The Human Potential? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

The Human Potential?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
mardok6
Nov 26, 2009 17:39:06 In a D&D game, 3.5 or Pathfinder....what would everyone consider a maximum ability for a human. This is before any magical enhancements, just the pure human ability at its peak potential?

I am curious because I like to play humans and always wonder where his stats fall compared to the average joe. Some systems have charts the show this such as Mutants and Masterminds.

Also, consider the fantasy fact, obviously they are better than the real world values.
#2
mardok6
Nov 27, 2009 8:34:06 Wow, thought I would have had some good responses here to read while drinking my coffee?!
#3
The-Mage-King
Nov 28, 2009 12:46:04 Hm... Working off the assumption that most people are around level 5...

19. 21, if they took Human Paragon.
#4
Kaunka
Jan 21, 2010 20:01:29 Well for character generation, the highest you can get it 18, and with the ability increases that you get and lvls 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 that would put that 18 at 23 by level 20, if you choose to max it out like that. (The worst stat a human can have is at 3, and if you put all your points into that it goes to 8) Also bear in mind that normal humans stats are 10-11.

So if we look at the Player's Handbook, a human with:

23 Strength would be stronger than an: Ape, Ogre, Triceratops, Flesh Golem and Gorgon, which all have 20-21 Strength.

23 Dexterity would be more dexterous than an; Arrowhawk and Bone Devil, who both have 20-21 Dexterity.

23 Constitution would be tougher than an; Elephant, Aboleth and Tyrannosaurus, that all have 20-21 Constitution.

23 Intelligence makes you smarter than a; Kraken, Titan and Nightcrawler, who again have 20-21 Intelligence.

23 Wisdom makes you wiser than a; Unicorn and Storm Giant, who both have 20-21 Wisdom

23 Charisma would make you more personable than an; Astral Deva and Kraken, who both have 20-21 Charisma.

So by looking at these, all things considered, a lvl 20 human who has chosen to max out one stat would be pretty super human by normal standards. Now imagine if they'd had all 18s to start with, that would be the stuff legends are made of.
#5
mestapholeas
Feb 11, 2010 4:09:37 I really enjoy your comparisons and they are right on the money. I've actually copied them for a baseline refernce for my players and myself. Humans were always meant to be the basis for all other creatures and even monsters, even in 1rst edition. In 30 years of play and DMing, I have had three characters that had three 18s at conception. Only one chose to be human, the other two became multiclassed non-human characters. I have never seen a character have more than three 18s at conception to have all 18s would be a truly epic character. I've always told my players that it's not your stats that make you what you are, it's what you make of them. Some of the best palyng I've seen is with characters that have a least one bad stat.
#6
Kaunka
Mar 02, 2010 6:48:42 I completely agree. All the truly memorable characters from history and fiction have been memorable not because they are perfect in every way, but because they had faults, flaws, cons and weaknesses as well as their more positive attributes.

Learning to overcome those weaknesses, or in some cases truimphing because of them, is what makes these characters stay with us for many many years.

Although all 18s would be nice from a power gamer perspective, it's more interesting when you have an average or below average stat or two. It comes down to Roll vs Role I suppose =P.

And also, you made a good point about humans being the baseline. I think people forget that sometimes. Since we are the only thing in our world that we can easily compare ourselves to, that has to be the way it is.

Actually, now that I think of it, I wonder what our stats in real life would be? I know people have been trying to figure this out for a while. What do people think their stats are in real life?
#7
johnkretzer
Mar 10, 2010 15:39:30
Actually, now that I think of it, I wonder what our stats in real life would be? I know people have been trying to figure this out for a while. What do people think their stats are in real life?

I once ran a game where the premise was that you are playing yourself transported to a D&D type world. I asaked my players to stat themselves...it was a fun experience. Most people were honest about it. Though...it was sort hard to tell someone no you don't have a charisma of 16..
#8
The-Mage-King
Mar 17, 2010 11:13:06 Meh. Cha is, to quote the SRD, 'a character’s force of personality' among other things. I'd let it slide.

You can be a ham and steal the screen time without looking good, you know.
#9
johnkretzer
Mar 19, 2010 2:15:35
Meh. Cha is, to quote the SRD, 'a character’s force of personality' among other things. I'd let it slide.

You can be a ham and steal the screen time without looking good, you know.

