Maximum Attributes for Real World People

[maximara]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

Actually, Conan-Doyle stated that Sherlock Holmes was based on his teacher Joseph Bell. Also some of Holmes' detective powers were demonstrated by Conan-Doyle himself. These factors bring down Holmes IQ down to realistic levels.

(restored snipped part)
I should add that I tried to recreate Holmes using 3e rules and it simply couldn't work - the relationship between his IQ attribute and some of his mental skills didn't work as they were too low if they were from default and too high if he even had 1/2 a point in them. The version of Holmes on GURPSwiki tries to take as much of the canonal stories (not movie or play versions) as well as the Bell and Conan-Doyle connection.

No they don't, anymore than Hafthor having a really high ST score makes Superman's super high ST score more realistic.

Non Sequitur in the extreme as Hafthor was born in 1988 while Superman was created in 1938.

Funny thing is back in 1939 Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster tried to "scientifically" explain Superman's powers comparing him to ants and Grashoppers. Of course by 1940 his power set had gotten impossible to explain "scientifically" and kept going up the powerscale until he got to the Silver Age where were stories required wild fluctuations in his powers and IQ to even happen. The alternate reality stories were even more of a hoot where Superman's moral compass went off into Bermuda Triangle land.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by maximara

Non Sequitur in the extreme as Hafthor was born in 1988 while superman was created in 1938.

The point you seem to to missing is that just because you can find a real life person with a much lower capability than the fictional person, doesn't mean the fictional person has a low level capability.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

The point you seem to to missing is that just because you can find a real life person with a much lower capability than the fictional person, doesn't mean the fictional person has a low level capability.

And you miss the point I was making. "Conan-Doyle stated that Sherlock Holmes was based on his teacher Joseph Bell" ie the creator of the fictional character stated a real life person was the basis for that character. More over in 1892 the press called Bell "the real life" Holmes.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by maximara

And you miss the point I was making. "Conan-Doyle stated that Sherlock Holmes was based on his teacher Joseph Bell" ie the creator of the fictional character stated a real life person was the basis for that character. More over in 1892 the press called Bell "the real life" Holmes.

I didn't miss that, I was responding to your point: "These factors bring down Holmes IQ down to realistic levels." The fact sherlock Holmes was based on a real person doesn't in anyway bring down his IQ to realistic levels.

[awesomenessofme1]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

I didn't miss that, I was responding to your point: "These factors bring down Holmes IQ down to realistic levels." The fact sherlock Holmes was based on a real person doesn't in anyway bring down his IQ to realistic levels.

I'm pretty sure he meant "This means Holmes wasn't IQ 18", not "This means IQ 18 is realistic". That's how I read it, anyway.

[NineDaysDead]

Originally Posted by awesomenessofme1

I'm pretty sure he meant "This means Holmes wasn't IQ 18", not "This means IQ 18 is realistic". That's how I read it, anyway.

That's how I read it TOO. IQ 18 seems fine for Holmes.

[maximara]

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

I didn't miss that, I was responding to your point: "These factors bring down Holmes IQ down to realistic levels." The fact sherlock Holmes was based on a real person doesn't in anyway bring down his IQ to realistic levels.

Conversely there is no reason to give him a really high IQ - everything he does can be done with an IQ 16. IIRC when I went through the Horror write up the only way to get some of his IQ stills to work as presented was to lower his IQ to 16.

Which means the skills were even more out of whack when Eidetic Memory doubled all points put into IQ skills....except spells which got a +1 or +2.

[SimonAce]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

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?

GURPS ST also covers mass and HP which in general women have less of than men.

Also upper and lower body strength of women is a lot less than that of men

A study in the Journal of Applied Physiology found that men had an average of 26 lbs. (12 kilograms) more skeletal muscle mass than women. Women also exhibited about 40 percent less upper-body strength and 33 percent less lower-body strength, on average, the study found. ... In general, men are also faster than women.

