How Malleable Are Your Stats?

Remove all ads!

The thread on "You are [Charname]" gave me this idea. I was thinking of how one could change their stats, and it seems like there are ways to do this for at least most of them.

Here's what I came up with:

Strength - The obvious thing here is weight training. While not everyone can attain the physique of an athlete or body builder, anyone who weight trains can probably add at least a couple of points to their strength. A 95 lb weakling can probably raise his strength from 7-8 up to the range of 11-12 with training.

Wisdom and Intelligence - I'm considering these together, because if you do mental exercises you can improve your reasoning and problem solving skills (which to me indicate an increase in wisdom more than intelligence). However, I can also see how such exercises may make learning new concepts easier (which would increase intelligence over wisdom). I think the problem is with intelligence that it necessarily requires some measure of education to come into play. The problem there is everyone can become more educated, but becoming more educated doesn't necessarily mean you're more intelligent. However, it does make some sense that most people who are capable of learning more than other people will pursue more education. Even IQ tests aren't the best here, as you can train yourself to become better at IQ tests.

Constitution - This one I have problems with. The only way I can think that you can raise your constitution would be to take vitamins and eat a healthy diet, which I suppose would improve your health. What about distance running? Or is it that more a measure of strength? I always thought equating constitution to how long it takes you to become intoxicated was a little odd. I mean, do alcoholics who have massive tolerance to alcohol have high constitutions? Not usually - in fact they usually destroy their livers in the process.

Dexterity - I feel this is similar to Strength. Just as there is weight training to improve your strength, there are other exercises that will improve your manual dexterity. You can train and learn how to run faster. Dancing is probably a good exercise for improving dexterity too. Or jumping rope. Or doing basic gymnastics (even if you haven't done a tumbleset since grade school, you could probably learn again easily enough).

Charisma - this is another tough one, as it takes into account personality and appearance. I suppose you can get dressed up and look a little better, or go to more extreme measures by getting plastic surgery. Furthermore, there are self-help books out there that can train you to become a better and more influential public speaker. Changing your entire personality seems to be a bit harder though.

I guess the take home message here is that it is probably possible to raise some if not all of your characteristics. However, there are only so many hours in the day, especially when one considers the demands of work and family, so it is unrealistic for most people to work on all of these things. Athletes who practice as much as possible to maximize their strength and dexterity are probably not reading astronomy books on string theory in their spare time. Similarly, there aren't too many physicists who make it a point to hit the gym and treadmill on a daily basis after the office.

Your genes probably give you a base ability in each stat which can be artificially adjusted upwards or downwards depending on the level of activity (or inactivity where applicable) you wish to spend on different pursuits.

Your thoughts?

 

Cardiovascular endurance does more for your overall body health than it does improve muscle. While it does improve muscular definition slightly, where its benefit lies is strengthening the heart, lungs and cardiovascular blood flow, which in turn stengthens the body's ability to fight off diseases and quickly filter out toxins. So yes - vigorous cardio will DEFINITELY improve one's constitution, and is probably the major factor. Alcohol tolerance is a small piece of this puzzle.

Regarding Intelligence - I agree with your premise for the most part. However, since it's understood that the "average" human intelligence is somewhere around 9, I would contest that if someone has an intelligence of 7 or below then it's fair to say they have either a learning disability or some degree of mental retardation, and thus it would be near impossible for their intelligence to increase (through non-magical means, of course) by any meaningful measure.

I also think Charisma can absolutely be increased. It's unlikely for someone with a natural 8 to go up to 16-18, but through improved appearance, dedicated work to improve social skills, and even study in social customs and human psychology, this can definitely be increased. That said, I think Charisma could ONLY be increased if the person has a decent enough Intelligence and Wisdom score to recognize his own social faults and seek to correct them. Just think of Cirano de Birjerac (sp?). I can't remember the guy's name right now whom Cirano was helping to woo the fair lady, but the reason that guy never pulled it off, despite his good looks, was because he was an idiot and couldn't comprehend what the right thing to say was, even with help.

So it can certainly be argued (and this is my opinion) that Charisma is definitely effected by both Intelligence and Wisdom. In this regard, I find characters with low Int and Wis scores - but yet have a high Charisma - to be completely unbelievable. Much as I find characters with a high Dex or Str score to have low Constitutions (though admittedly you see those much less often in D&D). We have 3 physical stats, and 3 mintal stats. The first two, IMO, should absolutely govern the 3rd to some degree.

 

Wow I didn't figure it that way! But yes I do agree with you, every stat is able to climb a few points or three if people put a little bit of effort in, although not every stat can be trained.

