[3.5]On Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma

[Nemoricus]

So, the physical attributes all have means in-system to determine what they mean in real-life terms. The three mental do not.

How do you calibrate their scale? Knowing this would be very useful in figuring out how to play and roleplay characters of significantly greater or lesser ability than the average human.

[Copacetic]

There is no relatve scale when it comes to mental stats. Does the INT 5 orc thnk hs INT 7 half-orc cousin think he is a genuis? Yes, because he is to him. But they both fairly stupid when it comes to human level.

[MisterSaturnine]

The PHB describes Intelligence as smarts, Wisdom as perception (however broad you want to make that), and Charisma as force of personality. It goes on to give examples of what people with high and low scores in Int/Wis/Cha would be like--one of these examples was of high Int/low Wis, which it described as an absent-minded genius.

A particular fun example of what happens when you mix and match these scores was talked about in the playground a while ago, which was High Cha/High Int/Low Wis. Basically, the person came up with good plans and was very persuasive and really got them into peoples' heads when talking about them...but the plans are usually missing one, very important detail. For example, they might plan an aerial assault to get over a wall, gather up the wizards they need to cast flight on people, and then later realize that none of the wizards are high enough level to cast Fly.

[Tengu_temp]

Intelligence is the ability to come up with solutions.
Wisdom is the ability to judge, both intents and ideas.
Charisma is the ability to make others do what you want.

[Thurbane]

INT = mental DEX
WIS = mental CON
CHA = mental STR

...at least, that's how I look at it.

[BobVosh]

INT = mental DEX
WIS = mental CON
CHA = mental STR

...at least, that's how I look at it.

I would do
INT = Mental STR How much mental force do you shove behind it?
WIS = MENTAL DEX How quick do you think?
CHA = Dump. Er. Mental CON How much personality do ya got?

Anyway. I remember one person I know saying 1 INT =10 IQ. No clue where he got that, but seems fairly reasonable to me, excluding those silly wizards.

[TeeEl]

I think the question in the OP is not what the abilities themselves represent, but what different scores are benchmarking.

Unfortunately this is problematic, since objective measurement of mental abilities in real world terms is itself a topic of intense debate. The closest thing I could suggest would be to look at ability score distribution. Assuming the basic population uses 3d6 for ability score generation (they're not PCs, so no fancy rerolls or point buy for them!), 1 in 216 (about 0.5%) will have an Intelligence score of 3 or 18--actually not that rare. An Intelligence score of 3 would probably be equivalent to a severe learning disability, but would still be functional; we're not talking about drooling vegetables here. An Intelligence score of 18 is highly intelligent but not world-shattering genius. A student who graduates from college with a GPA of 3.9-4.0 may be a good benchmark here.

Note that these ability scores are for young adults, as mental abilities increase with age and experience. Theoretically a human character in 3.5e can get up to 26 Intelligence pre-epic without magic and without needing any obscure ability-boosting PrCs (+5 from the ability increase every 4th level and +3 from venerable age), but upper level D&D is clearly beyond the bounds of strict realism even when magic's out of the picture. More realistically, we could say 21 Intelligence represents one of those graduates who does not aggressively pursue intellectual goals during their later career or simply proves unsuccessful at them (+3 from age, no ability increase). 22 Intelligence would be the culmination of a successful career in an intellectual field (one ability increase), 23 represents intellectual achievements of historic magnitude (two ability increases), and 24 would easily be one of the smartest minds in the history of the human race (three ability increases).

Past that, 25 or 26 aren't achievable until you get well into levels that are truly fantastic in their scope. They are technically beyond realistic human achievement but are believable as a theoretical ideal; an amazingly intelligent character in a work of fiction might display this level of intelligence without straining credulity too much. At 26 Intelligence, you have a +8 modifier to an untrained knowledge check. You can pull up basic knowledge about any academic subject as readily as a brilliant student who is fully trained in that subject (18 Int + 4 skill ranks) or a competent veteran in the field (say 14 Int + 6 skill ranks). There is a limit to what information is available with an untrained knowledge check, but if you make even a cursory study of the topic (1 skill rank) you can outperform either of the above.

