What's with the modesty about stats?

[Desthro]

To be honest, the modesty about stats is a general rule of thumb... there are numerous instances of people who are obviously super-intelligent. IQ 16 is high, but I sincerely doubt it is the highest. Also, let's say we find a child who is remarkably brilliant, say IQ 18. Insanity right? This child though, merely doesn't have enough world experience to warrant defaults in several skills, which is what defaults were meant to convey. You MIGHT know the answer to this, or know how to do it because you could have learned it. At age 6, I really doubt that child is going to know how to do certain things. That can be modeled with some sort of disadvantage, I forget what it is called... Anyway.

16 IQ might be the highest real-world IQ without limitations as modeled in GURPS, but IQ 17+ is probably out there. And how would one know if they had IQ 19 and -4 levels of Per and Will, along with a crippling learning disability?

Just putting that out there.

[aesir23]

Put another way:

If Einstein has IQ 20, then how on earth do you build Bruce Wayne?

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Desthro

That can be modeled with some sort of disadvantage, I forget what it is called...

There is no disadvantage that removes your defaults. Defaults are allowed or denied by the GM at his judgement. There is two social stigmas regarding lacking a skill that is considered "essential" by your culture (Ignorant) and a lack of general education in a culture that expects general education (Uneducated). Neither locks you out of defaults; they are both logical consequences of lacking certain kinds of skill training and therefore might suggest to the GM that you shouldn't get a default in some situations, but it's not a hard rule, and it certainly isn't described in the disads.

A child of IQ 18 is going to grow up to be an adult of IQ 21+ - "IQ" in GURPS is an absolute value, not like "IQ Score" in real life, which is "graded against the curve" expected of people of your maturity.

In real life, a 4 year old who can't read or write or do basic arithmetic, converses with limited grammatical skills and vocabulary, but can recognize some letters of the alphabet has a pretty average "IQ Score", while an adult with the same skillset is probably going to get an IQ of 80 or less, depending on the test. GURPS would peg both of them around an 8-ish (or 9-ish depending on where you stand on child IQ) because they perform the same.
Whereas a 4 year old who can read and write at a grade 12 level, do grade 12 math, converse with the full linguistic fluency and breadth of vocabulary you expect of a grade 12 student? That 4 year old would have a spectacular IQ score on any test but a GURPS IQ of 10. At most.

[Ketsuban]

Originally Posted by B9anders

But I do agree with the sentiment that the cult of stat normalization should simply be called the cult of preferring low stats.

I thought the Cult of Stat Normalisation were the ones who wanted to trade in points in a bunch of IQ-linked skills for raising IQ by 1 and getting a higher default? That would make them the exact opposite of the Cult of Preferring Low Stats.

[B9anders]

Originally Posted by Bruno

There is no disadvantage that removes your defaults. Defaults are allowed or denied by the GM at his judgement.

There is however such a thing as Anti Talents, which gives penalties to your defaults.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by B9anders

There is however such a thing as Anti Talents, which gives penalties to your defaults.

Don't forget incompetencies.
Also, going from real world experience, if you really hate a subject, it doesn't matter how much raw talent you have; you will avoid learning it.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Desthro

16 IQ might be the highest real-world IQ without limitations as modeled in GURPS, but IQ 17+ is probably out there. And how would one know if they had IQ 19 and -4 levels of Per and Will, along with a crippling learning disability?

Just putting that out there.

That's not what GURPS IQ is. GURPS IQ is not the same as real-world IQ and, in truth, correlates fairly poorly with it. Real-world IQ measures a very limited subset of the wide variety of competencies that we collectively group under the term 'intelligence'. It is therefore possible to have high real-world IQ, but being bad at functioning in the real world.

GURPS IQ, by contrast, is nearly entirely concerned with functional intelligence, i.e. the ability to assimilate knowledge and use it combined with reasoning ability to solve problems. In GURPS, various fields of knowledge are represented with skills. It has been said and with cause that GURPS IQ is primarily a measure of a character's ability to learn and apply IQ-based skills, which seems a circular definition, but is the only accurate one.

Because of this, the concept of having high GURPS IQ but a crippling learning disability is no more sensible than having high ST but being paralysed. It might fit magical constructs or characters under a curse, but it's not really representative of anything real. Real people with high GURPS IQ are those who have the ability to excel in any* mental field they choose and do so with speed that seems incomprehensible to the less gifted. If they don't have that ability, they probably don't have a high GURPS IQ, even if their real-world IQ measures off the charts.

*It is true that few people are truly gifted at everything and Anti-Talents provide a neat way to give polymath characters fields where they are less brilliant. On the other hand, unless the brilliance of the character truly does span extremely numerous and entirely unconnected fields, high IQ is a less accurate representation of their gifts than a more normal Attribute coupled with Talent(s) in their areas of expertise.

[ericthered]

I think much of the issue with stat normalization is that core set describes 50 points as being a reasonably competent, and anything over that as "Exceptional". a score of 14 is described as being extremely exceptional. And with 50 points describing the majority of humanity, it probably is.

Enter the worked examples, supplements, and particularly the templates. The basic set gives 6 worked examples, all over 200 points. Space presents the solider template worth 70 points stating it can be used to represent a "trainee or a green trooper from an underfunded army", which implies a basic boot camp can give you 70 points of advantages. Fantasy's templates are all 75 points or higher. IW templates are around 100 points or higher. And it gives the impression that these are "normal" people.

So GM's give out 150+ points. and with 150 points, 14 is high, but its not terribly special. PC's frequently have such numbers.

In addition, the most blatant violator of this is IQ, which is extremely versatile and examples of it being high across the board are extremely rare in real life. IQ! costs only 10 points.

And then people who pay attention to what was actually written say "wait... thats not what it said!"

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Ketsuban

I thought the Cult of Stat Normalisation were the ones who wanted to trade in points in a bunch of IQ-linked skills for raising IQ by 1 and getting a higher default?

No? That's not related to any definition of the term "normalize" that I'm familiar with, and that's not how "the Cult of Stat Normalization" is ever used here.

Originally Posted by Ketsuban

That would make them the exact opposite of the Cult of Preferring Low Stats.

Yes, but the Cult of Preferring Low Stats is "the Cult of Stat Normalization", and the other group you refer to don't have a name. I'm one of the "unnamed other people" fwiw.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Ketsuban

I thought the Cult of Stat Normalisation were the ones who wanted to trade in points in a bunch of IQ-linked skills for raising IQ by 1 and getting a higher default? That would make them the exact opposite of the Cult of Preferring Low Stats.

If you like that technique, it's called point optimization. If you don't, then it's basic munchkinism.