I guess that if you were BORN a genius, then you would be able to concentrate on the other skills without sacrificing your intelligence or wisdom as those things would naturally be high.

Now as for stat raising:

Strength - This stat would be obvious. Just look at the calculator! Go to the gym and just make yourself huge. No question there

Dexterity - There are all types of things you could do to increase this score. Dancing was a good idea Aldeth But knowing a martial art would be a big bonus. Boxing would improve hand to hand co-ordination and kick boxing would help you to become lighter on your feet. Even little things like skipping or jumping. You have to learn to crawl before you can walk though.

Constitution - As you said, running would be a perfect example. Constitution measures physical fitness remember and so running occasionally or doing fitness trials would help to improve it. Obvoiusly, taking shots would improve your health and help to prevent you from gettin sick, thus raising your constititution. Things like that.

Intelligence - Ahh a hard one You could be extremelly smart on one topic and absolutely on the next! I don't really know how you would be able to 'raise' the score but I guess there's some ideas, I just have none

Wisdom - A score a could care less about, but hey, I'm sure someone will help on this hehe

Charisma - Aldeth had it right. But obviously people born beautiful (LIKE MEEEE! ) are going to have an easier time in life. They're more confident, able to talk to a wider range of people and just find sociable situations easier. But learning to speak to a large audience, improving your physical appearance and learning proper codes of conduct will all have a big effect.

Know what I mean?

 

Agreed. I was thinking more of the "average person" here. Similarly, someone with MS would probably have a hell of a time greatly increasing their and constitution, and a quadrapelegic probably has a hard time getting on the treadmill or pumping iron to increase strength and dexterity.

*Note: I'm not trying to bust your balls too much here DR, I'm just saying that if you deviate much from the typical person, you can find exceptions to all of my points. So yeah, my comparisons are far from perfect.

Great points on charisma. I guess I should have specifically pointed out that no matter what you do, it's probably close to impossible to go from below average into the exceptional range. By improving your stats, I'm saying it's likely possible to go up 3 or 4 points at most.

 

Example for Cha - An ewww one, but just go with it

Queer eye for the Straight guy, umm do you think those guys have ANY idea once the gays leave?

 

No no, I agree completely. I think we can agree that, all things being equal, we can assume that any person's stats calculated by this means can be assumed to be born with a clean slate - i.e., no disabilities, diseases or deformities...the three D's, if you will. Infirmaties can be factored in later for roleplaying reasons.

Agreed...except for the top 3. My boss is one of the top bodybuilders in history, and I can certainly attest that he went from a 9 to at least an 18/50 in his career. The same can be said for Lance Armstrong, who was not always an ironman.

 

I agree that Strength and Constitution would have a link between them, but having a high Dexterity wouldn't really mean that the other two are necessarily particuarly good. Intelligence and Wisdom affecting Charisma I definitely agree with though.

Intelligence is a slightly more difficult one on its own. As IQ is supposed to measure your potential intelligence, your actual intelligence would be unlikely to be the same. As you would be unable to increase your IQ, then we should assume that Intelligence measures your 'actual' intelligence rather than your potential. So, in a way you wouldn't be becoming more intelligent- just realising what you are capable of.

 

CHA is the most trickiest one, is it the ability to lead/act/lie or just good looks? In some D&D games, there is a seperate stat named Comeliness for pyschial beauty. However, in BG2, CHA means BOTH beauty and 'talent'. For example, you need 15 CHA to convincingly lie to Phaere, or a noblewoman in a tavern would skip her appointed one and offer you if your CHA is at least 16. In the first thing, you are able to act, and lie very well. In the second, noblewoman is just attracted to your good looks.

I think too CHA means both. One can have perfect beauty, but if he/she has no skills in acting, lying, commanding, influencing people, etc. he/she can not have high CHA. (well, bettter than average still)On the other hand, an ugly person can have good abilities in these, but well, he/she is plain ugly, he will have good CHA, but NOT perfect. Only BOTH beautiful and skillful can have top CHA like 17-18 IMHO.

You can improve your CHA by learning how to influence people, command respect, or how to act properly, but if you are still pretty ugly, there is little you can do:first impression of the people will be ignoring you. The reverse will be as bad:first people will swoon over your beauty, but once they see you are rather...empty, the fever will be long gone.

 

To a degree this is true, but it's also a universal truth that clothes do in fact make the man. Ugly people, if in good physical shape, highly groomed, and very well dressed can still be considered physically attractive by most people. If you've ever seen certain hollywood stars out of their makeup and $3000 outfits, you'll see what I mean. This is also why dramatic makeover shows are so popular these days. In many cases, "ugly" is something that can be worked around.