This average to 36.5 percent less overall strength

In weightlifting standards adjusted by by weight are twice for men over women. This shown in the the log press, the strongest women can manage 113.6 KG log press whereas the male leader is 220KG a tiny shade under twice her capacity

As for carrying, I suspect soldier skill or hiking skill combined with GURPS's somewhat abstract speed rules account for this

Because men at the high end can come to a GURPS ST of 16 or so with a perk (15 normally IMO) with lifting ST making for greater amounts lifted , women being a bit less than half a strong come to 12, 13 with a perk . Basically the highest human stat for normals is 15 in anything, 16 with perk.

I am however a pretty big stat normalizer and I could be persuaded to allow a 14 for women.

Again this also only applies to normal people in no powers, non action worlds. An extra point would suit action or fantasy nicely and powered people have very different limits too.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by maximara

Conversely there is no reason to give him a really high IQ - everything he does can be done with an IQ 16.

Everything he does can be done with an IQ 9. It would just be odd and expensive.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Andreas

Without Extra Effort. If one were to adjust the GURPS rules to better represent real feats of strength, getting tired faster by various activities would likely be an important part.

Consider the case of someone wtih ST 10. How likely is it that the kind of average person ST 10 is supposed to represent (even if that is an average among healthy adults fit for military service) could lift of 160lbs overhead without effort every 4 secs?

Rather than Carry On Back, Lifting seems like a more appropriate place to make changes.

I take your point, and no one sub rule is perfect enough to pin all the rest to. But in concept I think I prefer the lifting Skill and EE system than x15 1FP per sec extreme carry rules. If nothing else the x15 carry is an abstract and hard and fast threshold. so a ST10 person can do this at 300lb's for 1FP per second, but 301lbs and forget it?

However yes that also means the Basic BL rules are not automatically great either, and perhaps more importantly only gives us what 2-3 ratings to extrapolate all lifting off. So what's bench, what's squat, what's deadlift (I've seen claims that the 8xBL isn't overhead at full extension but merely head height i.e. what you can lift onto your shoulders). But like I said this is a RPG system for running adventures not Gym sessions. That does mean with have to use interpretation when trying to put specific Strongmen feats into the system, and conversely when we tr and calibrate the system by those feats!


I do agree with the general point that these different systems don't give consistent overall results. So I agree there is a temptation to take the one we like and try and get the other to match it. However (and this is where I get on my stat normaliser's soap box ;-)), IMO most of the issues with "realism"
and ST and sub systems giving odd results happen at higher levels of ST (and skill). I think we have to accept that the system kind of defaults to playable cinematic scale as ST increases. And trying to shoehorn "realism" into system results get harder and harder accordingly.




160lbs overheard press hmm not sure that's what 73kg? I can do that but not forever. Which is another problem the fatigue system in Campaigns is not very fine grained, you either have very fast fatigue or your fine. I tend to use the AP system for a middle ground. (However that means I'm already moving away from the basic lifting rules!)

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

GURPS seems to set unmodified rolls as what you would encounter in an adventuring situation, and give a +4 modifier for everyday use, e.g;

Unmodified lifting roll: moving an awkward rock that's blocking the exit to the dungeon while orcs are chasing you and shooting arrows at you.

Lifting +4 roll: In a gym, lifting weights that are designed to be lifted with no one attacking you.

Yeah I never give a flat +4 for all skills in all non combat situations (certainly not skills were being in a dungeon doesn't inherently make much difference). Don't get me wrong I might give some equipment bonuses for good lifting equipment in a gym though! However that also means that if someone is trying to lift a particularly awkward weight in bad circumstances e.g those you might find in dungeon I'd likely penalise them!



IMO that +4 non combat bonus is more for skills designed for use in combat scenarios being used in non combat ones. i.e I don't give all accountants +4 to accounting rolls just because they doing accounts in a office and not a dungeon!

Originally Posted by NineDaysDead

So skill HT 10 WILL 10 skill Att+2 gives skill 12; in a gym gives you an effective skill of 16, meaning without extra effort you can increase your lift by upto 65% or with Extra Effort by upto 130%. That's just not realistic.

Only if you roll triple ones! TBH looking at critical successes is not a very good way to assess baseline expectations and realism.

If you assume a roll of 10 your talking about a +30% or +60% (and that's with the +4 non combat bonus I wouldn't give).