Maximum Attributes for Real World People

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

More like the upper limit of people who don't have superpowers in a comic book. The limit of 20 is supposed to tell you where to slot Batman.

Yes, I'd go with something like:

IQ

21+: Beyond Human
17-20: Bat-God*, Doc Savage, Sherlock Holmes etc.
16: Peak Real world human, extremely rare (Maybe Unusual Background), e.g. Leonardo Da Vinci
15 or less: Real world humans

*Nolan's Batman would be in the 15 or less range.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

One problem 3rd Edition had was the lack of 4th Edition's talents. This meant that if you wanted to be a genius in an area larger than a few skills you needed to have a very high IQ. So Isaac Newton was given IQ 18 + Mathematical Ability (3rd Ed), which gave him an IQ of 21 for Maths and Physics etc, and an IQ of 18 for everything else.

In 4th Ed you could represent an IQ of 21 for Maths and Physics etc, with:

IQ 21 + Mathematical talent 0
IQ 20 + Mathematical talent 1
IQ 19 + Mathematical talent 2
IQ 18 + Mathematical talent 3
IQ 17 + Mathematical talent 4
IQ 16 + Mathematical talent 5
IQ 15 + Mathematical talent 6
IQ 14 + Mathematical talent 7
IQ 13 + Mathematical talent 8
IQ 12 + Mathematical talent 9
IQ 11 + Mathematical talent 10
(Power ups Talents has rules for Talents going to 4, 5, 6, or 10 levels)

So how what IQ does Newton need to cover things that aren't covered by Mathematical Ability? Does he really need an 18?

Mathematical Ability: Accounting, Astronomy, Cryptography, Engineer, Finance, Market Analysis, Mathematics, and Physics.

He really doesn't need that IQ 18 as the non Mathematical Ability skills can be brought up via spending more points. Here his skills (remember 1/2 points were a thing; those skills are in italics):

Administration-18
Area Knowledge (London)-17
Astronomy-17
Chemistry-18
Cyphering-21; Accounting, Merchant, or other mathematical skills in 4e
Economics-15; it could be built off of Finance which could fall under Cyphering
Engineer (Laboratory Equipment)-17
History-17
Mathematics-21
Law-15;
Leadership-16
Occultism-18 [2]
Pharmacy-16 [1]
Physics-23 [14]
Research-20 [6]
Savoir-Faire-20 [0]
Theology-19 [6]
Writing-17

[Fnordianslip]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

...If we are talking about point efficiency though, which is generally the metric by which GURPS measures most characters, a specialist is usually going to be worse off than a generalist...

Point efficiency might be the metric by which you, and possibly some other players, measure characters, but GURPS is a gaming system, it doesn't measure anything. To me, games are about fun, not efficiency and it's ridiculous to assume that every player of GURPS only finds fun in creating or playing the most efficient character builds. It's fine to put your opinion out there, it's fine to mention that you personally value efficiency over all other metrics, but don't claim that somehow the system is designed so that efficiency is all its players would care about.

To bring it back to why this matters for maximum attributes for real world people, if you want to play a character that feels real, or model a real world person, almost no one is equally good at all skills that are IQ based. Most people have a lot more nuance than that which is often, if your goal is fun, better modeled by having a lot of skill points than huge base stats.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Sorry, I meant in the field. If we are talking about point efficiency though, which is generally the metric by which GURPS measures most characters, a specialist is usually going to be worse off than a generalist. It would be different if skills really did cross multiple attributes...

Let us examine an IQ 10 individual with Physics (VH) IQ+10 [48]. At that level, they are quite skilled, if not terribly brilliant physicists. They will never get a Noble Prize though because they lack the ability to play the academic or research game. While they can do research on 'book learning' (the established literature) in Physics at a default of 18, meaning that they are a good research assistant, they are horrible at teaching classes, writing up grants and research, and at interviewing for jobs. In order to be equally good in all of those areas, they must have Diplomacy-20 [44], Fast-Talk-20 [40], Teaching-20 [40], and Writing-20 [40], for a total of 172 CP.