Yeah...except the issue it was a girl...who thought she was prettier than she was....and not as obnoxious as she was...I let it slide because well it was not worth hurting her feelings.
#10
The-Mage-King
Mar 19, 2010 8:30:30 Ah...
#11
Kaunka
Apr 19, 2010 12:48:27
Yeah, that's always been one of the problems with trying to find out what a person's real stats would be. Sometimes we're not as good at something as we like to think we are.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 mardok6 Nov 26, 2009 17:39:06	In a D&D game, 3.5 or Pathfinder....what would everyone consider a maximum ability for a human. This is before any magical enhancements, just the pure human ability at its peak potential? I am curious because I like to play humans and always wonder where his stats fall compared to the average joe. Some systems have charts the show this such as Mutants and Masterminds. Also, consider the fantasy fact, obviously they are better than the real world values.
#2 mardok6 Nov 27, 2009 8:34:06	Wow, thought I would have had some good responses here to read while drinking my coffee?!
#3 The-Mage-King Nov 28, 2009 12:46:04	Hm... Working off the assumption that most people are around level 5... 19. 21, if they took Human Paragon.
#4 Kaunka Jan 21, 2010 20:01:29	Well for character generation, the highest you can get it 18, and with the ability increases that you get and lvls 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 that would put that 18 at 23 by level 20, if you choose to max it out like that. (The worst stat a human can have is at 3, and if you put all your points into that it goes to 8) Also bear in mind that normal humans stats are 10-11. So if we look at the Player's Handbook, a human with: 23 Strength would be stronger than an: Ape, Ogre, Triceratops, Flesh Golem and Gorgon, which all have 20-21 Strength. 23 Dexterity would be more dexterous than an; Arrowhawk and Bone Devil, who both have 20-21 Dexterity. 23 Constitution would be tougher than an; Elephant, Aboleth and Tyrannosaurus, that all have 20-21 Constitution. 23 Intelligence makes you smarter than a; Kraken, Titan and Nightcrawler, who again have 20-21 Intelligence. 23 Wisdom makes you wiser than a; Unicorn and Storm Giant, who both have 20-21 Wisdom 23 Charisma would make you more personable than an; Astral Deva and Kraken, who both have 20-21 Charisma. So by looking at these, all things considered, a lvl 20 human who has chosen to max out one stat would be pretty super human by normal standards. Now imagine if they'd had all 18s to start with, that would be the stuff legends are made of.
#5 mestapholeas Feb 11, 2010 4:09:37	I really enjoy your comparisons and they are right on the money. I've actually copied them for a baseline refernce for my players and myself. Humans were always meant to be the basis for all other creatures and even monsters, even in 1rst edition. In 30 years of play and DMing, I have had three characters that had three 18s at conception. Only one chose to be human, the other two became multiclassed non-human characters. I have never seen a character have more than three 18s at conception to have all 18s would be a truly epic character. I've always told my players that it's not your stats that make you what you are, it's what you make of them. Some of the best palyng I've seen is with characters that have a least one bad stat.
#6 Kaunka Mar 02, 2010 6:48:42	I completely agree. All the truly memorable characters from history and fiction have been memorable not because they are perfect in every way, but because they had faults, flaws, cons and weaknesses as well as their more positive attributes. Learning to overcome those weaknesses, or in some cases truimphing because of them, is what makes these characters stay with us for many many years. Although all 18s would be nice from a power gamer perspective, it's more interesting when you have an average or below average stat or two. It comes down to Roll vs Role I suppose =P. And also, you made a good point about humans being the baseline. I think people forget that sometimes. Since we are the only thing in our world that we can easily compare ourselves to, that has to be the way it is. Actually, now that I think of it, I wonder what our stats in real life would be? I know people have been trying to figure this out for a while. What do people think their stats are in real life?
#7 johnkretzer Mar 10, 2010 15:39:30	Actually, now that I think of it, I wonder what our stats in real life would be? I know people have been trying to figure this out for a while. What do people think their stats are in real life? I once ran a game where the premise was that you are playing yourself transported to a D&D type world. I asaked my players to stat themselves...it was a fun experience. Most people were honest about it. Though...it was sort hard to tell someone no you don't have a charisma of 16..
#8 The-Mage-King Mar 17, 2010 11:13:06	Meh. Cha is, to quote the SRD, 'a character’s force of personality' among other things. I'd let it slide. You can be a ham and steal the screen time without looking good, you know.
#9 johnkretzer Mar 19, 2010 2:15:35	Meh. Cha is, to quote the SRD, 'a character’s force of personality' among other things. I'd let it slide. You can be a ham and steal the screen time without looking good, you know. Yeah...except the issue it was a girl...who thought she was prettier than she was....and not as obnoxious as she was...I let it slide because well it was not worth hurting her feelings.
#10 The-Mage-King Mar 19, 2010 8:30:30	Ah...
#11 Kaunka Apr 19, 2010 12:48:27	Yeah, that's always been one of the problems with trying to find out what a person's real stats would be. Sometimes we're not as good at something as we like to think we are.