of +15, which is pretty dang good. That's 2 of 3 feats available for a human expert 3, but totally doable.
TL;DR - People like Einstein are just as much, if not moreso, a result of their hardwork and dedication as anything else. Or obsession
We know IQ conforms to the standard distribution. Further, we know that half of the outliers will be low, and the other half high. Armed with this information, we can pretty easily match IQ to Intelligence score based on the probability curve generated by 3d6:
IQ 115+ = ~15% of the population is roughly a 13
IQ 130+ = ~2% of the population is roughly a 16
IQ 145+ = ~.1% of the population is roughly a 19
IQ 160+ = ~.003% of the population is roughly a 22
IQ 175+ = ~.00005% of the population is roughly a 25
IQ 190+ = ~.000000001% of the population is roughly a 28 (maybe a half dozen people in the world have an IQ this high).
IQ 205+ = You're pretty much the smartest guy on the planet.
Of course, once you get above 160 or so, it's very difficult to accurately assign scores, because there simply isn't enough data.
I also think RPG fans skew high. I would guess that half the people on this board probably hit 115. Likewise, plenty of us are at or close to 130. It's the folks around 145+ (or at or below 55) who stand out in a crowd.
TLDR: A genius is int 19+. A score of 18 is simply too common (1 in 216) to equate to an IQ of much more than 140 or so.
|
I agree with the thought mentioned upthread that "idiotic behavior" is more of a question of low wisdom rather than low intelligence.
Intelligence is about little more than how fast can you learn something new.
Wisdom is about figuring out what's a Smart thing to do. Or alternately about not doing stupid things.
The absentminded professor is an excellent example of how this works. He may know everything there is to know about esoteric subjects, but doesn't know to look both ways before crossing the street.
It's not that the absentminded professor doesn't know to look both ways before crossing the street. They just forget. Or maybe they don't even notice there's a street there, because they're too busy thinking about the paper they're working on.
I walk into things a lot.
So that's the awareness part of the wisdom stat. The problem absentminded professors have with common sense is more like this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yup; wisdom definitely matters as far as perceived intelligence. Frankly, so does charisma. It's hard to accurate gauge the intelligence of someone you're that busy disliking. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd say it depends on your chosen skills. If for instance your lone skill is knowledge geography, then he's been around and might remember some of the places, but that general that's lived in the same city as you for 15 years? Nah, no clue who the hell he is (unless the DM says otherwise).
It also depends on feats you take I think. For example, I'm going to be playing a 7 WIS character, but I'm using feats and traits to make up for his lower Will save and perception and sense motive scores, thus, he's still very willful, and perceptive, but I'm going to play him as the type to take unnecessary risks because... hey... it might look awesome. So, if you took say, skill focus and maybe cosmopolitan to get your knowledges up there, I'd say he's intelligent in some areas, but is generally clueless in others.
We know IQ conforms to the standard distribution. Further, we know that half of the outliers will be low, and the other half high. Armed with this information, we can pretty easily match IQ to Intelligence score based on the probability curve generated by 3d6:
IQ 115+ = ~15% of the population is roughly a 13
IQ 130+ = ~2% of the population is roughly a 16
IQ 145+ = ~.1% of the population is roughly a 19
IQ 160+ = ~.003% of the population is roughly a 22
IQ 175+ = ~.00005% of the population is roughly a 25
IQ 190+ = ~.000000001% of the population is roughly a 28 (maybe a half dozen people in the world have an IQ this high).
IQ 205+ = You're pretty much the smartest guy on the planet.Of course, once you get above 160 or so, it's very difficult to accurately assign scores, because there simply isn't enough data.
I also think RPG fans skew high. I would guess that half the people on this board probably hit 115. Likewise, plenty of us are at or close to 130. It's the folks around 145+ (or at or below 55) who stand out in a crowd.
TLDR: A genius is int 19+. A score of 18 is simply too common (1 in 216) to equate to an IQ of much more than 140 or so.
Now I'm feeling legitimate do play a wizard in-character
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Getting back to the original idea of how to play a low Int character, I like to keep in mind that it is rare for someone to think they are below average intelligence. My low Int characters often come up with "brilliant" ideas. Or at least they think they are brilliant. I usually make sure any idea they have can be summed up in three sentences or less. My low Int characters will always offer up advice, no matter how little they understand the situation.
Just talk louder so the goblins can understand you.
Just kick in the door and stab the guards.
Light a big fire, it will scare all the monsters off.
The answers are always easy for the low Int character and he can't figure out why everyone else makes such a big deal out of them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Some folks call it a Sling Blade, I call it a Kaiser Blade."
I reckon' that's about a 7 int.
Bingo. I think system mechanics are entirely too forgiving for people with 7 int. Saying that a character can learn 5 instruments, and therefore isn't *that* bad with a 7 int, isn't entirely accurate. By that logic, all you'd need to do to make up for being stupid is play a rogue. Cus, more skill points man. Therefore smarter? No.
