What's with the modesty about stats?

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by 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.

The majority of people were farmers, and not even particularly successful ones, at low TLs. Today, the majority of people are low-income service workers, and not particularly succesful ones neither. You don't need many points to represent a character that is basically competent within his own narrow sphere of experience, neither wealthy nor socially significant, and more likely to become a victim than a hero if caught up in an adventure suddenly.

None of that means that there don't exist people who are much more competent and capable of surviving an adventure*. Or that among the ordinary folk some turn out to be strong-willed, courageous, quick-witted and decisive under pressure. It's just that this is less the average than it is the exception.

Usually, the heroes or protagonists of any kind of story will be exceptional, in one way or another. Even when they are refered to in the context of their world as being just common people, ordinary folk in extraordinary circumstances, the truth is that where the average human fails to cope with extraordinary circumstances, stories are usually about those who manage them better, at least enough to fail entertainingly instead of abjectly and, most unforgivably of all, in the very beginning of the story.

Both the former Navy SEAL honour-student who went into business after his military service and the heroin addict dying off a combination of Hep C and poor nutrition that he passes on his way to work in the morning are 'normal people'. It's just that the world holds rather more people like those who pass them both in the course of their own ordinary lives and would greet adventure with panic, mistakes and an early demise.

*The way GURPS arranges skills, it is far more expensive to learn the basic skills of a soldier, scout, criminal or magician than it is to become an astonishingly broadly competent academic or a world-class expert in a variety of crafts less useful on an adventure. In reality, it takes far more time to learn many academic skills than the same amount of points of fighting skills, but that's glossed over.

[Desthro]

Originally Posted by Icelander

That's not what GURPS IQ is.
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's no less sensible than taking IQ14. And for all intents and purposes, they might actually be capable of GURPS IQ19 performance, but with the limitations imposed they only function at GURPS IQ14.

It's completely reasonable. Just because it's on paper and not testable in real life doesn't make it unreasonable by default.

[Flyndaran]

Gurps IQ is really all things mental, which just includes what we call basic intelligence in common language.
Imagine the physical version, that includes fitness, strength, toughness, resistance to disease, poison, all forms of injury, healing, hand eye coordination, full body coordination, etc. No one is super duper at all those.


I'm not even sure I believe in general intelligence in reality. It's all specialized modular forms, I think.

[naloth]

Originally Posted by B9anders

I don't think stats of 20 for IQ,DX and HT belong in a realistic campaign. But I do agree with the sentiment that the cult of stat normalization should simply be called the cult of preferring low stats. It is most apparent in Supers where you see arguments that guys like Spider-man should have DX below 20 or Reed Richards IQ in the sub-20 range.

Meh, it's more of personal preference and writing characters to fit a campaign.

Spider-man doesn't necessarily have an amazing DX since that's more of a skill base than anything else. Sure, he has a reasonably high DX and lots of raw potential for DX-based skills but his real claim to fame is being basically impossible to touch which translates to a really high Dodge/Speed score. There are plenty of skill DX based characters that work better with a higher DX than Spidey. In fact, other game systems (MSH) represent Spidey with decent skills and amazing dodging capacity while other characters like Cap and Hawkeye are much better at fighting even if they can't dodge as well. The Silver Surfer is a better model for absurdly high DX - he's inhumanly graceful, good at everything (even from default), has a lot of general experience (hundreds of years at trying things?), and quick but doesn't dodge as well as Spidey.

Reed is known as being super smart but he only really displays a lot of academic prowess. Outside of the "nerdy" fields, he's been shown to be somewhat less than proficient even at things that would be IQ-based in GURPS. You could represent that with social incompetence but Reed isn't shy or clueless - he's just not as well rounded as a 20 IQ would suggest. There's a fair amount of evidence that the Thing has just as much willpower and that Susan is as perceptive at noticing things. Certainly if you're building Reed on a budget, I would go for a moderately high IQ and Talents/Science! rather than just IQ.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Desthro

It's no less sensible than taking IQ14. And for all intents and purposes, they might actually be capable of GURPS IQ19 performance, but with the limitations imposed they only function at GURPS IQ14.

Someone theoretically capable of IQ 19 who functions at IQ 14 has IQ 14 and a justification to buy up his IQ in play.* This is precisely analogous to someone born with three arms who has lost one of them. He doesn't take Extra Arm and a Disadvantage to represent not having an Extra Arm. At most, the fact that he was naturally capable of something more than he is can be a roleplaying point or a Quirk.