 

Then again you can have plastic surgery too, to enhance your looks, but results may be rather unexpected: hint, look at Micheal Jackson! He was once so cool and now he looks like a freak! A pity.

 

While true, I think in this context it's limited to techniques that don't permenantly alter one's physical appearance, and surgery of any kind shouldn't be a consideration. Clothes, hair and make-up don't require surgery, of course. Besides - I've never heard of a Necromancer getting a nose job, have you?

 

Interesting topic. I believe only a few stats can be modified willingly. Many are modified by aging (which is in PnP).

Strength -- the easiest stat to modify in real life. I've done it, my nephews have done it, my wife has done it. Weight training is the easiest.

Constitution -- I don't think we can modify this, except that we get immunized. Con is the ability of the body to resist infection, heal from an injury, and endurance. We can improve our endurance (usually at a cost of strength), but that is a small part of the equation.

Dexterity -- This is all about reflex and I've never heard of any exercises that can markedly improve reflexes. Becoming faster is strength related, balance and grace do not necessarily help reflexes.

Intelligence -- the ability to learn. I think this is hard wired. The stat intelligence should not be confused with knowledge -- a high int stat just mean that person can learn with less effort (it does not mean they actually use the ability).

Wisdom -- the ability to make good decisions based on the knowledge we have. This improves with our life experiences (and in older PnP rules had the most dramatic change with aging).

Charisma -- looks has very little to do with charisma. By DnD standards, Hitler had a charisma of at least 18. He wasn't good looking by most standards. Bill Clinton is highly charismatic (I'd certainly give him an 18, with maybe a 9 wisdom). Charisma does not appear to be affected by age, although our experiences affect charisma. However, I believe leaders are made, not born. It takes more than good looks and speaking ability to be a good leader (leadership is the essence of what charisma is about). I believe charisma is a stat that is a moving target throughtout life. Another good example is Winston Churchill -- I don't believe he was an 18 charisma early in life, but he was at least an 18 toward the end of his life.

[ September 07, 2006, 20:13: Message edited by: T2Bruno ]

 

@T2B - I mostly agree, but dexterity isn't just about reflexes. Just think about what types of things dexterity effects in the D&D world. It also affects things like eye-hand coordination (using missile weapons), things requiring precise movements (like theiving skills, most notably stealth ability and disarming traps), and even balance and control of movements (reduced AC).

However, even if you want to limit it to just reflexes, I think there are certain things that you can do to improve your reflexes. Training in a martial art would certainly improve your reaction time (which is a reflex). It can even be argued that eye-hand coordination is a reflex, and we see baseball players refining that skill daily. Football players do that training where they step inside tires spaced very close together to improve their footwork. That's an exercise meant to improve agility, not strength or stamina. While I agree that some aspects of dexterity and reflexes are tied to strength, that's not how they are implemented in game, which is why I took a broader look at it when I described the means of doing this.

 

Aldeth: I see what you're saying, but I've always felt those exercises helped you maximize your ability, not necessarily enhance it. You continue exercises to keep your reflexes honed -- improving your reaction time through practice allows you to rely on your reflexes and not have to take time to think about the reaction.

In a DnD setting, that practice is already accounted for and assumes the PC is at the top of their game. But then, that is simply my interpretation of it and, as is often the case, I could be way off base.

Using baseball as an example I like a story about Henry Aaron. After striking out he went back to the dugout, shaking his head. He commented to no one in particular, 'I could see he threw a sinking curve, but just could get my bat there in time.'

One of his team mates said, 'At that time I realized the difference between a good hitter and a great hitter. I play mind games with the pitcher, always trying to guess what he'll throw next and have my bat there. Henry could take the time to look at the pitch, evaluate it, decide where it was going to be AND THEN SWING.'

Henry Aaron's reflexes (along with Babe Ruth's and most recently Albert Pujols') were slightly faster than other ball players -- this gave him the time to evaluate the pitch instead of guessing.

I think you can only hone your reflexes, part of the equation is natural ability.

 

I certainly don't want to discount natural ability entirely. However, I think we are evaluating it two different ways. You seem to think that the score in dexterity represents an absolute maximum, and that practice is required to maintain it at that level. I really didn't think of it that way, although for the purposes of the D&D world, you could be right.

