What would your D&D stats be?

[Steph]

Man, y'all have low opinions of yourselves.

Not necessarily, since I estimated constitution and dexterity higher than the test.
But some parts, like intelligence, are IMO overrated in the test, at least compared to the criteria in the OP.
OP says: Einstein would have an intelligence of 16, but test gives 17 to any guy with a PhD.
Same OP says 14-15 = extremely well trained, 16+ = "super human".
So for example with Strength, the test gives me 13, I estimated at 10. I do some workout regularly, but not "heavy", so I think I am slightly above average, 13 would be just belo extremley well trained according to OP.
Doesn't fit.

So we are using too differents reference scales.

@Tetley = Charisma is not only if you are good looking, you know?

 

[strijder20]

Test results:

STR:15
INT:18
WIS:13
DEX:7
CON:9
CHR:11

That strength score is HILARIOUSLY overrated.

 

[Steph]

And so is Intelligence and Wisdom I think

 

[bhavv]

Well the test gave me:

Str 6
Int 16
Wis 16
Dex 10
Con 12
Chr 6

Based on its different requirements to my OP that would also be true, and a better way to measure than simply guessing.

 

[Steph]

Small reminder from rules, 3.5 edition:
- Strength 6 = Hawk, Pixie.
- Charisma 6 = Badger, Troll, Bear.

Some of these rules are really ridiculous.

If you follow them, Humans are 10-11 for any attributes...

 

[bhavv]

I wish I was as charismatic as a badger.

 

[downtown]

From the test:

STR:13
INT:13
WIS:14
DEX:14
CON:12
CHR:18

I've never played D&D, so I have no idea if that's right. I'd consider myself to have about average strength/constitution, slightly above average intelligence, and a pretty high charisma score.

 

[Disgustipated]

I'm still rerolling for my stats

Strength (if you include women, them I'm average): 9
Dexterity: 6
Constitution: 9
Intelligence: 11
Wisdom (pretty hard to quantify this): 12
Charisma (my dump stat): 4

 

[Harv]

Small reminder from rules, 3.5 edition:
- Strength 6 = Hawk, Pixie.
- Charisma 6 = Badger, Troll, Bear.

Some of these rules are really ridiculous.

If you follow them, Humans are 10-11 for any attributes...

You forgot to include Intelligence of 6 or less. The probability of rolling a 6 or less on 3d6 is 20/216. Almost 10% of the population. Really?

It makes me think of an earlier comment....

the DnD book was written by a writer with no sense of scale (warning: TVTropes)

Agree with 10 or 11 being average for Humans. Or possibly 10 for 5 stats and 13 for one stat which they are specialized in.

The OP also asked for alignment on a different thread. Is he also going to ask for a character class and character sheet? (Quoting Munchkin, I have no class. )

WIS 9 or less because atheist?

Nah. More likely it will not be your highest stat. (Intelligence will be.) I did say spirituality, not religion. The line of questioning would be somewhat different and will come down to how much you think about concepts such as "right and wrong."

http://www.kevinhaw.com/add_quiz.php

According to the quiz linked above my D&D stats are as follows:

Kind of funny how once a quiz was posted everybody jumped on it and filled it in. On the plus side, it gives an answer. On the other side, it is subject to user bias and the perception of the writer.

It is kind of funny how the strength test is based on two upper-body exercises. Bench press makes me think of the Elliot Hulse video where he was explaining that how much you can bench press means nothing if you can't squat. How much you can deadlift is a better indicator. How much you can squat might vary with the range of motion you choose.

Maybe I will come up with some more stupid quizzes.

 

[EgonSpengler]

If you want to take a long quiz, try What D&D Character Would You Be?

According to them, I'm a 5th-level Chaotic Neutral Human Wizard.

Strength- 10
Dexterity- 12
Constitution- 10
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 13
Charisma- 11

Human is fine, and if I had to shoehorn myself into the D&D character classes, Wizard is probably a reasonable choice. I also scored well for Bard and Sorcerer. The ability scores seem alright.

Chaotic Neutral is not how I think of myself. I came close to True Neutral too, and scored a zero for Evil of any kind. So if your definition of Neutral is "some Good and some Evil" then I don't fit the bill. I guess this judges me "sometimes selfish, sometimes altruistic, but not malevolent"?