A permanent injury, disease, disorder or any other form of affliction that imposes penalties to all uses of Attributes or prevent one from using Advantages are represented in game terms by lowering that Attribute or dropping that Advantage. People with a game leg lower Move. People who survive a wasting disease might lower ST, DX and HT.

GURPS Attributes don't represent some innate, immuatable fact. They are a composite of inborn and accumulated gifts; not just potential, but actual, realised ability. A child that had the potential to become astonishingly intelligent, but suffered neglect and deprivation in childhood which seriously affected learning ability, self-confidence and practical living skills doesn't have a high GURPS IQ in adulthood.

*Which may or may not be worth points, depending on whether the GM would ordinarily limit that.

[Desthro]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Someone theoretically capable of IQ 19 who functions at IQ 14 has IQ 14 and a justification to buy up his IQ in play.* This is precisely analogous to someone born with three arms who has lost one of them. He doesn't take Extra Arm and a Disadvantage to represent not having an Extra Arm. At most, the fact that he was naturally capable of something more than he is can be a roleplaying point or a Quirk.

Again, how is that any different than buying off the imposed limitations/disadvantages in play and fully realizing his.her potential? Just because it doesn't suit your rigid view doesn't mean it is inherently unrealistic. As far as the arm example goes, "lost" could mean one of several things, one of them notably being completely and utterly crippled, good enough for -80% imho. The potential for restoration is there...

[Aneirin]

Originally Posted by Icelander

The majority of people were farmers, and not even particularly successful ones, at low TLs. Today, the majority of people are low-income service workers, and not particularly succesful ones neither. You don't need many points to represent a character that is basically competent within his own narrow sphere of experience, neither wealthy nor socially significant, and more likely to become a victim than a hero if caught up in an adventure suddenly.

Now I'm depressed ;_;

Thanks for the chuckle. "Majority of people are low-income service workers...and not particulalry succsesful ones neither" Made me smile and cry at the same time.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Desthro

Again, how is that any different than buying off the imposed limitations/disadvantages in play and fully realizing his.her potential? Just because it doesn't suit your rigid view doesn't mean it is inherently unrealistic. As far as the arm example goes, "lost" could mean one of several things, one of them notably being completely and utterly crippled, good enough for -80% imho. The potential for restoration is there...

The imposed limitations that you are talking about are, in game terms, lowered IQ. There isn't any Disadvantage that represents having high IQ but being bad at using it, because the game system represents that by having lower IQ.

You can certainly rationalise this as being the result of trauma or some other factor in your character's backstory. In fact, that's probably good characterisation, making the numbers on the character sheet mean something in terms of history and perhaps even personality and motivation.

But that doesn't change the fact that until the point the character buys up his IQ, he doesn't have a super-high IQ. It doesn't matter what he could or should have, it only matters what he does have.

[Ji ji]

Originally Posted by 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!"

Since 3rd edition...
Dai Blackthorn was a greenhorn burglar wearing tattered clothings. DX 15 and IQ 12 -.-"

[gjc8]

Originally Posted by Brett

It so happens that a GURPS character with an IQ of 16 is professionally competent (skill-12) at skills that he or she has merely read about or seen actors enacting on TV. A GURPS character with an IQ of 20 is a master of skills he or she has never tried before. Not just a couple. All IQ-based skills, and there are a lot of them, very diverse, too.

A GURPS character with IQ 20 is a master diplomat, tactician, surgeon, physician, lawyer, historian, geographer, geologist, oceanographer, ecologist, botanist, zoologist, anthropologist, sociologist, economist, mathematician, programmer, physicist, chemist, musician, composer, soldier, accountant, actor, administrator, architect, armourer, artist (in every medium), engineer, carpenter, cartographer, cook, disguise artist, farmer, leader, linguist, locksmith and everything else, including stealth and camouflage, shadowing, every hobby skill, every professional skill, every expert skill, every specialisation. he or she is as good as an expert specialist in all of those. He or she also has an iron willpower, the hearing of a watchdog, the eyesight of an eagle….

Attributes influence more than just defaults. Is the cinematic part giving Julius Caesar IQ 20, or GURPS rules for defaulting from attributes?

As for tying Will and Per to IQ, that's a whole 'nother issue, but it's definitely possible to sell those back.