There's a reason I won't allow players to dump stats below their natural average (if you play a race with a -2, you can't drop it below 8, for example), and it's because the players are often too intelligent for their own good -- they start to convince themselves of things that aren't true because, basically, they really want it to be true. They say things like "having a wis 13 averages out the 7 int," and try to play the characters like they're normal. Or, that their class skills in Knowledges and putting 2 ranks in 2 or 3 of 'em balances out the penalty for a 6 int, therefore they aren't dumb. I call B.S. Mostly it's just folks trying to squeeze a 17 or 18 out of a 16.
Int 7 wis 13 guy having a conversation with 7 wis, 13 int guy:
7 int: Dude, lak, I got dis sanwish, it tasses real good. Ju'wan some?
7 wis: It looks like tuna, is it tuna? I read once that tuna has a 15% chance of being poisoned if it comes from anywhere in the pacific rim! Get it away from me!
7 int: Huh? Wutsa pasific rim? In't that where the big robots is at? Lookit, 's jus a sanwich, man. It ain't gonna kill ya, I goddit jus a sekkin ago at dat food stand! An, lak, they sell a gazillion of'em, dey ain't got lak a bunch o' people droppin dead, or dey'd close da shop!
7 Wis: I said, get that sandwich away from me, imbecile! Just because you're too stupid to die from food poisoning, doesn't mean those people are selling legitimate goods! I read something recently that says, 75% of food stands get their food from the black market-
7 int: say whut? Ah think you is retarded, where you done read dat bull-
7 wis: I read it on the internet, fool! It's common knowledge! Don't be obstreperous, you nincompoop! I can't take it any more, talking to you is like slapping myself in the face with a sand-paper paddle!
7int: Yous kinda high strung, g'won den, amma et this tuna sanwish, you go read a innanet somewah'.
low int - ignorant, uneducated. But a 6 int is only -2 skill points a level? Kind of forgiving, when you could just rogue it up to make up for it, or assign your favored class bonus to skills. If an animal with 2 int would have a -4, therefore a horse rogue would have half as many skills as a human rogue. Hah. I think I'm going to start giving bigger penalties for players who drop it below 10, like 25% of their skills vanish per tier it's below average. Then it would make sense that animals have practically 0 skills.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think system mechanics are entirely too forgiving for people with 7 int.
I think it makes more sense to work out the meaning of 7 Int from the system mechanics than to decide arbitrarily that 7 Int = 70 IQ (or whatever) and then criticize the system mechanics for not matching your preconceptions.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hah. I think I'm going to start giving bigger penalties for players who drop it below 10, like 25% of their skills vanish per tier it's below average. Then it would make sense that animals have practically 0 skills.
I hope you intend on making wizards incapable of carrying their spell books with less than 10 strength, too.
Hey, I didn't decide anything (IQ) for example arbitrarily - that was some other post. But since you mention it, Wisdom should probably also figure into that IQ at least a little- but since they made that point, that 100 IQ is considered average, while 145 is considered baseline genius.... by the rules/paizo/whoever had that chart's measure, 10 int = 100 iq, while 145 is about a 19... soooo that said, it seems like 5 IQ = 1 int point above or below average (and that would be forgiving considering an int 2 creature would therefore have an IQ of 60, as compared to say, 20 (it doesn't know how to breathe). So by that formula, a 7 int character is about an 85 IQ. 80 or below is considered mentally disabled, just so you know.
The purpose of this thread is to determine how intelligent 7 actually is?
So, there ya go, ballpark figure, and now I threw a arbitrary number on it of 85 IQ.
As for the purpose of this board, it's to allow people to express opinions, -- like mine, which is that I think having low intelligence should have a greater influence on how low your skills are. Just because you have 7 int rogue, why should he be able to be just as good at say, using magic devices, as the genius rogue right next to him? Because players seem to do this all the time - they play some guy with a 7 int stat dump to boost their cha/str/whatever to 18, then pretend their character just as clever as everyone else because hey, int 7 is offset by 2 ranks in a couple of knowledge skills. Instead of say, playing their character, which is just marginally smart enough to not be mentally disabled, and forgetting to check for traps before they start kicking down doors, or that they don't need to yell for a healer, because they've got 2 heal pots on their belt.
anyway, I'm not "criticizing the game" in the sense that I think they suck or something. It's just constructive, and makes plenty of sense. Hence, all the times they take these kinds of gripes to the drawing board when they make revisions. It's why pathfinder exists. d&d -> Ad&d -> 2nd edition -> 3rd -> 3.5 -> pathfinder. All based on constructive criticism of the ruleset. Hey, at least the skill rules are better than 2nd ed, there weren't even ranks, just a bunch of stat checks, and you had to use language slots just to get them.