<snort> Absurd. First of all, they don't have to be equally good in all those areas. You don't have to be a great teacher to be a great physicist. Many of them are no more than adequate as instructors and keep their position based on their ability to publish. And you don't need Fast-Talk at all. In fact Fast Talk is counterproductive because afterward people will frequently figure out they've been BSed. The type of writing you need to do is tightly specialized. And often great scientific minds have other people who do the academic infighting for them so that they can ride on the genius's coat tails.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Yes, I'd go with something like:

IQ

21+: Beyond Human
17-20: Bat-God*, Doc Savage, Sherlock Holmes etc.
16: Peak Real world human, extremely rare (Maybe Unusual Background), e.g. Leonardo Da Vinci
15 or less: Real world humans

*Nolan's Batman would be in the 15 or less range.

Both Sherlock Holmes and Leonardo Da Vinci were given stats in GURPS classic.

Sherlock Holmes appeared in Horror 1e: IQ 16

Leonardo Da Vinci appeared in Whos Who: IQ 18 though as I mentioned before that is likely highballing it a bit.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by maximara

Besides we really don't want to get into the Champions/Hero mindset of players trying to squeeze every possible thing out of a point they can.

A character should based on a concept not on 'how can I manipulate the point totals to make as powerful a character as I can?'

Heck, in the edition of Champions I played back in the 1980s the book itself told you how to manipulate the rules so you got the biggest bang for your points.

Besides as pointed out before most Nobel prize winners didn't do much out of their field. More importantly the outstanding work generally wasn't a case of high IQ but high skill

Never mind in some cases one prize has been given to several people (such as in the case of penicillin)

Regarding GURPS stats for Nobel prizes winners the Who Who's books list several but none of them is IQ 20. I have also included the skill most relevant to the Nobel Prize they got.

Rudyard Kipling: IQ 13; Writing-20 (literature)
Albert Einstein: IQ 15; Physics-22 (physics)
Theodore Roosevelt: IQ 14; Diplomacy-12, Politics-17, Savoir-Faire-16 (peace negotiations)
Sir Winston Churchill: IQ 14; Writing-18 (Literature)
Ernest Miller Hemingway: IQ 13; Writing-19 (Literature)

As you can see from this is wasn't high IQ but rather high skill in the related profession. Teddy is more the interaction of skill rather then just one and he may have used other things to get the peace negotiations to completion that aren't immediately obvious.

Side notes: GURPS Who's Who 1 and 2 are the works I would really like to see an update for.

Just to say yep definitely plus one on all this

[SimonAce]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Yes, I'd go with something like:

IQ

21+: Beyond Human
17-20: Bat-God*, Doc Savage, Sherlock Holmes etc.
16: Peak Real world human, extremely rare (Maybe Unusual Background), e.g. Leonardo Da Vinci
15 or less: Real world humans

*Nolan's Batman would be in the 15 or less range.

This is what I use for all stats actually with the addition of a taboo trait for strength ST 12 , ST 13 with an unusual background for real world human females.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by SimonAce

This is what I use for all stats actually with the addition of a taboo trait for strength ST 12 , ST 13 with an unusual background for real world human females.

Unless you're allowing Lifting ST and/or some special rules for Hiking, that's a low cap for women's ST (or perhaps are using KYOS).

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by SimonAce

This is what I use for all stats actually with the addition of a taboo trait for strength ST 12 , ST 13 with an unusual background for real world human females.

That is unrealistically low. I have known more than a few women in my life that would fit into ST 14. Heck, I teach a female student who is an ROTC gunner that can deadlift a 120 lbs equipment pack one-handed without any strain and can run four miles with over 200 lbs of gear in an hour. She does not look that tough, but she would either have to be ST 11 and Basic Move 10 or ST 14 and Basic Move 6 to fit within a GURPS paradigm, and which is less unrealistic?

[Jareth Valar]

For real world people and even gritty action movie/TV heroes I suggest this:

THIS by Kromm

Also, the 15 soft cap and 16 hard cap with Unusual Background, IIRC comes from KYOS as well.

And as for why KYOS is so referenced Alexander? I can't speak for everyone else, but for our table it presents an even playing field at the attributes and rules. For example:

* ST doesn't dictate HP anymore. Big win IMHO.
* HP are determined by the system for all other HP determination in the game. Another plus there.
* ST doesn't have it's own sitting corner with attribute value when compared to the other attributes. All attributes being comparative in scale to one another? Again, win.

I could go on, at least from what our table has discussed at length before our game even started, but that is't the OP's question (and neither is Luthor or Stark for that matter, but I digress :P )

Added Thought:
KYOS is written by Kromm. While I don't hold his word a gospel for GURPS ( I happen to disagree with a few things he has said over the years), his word does, for me at least, carry a bit more weight than most.