 

[bhavv]

You can still be wise as an atheist, just not the same thing as divine wisdom. E.g. Druids / Rangers need wisdom but are based on nature, while monks also need it but for wholeness and perfecting of the mind and body.

 

[BenitoChavez]

What I initially rated myself assuming a 1-18 scale with 9 as the average:

Strength- 12
Dexterity- 8
Constitution- 10
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 11
Charisma- 7

Based on the test Commodore Posted:

Strength- 15
Dexterity- 12
Constitution- 12
Intelligence- 13
Wisdom- 14
Charisma- 7

Based on the test Egon linked:

True Neutral Human Ranger
Strength- 14
Dexterity- 14
Constitution- 16
Intelligence- 16
Wisdom- 13
Charisma- 11

I have a sneaking suspicion that these tests are designed to make you feel good about yourself.

 

[Harv]

I have a sneaking suspicion that these tests are designed to make you feel good about yourself.

There was some stat inflation, wasn't there?

If you want to take a long quiz, try What D&D Character Would You Be?

Lawful Anal Human Monk. I'm going to shave my head!

 

[Commodore]

According to Egon's test I am a 5th level Chaotic Evil Human Sorcerer with the following stats:

STR- 11
DEX- 12
CON- 13
INT- 15
WIS- 12
CHR- 13

Very different from the stats I got from the other quiz so I'll estimate my true stats as the median between the two. That would make my stats:

STR- 11
DEX- 11
CON- 12
INT- 14
WIS- 15
CHR- 10

 

[Steph]

I took the other test. Here is the result.

I'd be:

Lawful Neutral Human Ranger (5th Level)



Ability Scores:
Strength- 14
Dexterity- 13
Constitution- 11
Intelligence- 16
Wisdom- 14
Charisma- 12

Funilly, I very often played a ranger, and I was general Lawful Neutral when I used to play AD&D

 

[Antilogic]

Egon's quiz gave me:


Neutral Good Human Wizard (4th Level)

Ability Scores:
Strength- 14
Dexterity- 15
Constitution- 15
Intelligence- 17
Wisdom- 17
Charisma- 12

Might fit? Seems like it inflates the scores a bit.

 

[Harv]

I remember in the original D&D, you rolled 3d6 for 6 statistics with no bonuses or penalties. Am I correct in assuming that except for the fact the character chose a life of adventure, there is nothing exceptional about the character, unless the dice tell a completely different story. The DM just grabbed this character off the street and threw him into a campaign.

So you might roll scrap like S9 D7 C8 I4 W8 Ch7, Fighter Level 1, 2hp. I also remember the introduction book gave you a Fighter S17 D11 C16 I9 W8 Ch14, 8hp which was an exceptional roll.

If I understand AD&D correctly, you are usually rolling a specific class and there were alternate rules to get you a higher score. This is reflecting that your character is more likely to be exceptional.

Then there was Baldur's gate, where it kept re-rolling for you until you got a minimum total of 75. This character was definitely exceptional.

OP says: Einstein would have an intelligence of 16, but test gives 17 to any guy with a PhD.

This is basically the reason I have not given any numbers. We do not have a scale that anybody seems to agree on.

 

[Antilogic]

There were all kinds of rolling and point allocation methods. The traditional 3d6 system, 4d6 drop lowest, straight 10s with limited point buy, 6+2d6, etc. I can't count the number, but I'd guess at least a dozen were present by the time 3.5e was released and they have only added more variations.

I think there was a rule if you had more penalties than bonuses, you were allowed to reroll, even in the original D&D.

 

[Zelig]

As a DM, I'd assign roughly the following to the average CFC user:

Strength- 7
Dexterity- 8
Constitution- 8
Intelligence- 13
Wisdom- 11
Charisma- 9

There were all kinds of rolling and point allocation methods. The traditional 3d6 system, 4d6 drop lowest, straight 10s with limited point buy, 6+2d6, etc. I can't count the number, but I'd guess at least a dozen were present by the time 3.5e was released and they have only added more variations.

If eschewing the standard 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8 or 27-point buy from base 8, my favorite rolling method is 4d4 with lowest die replaced by 4 - so 7 min, 16 max.

 

[Antilogic]

I hadn't seen the 4d4 method before, that's interesting.

I usually stuck to 4d6, drop lowest. I think I played another campaign with a point-buy system and another where we had pre-rolled characters recently (we were goblins in a just-for-quick-fun module).