For example, a thief that uses a bow as his primary weapon would be at the top of his game, at that 18 in dexterity is truly his maximum. However, for everyday people like you and me, we aren't practicing such skills on a daily basis, and so our working dexterity is probably significantly lower than the theoretical maximum. I realize that this can be argued in circles, and can even be applied to other stats. The simple counterargument would be that all ability scores represent maximum potential, and it depends on the amount of effort you place into them that determines how close you get to reaching that potential.

Anyway, my point is that I'm taking ability scores to be what they would represent in a person in their present condition, acknowledging that they may not be at their natural maximum ability due to lack of use.

I'll use myself as an example. If we agree with the test's assumption in the Charname thread, then I have a strength of 15. If I had taken that same test 5 years ago, my strength would have been more like 12. However, just because it is 15 now, it doesn't necessarily mean that 15 is the maximum I can attain. If I decided to dedicate myself more fully to working out, then maybe I can get to 16 or 17. That's why I don't like looking at any statistics as strictly natural ability and a maximum, because for most people you have no idea where that maximum will ultimately lie.

The same can be true of the D&D world. Yes, we can assume that a thief is at the top of his game when it comes to skills requiring dexterity, but is the fighter or the mage? They, after all, get the same bonuses as thieves do even though they are doing significantly less to hone their dextrous skills.

EDIT: Now that I think on this a bit more, shouldn't we see exceptional scores for a lot of stats, not just strength? Just like only fighter types can gain exceptional strength scores because of the focus of their class, shouldn't rouges be able to get higher dexterity scores than other classes because their class requires this type of specialization? And apply this similarly to the other classes for whatever their primary stat is.

[ September 07, 2006, 21:34: Message edited by: Aldeth the Foppish Idiot ]

 

Elven or halfling rogues, gnome illusionists or drow wizards, svirfneblin clerics...19's all around. Though a 19 DEX isn't quite that exceptional compared to 18, you can get 20 DEX with a Drow, which is exceptional. 19 INT means being able to learn every spell in existence, and bonus spells from WIS double at 19+. But I know that's not quite your point, with the possibility of 19 STR from a half-orc being such a huge difference from 18.

While many have speculated that it was actually a mistake to create the exceptional strength categories, I guess you could look at it from the opposite angle of why every stat didn't have exceptional ranges. But I think that would just reinforce the problem of the difference between 18 and 19, acquirable by certain player races. The only place where it wouldn't be trouble is CON because...what class would have it as the main stat? Are we going to create a meatshield class?

 

I get what you're saying Fel, but I was thinking more along the lines of exceptional stats because of your class, not your race. All elves can get 19 in dexterity, regardless of whether they are playing a rouge class or not. I was specifically referring to the possibility of have 18 (xx) available for all rouges in dexterity, regardless of what their race was.

You also bring up another interesting point: Strength is the only stat where there is a HUGE difference between 18 and 19. As in not even close huge. Compared with something like Dexterity that gives you what? +1 to hit with missile weapons? Naturally this is because there's nothing in between 18 and 19 in dexterity, but there are 5 divisions between 18 and 19 in strength. Of course, that's the fatal flaw in this technique. If we create exceptional stat scores for the other stats, then once again, you are going to see a huge difference between 18 and 19, making the means of raising your stats by a point even more overpowered.

 

Yeah, I got that. That's why I said, "I know that's not your point". But in the end, it defeats the purpose of creating the 'exceptional' divisons when any elf cleric can be more dextrous without even trying. STR gets...almost understandable if you try real hard (Gygax's reasoning with the gap was that there should be a gap between what a person could do and what a creature two or more times bigger could do, not that that explains exceptional STR), but others...well, there'd have to be a good reason for it other than simply expertise.

After all, expertise is skills, not physical attributes; fighters have specialization, wizards and clerics their spells, thieves their unique skills, and bards have both skills and spells. How good they are with this stuff, with training, is called levels. Given, this training could have an additional benefit of making them overall better at things, but...well, that's the line of thought that created the 3e stat bonuses by level (not a bad thing, but there are still kinks to work out). For 2e, I'd go with T2's line of thought about the practice keeping you from getting rusty.

 

Gygax also used the difference between athletes and non-athletes as a justification for exceptional strength. Although some non-athletes (upper end) are as strong as some athletes (lower end), the top athletes have no peers amoung us non-athletes. The top weight lifters in the world or professional football linemen have strengths of 18(90) to 18(00). Since the current snatch record is nearly 500 pounds, it just seems reasonable these guys are closer to giants than the rest of us.

Gygax likened the warrior classes to athletes of today. There is no way to obtain exceptional strength without a lifetime (or at least several years) of intensive training -- and only the warriors classes would be able to incorporate that training into their daily routine.

There is no equivalent to this in real life with any other character ability.