At the other end, 3 Intelligence gets you a -5 penalty on knowledge skills. By dint of great effort, a character at that level who studied that topic intensively through their young adult years (4 skill ranks) would have difficulty matching the performance of an average person off the street with no prior study or training in the subject (-1 skill modifier vs. +0 skill modifier). They could occasionally come up with details that a layperson would simply never know (trained skill check vs. untrained), but not very reliably (it would only come up on a DC of 11 or greater, which they have less than 50% chance to make).

Wisdom and Charisma are a bit trickier, since they are defined even more murkily than Intelligence is, but the same general reasoning can be applied.

[Nemoricus]

The above post is spot-on, but not quite what I need.

I need more benchmarks for scores between 0 and 20, not beyond.

Above 20, things probably start getting a little weird period.

[Riffington]

Note that the .5% derived from the bellcurve applies to heroes - not to the average population. A 20 or higher would be legendary amongst humans.

So for Intelligence:
20 - Richard Feynman.
18 - You can get a PhD in astrophysics while learning Chinese in your spare time.
16 - You can get a PhD in astrophysics.
14 - You can get As at MIT
12 - You can get As at a regular university.
10 - Average. IQ 105.
8 - You can pass a mediocre college with difficulty.
6 - Minimum intelligence to function in modern society. A GED is above you, though you may have got a "social pass" from your high school.

[Bayar]

While you are discussing this, maybe someone could determine mental stats for Stephen Hawking...

[Eldariel]

Generally, I've found that the "Int X 10 = IQ"-system holds pretty well for Ratio IQs. Greatest geniuses fall in the 210-line, which should be the very edge of what a Human can possess (or what can effectively be measured at any rate), and coincidentially also on the edge of what a Human in D&D can have. 10 is the average, as is 100 (duh - it's base-100 system).

[JackMage666]

Ooo, ooo, I wanna do Charisma!

6 - You always screw up when talking to people. Socially awkward and unable to express yourself properly, generally. Not to say you can't be social, but generally you have to work at it, for a long time. This could, in some ways, represent some (not all) people with Autism, who have trouble functioning in social settings.
8 - Slightly socially awkward, and a horrible speaker or liar. You likely have a speech impediment that people would notice. As well, most people sense something is off in you, and won't approach without reason.
10 - Human average for Charisma. You can talk to people easily, and have an OK time making friends with people you see regularly.
12 - Slightly above average. You're generally one of the people your friends turn to for help with meeting people or dating advise. You normally can hold a conversation, and convince others to join.
14 - Above average! People notice you, even without you trying, for the right reasons. You have a sort of aura radiating your charisma to onlookers. You normally find yourself in conversation, and can often impress and perhaps change the views of those you speak to.
16 - Masterful charisma. You have a natural above average charisma, and have honed it to a science. You've likely taken several psychology, communication, or marketing class that allow you to show yourself at a far better angle. You make your points boldly, and people notice your presence.
18 - Master of charisma - You not only took the classes, but you've used them in real world situations. You're likely a marketer or a lawyer, using your strong force of personality to convince others of your points, as well as having a mastery of body language and vocal sciences to make yourself remembered by everyone you speak to.
20 - Leader of Man. By this point, you've likely reached a point of high authority, be it Senator, Protest Leader, or other position where you're the central voice of thousands. People not only trust your actions, but they want to follow whatever you endorse. Your mastery of communication has made you a household name, and most people would at least recognize it if they heard it.

[Adumbration]

I would just like to know how to roleplay my Wisdom 30 spirit shaman...

[Kurald Galain]

Open any White Wolf book. They do very good descriptions of the various kinds of attribute and skill ranks. Extrapolate from 1-6 to 3-18. Done.

[BobVosh]

I would just like to know how to roleplay my Wisdom 30 spirit shaman...

How about adding a headband of intelligence. How do you roleplay that?

My epic wizard has 26 natural intelligence, and with items he has a 40.

10 wisdom.

25 natural charisma, with items it is a 30.

How exactly do I roleplay that? Espically if I put it on and off?

[Tengu_temp]

INT = mental DEX
WIS = mental CON
CHA = mental STR

Int = mental Str. Pure physical power, pure mental power.
Wis = mental Con. The ability to endure.
Cha = mental Dex. Manipulation of objects, manipulation of people.