Hah. I think I'm going to start giving bigger penalties for players who drop it below 10, like 25% of their skills vanish per tier it's below average. Then it would make sense that animals have practically 0 skills.I hope you intend on making wizards incapable of carrying their spell books with less than 10 strength, too.
and no, I won't have to implement some kind of new rule for that, because there are already reasonable rules for encumbrance implemented. If they actually can't carry their spellbooks because they're a str 5 gnome , then hey, bad character decision in the first place. But its on them. They'll have to choose if they want the bedroll or the books. Or the slave, to be fair. They could just do that. Charm person --> packmule. Thanks bob! Now, if you don't mind, please kick down that door! Ooo..... traps. Too bad Bob, now I'll have to see if there are any other big laborers with low intelligence back at the tavern...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are already some pretty reasonable rules for low intelligence reducing your skills too.
There are already some pretty reasonable rules for low intelligence reducing your skills too.
mostly - for classes like fighters, or barbs, with only 2-4 skillpoints perlevel, low int reeeeeally sucks. But I've seen some pretty ridiculous rogue/ranger builds that were still viable even with the int penalty, because those classes get enough to make up for the int loss. Pcs drop a few favored class bonuses into their mix, and they're fine. Obviously not for knowledge checks or spellcraft- but since they're uber stealth snipers or dualwield-o-maniacs, they didn't care about that anyway, they just really wanted that extra 2 damage or whatever.
Look - I'll agree with one point; the int rules aren't "broken" - that was never my argument. Only that they are often just worked around, which is the true culprit. And that's the part that I find mildly annoying - people working to create ridiculous exploits (if I see another 7 int 7cha 1 leve shadowdancer character at the table, I'm forcing a reroll), then ignore the penalties they *should* suffer because of them. Anyways, find me any roleplaying game without exploits, and I'll trade you for one holy grail.
Anyway, it isn't like the bane of my existence, just annoying when I take the time to make a story and someone shows up with some fudged character stats and ignores everything (including the bored expressions of the other players) but how much bad@ss they are in combat becuz 18dex/str man! uber! Player A)" Dude, I rocked that last scenario! my dmg is sick!" PlayerB: "We didn't even need to fight man, we already had the key. Now the guards will be looking for us." Player A: "*** 'em, let em try."
Valid character choices? Maybe once, maybe twice, but it gets old.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think in general there's a lot of inaccurate and annoying stereotypes about lower/low average characters that get overexaggerated and overplayed. Using only monosyllabic words and grunts, speaking universally in the third person, acting as rashly as an impulsive howler monkey on speed, panicking to death when encountering anything they don't understand as "spooky"- all this really "dramatic" stuff doesn't happen to every (or even many) of low/low-average character. The speed impediment/speak in third person stuff can be particularly irksome in this regard. For example, people with certain intellectual disadvantages might use big words, but misuse them with understandings meaningful only to themselves. this can be played for comedy from time to time, but many times it's a bit more subtle than that.
Somebody else made the comment about a humanoid with a 7 int being described as really dumb but an animal with a 7 Int as really amazingly smart. I think this difference is inadvertently played out where the animals will be be able to do more advanced combat tactics whereas the humanoid will be confined to "I go up and thunk it with a rock". If int 2 animals con conceive of and use basic ambush and chase tactics, then an int 7 barbarian or warrior shouldn't have a problem with figuring out tactics that are a bit more than that.
Basically, a 7 int won't necessarily make you horrible at what you do- if you've fought as a warrior all you're life it won't necessarily keep you from developing a few tricks and using familiar environments to your advantage. If you have a high dexterity, wisdom, or charisma and good number of base skill points, you could be quite skilled in the areas of expertise you select. Now, learning and adapting to new things may give you some problems or take you some more time/effort (you won't be able to just take 10 to guess basic facts other people might get just by taking 10.)
Remember that a basic, first level peasant is operates only on a budget of 2-4 skill points. As a player character goes higher up in level they're likely to become significantly more skilled than that (especially if you figure in bonus skill points for favored class bonuses or the bonuses for being a human.) You still have a lot of potential to learn; it will just take you some more effort to learn a bit less in terms of skills.
Also, your intelligence doesn't necessarily determine how you respond to adversity beyond your immediate understanding. You don't have to fly off the handle or treat it as haunted or just break it. that has lot more to do with personality and learned behavioral patterns than innate intelligence by itself. So basically what I'm saying is, think of how your Intelligence score relates to the rest of your character's other qualities to make your character a more whole person rather than think you have to follow some concrete algorithm that magically and rigidly predetermines your behavior based on a single number on your sheet.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some DMs, don't care about the circumstance, backstory, or evocative roleplay you put forth.
You put anything less than a 10 into any mental score, and they will make you suffer.
The contrived circumstances, houserules, and passive-aggressive dickery, will be endless.
Of course, they will never give you warning, and deny all allegations.