After Xulrev made a compelling argument to revise the Tiering in this verse, I thought I might follow it with a much smaller complaint of a specific handling of character pages: the character's intelligence.
First of all, when I visit character pages, the character's intelligence is usually expressed by stating the characters's intelligence score. This contradicts the Intelligence page, which states:
"An author can give a character as ridiculously high of an IQ as they want, whether it be over 200, 314, 5,000, or even 10^30, but without feats, these numbers are meaningless, only acting as confirmation that they are much smarter than normal humans.[...]Some verses[...]have their own internal intelligence ranking systems. It is the same situation with these as it is with IQ - without feats, these rankings mean little."
Furthermore, the numbers in question and the meaning of a specific number vary with the edition. While an ancient red dragon has an already very high intelligence of 18 in 5e, the number grows to a ridiculous 22 in 3e , and an even more ludicrous 24 in 3.5e, its revised update, even though it's supposed to be the same creature in the same age range.
Second of all, the wiki has an odd obsession with classifying people in this verse as Extraordinary Genius, when the aforementioned Intelligence page says this about Genius:
"This level of intelligence[...], in lieu of better feats, should be the default intelligence category for fictional characters treated as if they have exceptional or superhuman intelligence."
And this about Extraordinary Genius:
"Individuals[...]who vastly surpass the intellects of the smartest humans on Earth."
Considering the maximum a human can normally have in any stat is 20 (though this is quite loose and depends on the edition), and that is the stated intelligence for several of the characters (again, depending on the edition) classified as EG (whilst being that number makes them that category), the logical conclusion would be that those characters are overrated in Intelligence and should be just Genius.
This gets particularly ridiculous in the case of Artus_Climber, stated to be EG because of a still impressive but definitely not superhuman score of 17.
Lastly, it is commonly said that someone becomes a genius at 17 intelligence. However, this idea comes from first and second edition, which had the now explicitly EG (at least) archdevils at roughly those scores, yet at much higher ones in further editions due to the power creep. The same happens to many other monsters. Therefore, I don't think a score of 17 should be enough to grant Genius unless it's in one of those editions.
Thanks for reading,
Devout Follower of the Mannis
First of all, when I visit character pages, the character's intelligence is usually expressed by stating the characters's intelligence score. This contradicts the Intelligence page, which states:
"An author can give a character as ridiculously high of an IQ as they want, whether it be over 200, 314, 5,000, or even 10^30, but without feats, these numbers are meaningless, only acting as confirmation that they are much smarter than normal humans.[...]Some verses[...]have their own internal intelligence ranking systems. It is the same situation with these as it is with IQ - without feats, these rankings mean little."
Furthermore, the numbers in question and the meaning of a specific number vary with the edition. While an ancient red dragon has an already very high intelligence of 18 in 5e, the number grows to a ridiculous 22 in 3e , and an even more ludicrous 24 in 3.5e, its revised update, even though it's supposed to be the same creature in the same age range.
Second of all, the wiki has an odd obsession with classifying people in this verse as Extraordinary Genius, when the aforementioned Intelligence page says this about Genius:
"This level of intelligence[...], in lieu of better feats, should be the default intelligence category for fictional characters treated as if they have exceptional or superhuman intelligence."
And this about Extraordinary Genius:
"Individuals[...]who vastly surpass the intellects of the smartest humans on Earth."
Considering the maximum a human can normally have in any stat is 20 (though this is quite loose and depends on the edition), and that is the stated intelligence for several of the characters (again, depending on the edition) classified as EG (whilst being that number makes them that category), the logical conclusion would be that those characters are overrated in Intelligence and should be just Genius.
This gets particularly ridiculous in the case of Artus_Climber, stated to be EG because of a still impressive but definitely not superhuman score of 17.
Lastly, it is commonly said that someone becomes a genius at 17 intelligence. However, this idea comes from first and second edition, which had the now explicitly EG (at least) archdevils at roughly those scores, yet at much higher ones in further editions due to the power creep. The same happens to many other monsters. Therefore, I don't think a score of 17 should be enough to grant Genius unless it's in one of those editions.
Thanks for reading,
Devout Follower of the Mannis