I disagree with the statement that IQ = Int/10, or that 18 Int somehow makes you a super-duper genius. Int increases with levels and with age, which IQ doesn't, and every Int-based character ends up with a crapload of this stat. Not to mention that if a character with 10 in a stat has 50% chance to succeed in something, a character with 18 in this stat has 70%. That's only 40% better. People are seriously overestimating high stats here.

[Riffington]

Not to mention that if a character with 10 in a stat has 50% chance to succeed in something, a character with 18 in this stat has 70%. That's only 40% better. People are seriously overestimating high stats here.

The percentages are just an unrealistic part of the d20 system.
4 ranks in a skill is a competent expert (albeit not a famous superstar).
So 10 vs 18 Int is the same as the difference in picking locks between a kid who's never picked up a lockpick, and your friendly neighborhood locksmith.


[the age thing is a weird part of the D&D world. Use it or not, but it isn't like the real world.]

[Riffington]

How about adding a headband of intelligence. How do you roleplay that?

My epic wizard has 26 natural intelligence, and with items he has a 40.

10 wisdom.

25 natural charisma, with items it is a 30.

How exactly do I roleplay that? Espically if I put it on and off?

You can only reliably tell the difference in intelligence with regard to people 2 points higher than yourself. In other words, if you're a pretty smart guy (14), you can tell the difference between someone of your intelligence and someone with Int 16. You couldn't reliably tell the difference between a 16 and an 18.
So if you're trying to roleplay an Intelligence 18 Wizard, you find smart quotations and work them into your conversation. Play him as smart as you possibly can.
If you're trying to roleplay an Intelligence 26 wizard, you do the exact same thing. If he takes off his headband that he's used to, play him as absolutely brilliant - yet who continually calls himself dumb "Oh man, I can't believe I just forgot about the flux correction for using dire bat guano. I really need to reread Elminster's classic on the seventh principle of matter"

[monty]

While you are discussing this, maybe someone could determine mental stats for Stephen Hawking...

Brace yourself...

Spoiler

Show

IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!

[TempusCCK]

Two points of Interest to add to this discussion.

Average I.Q is based on a 100 point system, however, now the average I.Q of America (I realize not all of you live in America, but I do) is now 90.

I.Q doens't actually measure intellect, it means the ability you have to collect information and spew it back correctly, a person can have a low IQ and still be really smart, just a slow learner, however, that's not usually the case.

[monty]

I.Q doens't actually measure intellect, it means the ability you have to collect information and spew it back correctly, a person can have a low IQ and still be really smart, just a slow learner, however, that's not usually the case.

It's supposed to measure intellect, though (hence "Intelligence Quotient"), it just does so poorly. If it were to accurately measure the intelligence of everybody, it would probably compare roughly to the d20 system. That is, it would compare your level of intelligence to that of other people on a numerical scale.

[Prometheus]

Two points of Interest to add to this discussion.

Average I.Q is based on a 100 point system, however, now the average I.Q of America (I realize not all of you live in America, but I do) is now 90.

I call BS. If you change the statistical interpretation of an IQ test and fix it at a constant ability, than IQ increases, rather than decreases, this is known as the Flynn Effect. The Flynn effect is caused by increasing standards of living, health, nutrition, and education.

If instead you are keeping the statistical interpretation of IQ and comparing it to the rest of the world, I do not doubt that the United States' status as a developed country puts its IQ way above that of developing counties with significantly greater problems with starvation and literacy.

If you then are comparing America to other developed countries (where, presumably, its easier to administer and IQ test and the convenience bias is obvious) than maybe I can believe the IQ was measured to be 90. But really its a roundabout way of saying "Europe is better" or "America is overrated". You know, I thought it might be a good thing for NATO to progress together and that it might be okay for us all to be friends even when we don't have a security dilemma but apparently there are some people who are more concerned about relative gains.

[Epinephrine]

I'm going to go with the statistical setup mentioned by the 3d6 roller above.
IQ is roughly normal, and thus we can say that ~95% of people lie within ~2 standard deviations of the mean. With the 3d6 mean being 10.5, and the mean IQ being 100, the standard deviation of IQ is ~15points, so 70-130 IQ is roughly the same as the span of Int 6-15; roughly 99.7% of people lie within 3 standard deviations, so IQs of 131-145 are represented by Int scores of 16-17 or so (and likewise, 55-69 IQ corresponds to the 4-5 range), and above 145 IQ gets into the 18+ range.

If you want a slightly more precise mapping, it might look like:
Int......IQ
<=3......<55
4......55
5......60
6......70
7......73
8......78
9......84
10......92
11......108
12......116
13......122
14......127
15......130
16......140
17......145
>=18......>145


The old 3d6 system with /00 for scores of 18 would allow mapping the higher IQs to percentiles within the 18+ bracket, but since one can't generate scores higher than 18 on 3d6 all IQs above 145 are in the 18 category.

I think labelling it as "could graduate from M.I.T." etc. is a poor system, as I know bright people who flunked school, and other not very bright folks who simply worked their butts off to get through their programs. Oh, and folks who cheat to get by - the number of engineering students I caught cheating on tests and assignments is astounding.

For wisdom, if you wanted to treat it as perception, one could use distributions of eyesight/hearing, but if it represents force of will (Will saves) as well as common sense, practicality, and groundedness, those don't so much have scales associated with them.

[monty]

For wisdom, if you wanted to treat it as perception, one could use distributions of eyesight/hearing, but if it represents force of will (Will saves) as well as common sense, practicality, and groundedness, those don't so much have scales associated with them.

Eyesight/hearing seems like a poor way to measure wisdom; I'm very myopic, but that shouldn't affect how wise I am in any way (in D&D terms, it'd just be a penalty to Spot).

[chiasaur11]

Brace yourself...

Spoiler

Show

IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!

And as for why he hasn't solved all the world's problems:

Stephen Hawking is a bastard.

[Epinephrine]

Eyesight/hearing seems like a poor way to measure wisdom; I'm very myopic, but that shouldn't affect how wise I am in any way (in D&D terms, it'd just be a penalty to Spot).

Agreed, it's a really poor operational definition, but I'd argue that IQ is likewise a suboptimal operational definition of intelligence, since recall seems to be linked to intelligence (knowledge checks) as do skills such as forgery, woodworking (or other crafts), appraisal, and the ability to search thouroughly - none of which I would suspect are strongly correlated with IQ.

[TempusCCK]

I call BS. If you change the statistical interpretation of an IQ test and fix it at a constant ability, than IQ increases, rather than decreases, this is known as the Flynn Effect. The Flynn effect is caused by increasing standards of living, health, nutrition, and education.

If instead you are keeping the statistical interpretation of IQ and comparing it to the rest of the world, I do not doubt that the United States' status as a developed country puts its IQ way above that of developing counties with significantly greater problems with starvation and literacy.

If you then are comparing America to other developed countries (where, presumably, its easier to administer and IQ test and the convenience bias is obvious) than maybe I can believe the IQ was measured to be 90. But really its a roundabout way of saying "Europe is better" or "America is overrated". You know, I thought it might be a good thing for NATO to progress together and that it might be okay for us all to be friends even when we don't have a security dilemma but apparently there are some people who are more concerned about relative gains.

I'm not changing the interpretation of anything, I'm saying that when a large majority of Americans are administered the test, they tend to score average 90, whereas when the test was designed the average was supposed to be 100. The test hasn't changed, just how well people as a whole are doing on it.

Man, you point out a fact and some geek has to turn it into a freaking calculus class, maybe the answer is something simpler than crunching numbers?

[Destro_Yersul]

And as for why he hasn't solved all the world's problems:

Stephen Hawking is a bastard.

Atomic Robo says so. It must be true!

As for the penalties to specific things, let's go with a TV example. Dr. House. He's a total jerk, but he can bully people into doing what he wants them to do. How does that work for Charisma? Loads of ranks in Intimidate? Anyone that caustic shouldn't be allowed to have a high CHA score.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Atomic Robo says so. It must be true!

As for the penalties to specific things, let's go with a TV example. Dr. House. He's a total jerk, but he can bully people into doing what he wants them to do. How does that work for Charisma? Loads of ranks in Intimidate? Anyone that caustic shouldn't be allowed to have a high CHA score.

He's a Montebank 1/Expert 19. He gets Int to his social skills.

[Douglas]

Note that the .5% derived from the bellcurve applies to heroes - not to the average population. A 20 or higher would be legendary amongst humans.

No, heroes get 4d6 drop low which gives quite a bit more than .5% with 18. The 3d6 distribution is for the average population.