Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

[Enforcer84]

It's late and I'm getting sluggish, but I'm still awake.

 

So here goes.

 

if you were so anal retentive that you actually spelled out what level of intelligence (ie INT score) was needed to develop certain technologies, what would your's look like?

 

1. INT 10 30 AP Technology: Current available technology
   
2. INT 15 45 AP Technology: Current Cutting Edge Technology
   
3. INT 20 60 AP Technology: Blaster & Force Field Technology
   
4. INT 25 75 AP Technology: Advanced Movement Tech (Flight, Swimming, Running, Leaping), Animal Abilities grafted to humans
   
5. INT 30 60 AP Technology: Tractorbeams, Artificial Psionics, Cloning
   
6. INT 35 70 AP Technology: Teleportation, Dimensional Travel, True Artificial Intelligence, Unique Life Forms
   
7. INT 40 120 AP Technology: Regeneration, Anti Aging, Cold Fusion, Wonder Alloys
   
8. INT 45 135 AP Technology: Terra forming, Reverse engineer highly advanced alien technologies
   
9. INT 50 150 AP Technology: Resurection? Universe Creation?
   

 

Etcetera?

Or is that selling them short? Or High.

Where would you put the various Coulons (Braniacs), Luthor, Reed Richerds, The High Evolutionary, Dr. Doom?

[OddHat]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

The Hero INT stat mainly represents speed of thought, memory and perceptiveness as well as less quantifiable forms of intelligence. You could be a scientific genius who was self absorbed and absent minded, and thus had a lowish Hero INT but very high Science skills. So, I'd do it by skill level in the science in question:

 

11- May maintain and develop modern technology, by the standards of the culture in question

15- May maintain and develop cutting edge technology

21- May maintain and develop technology that is nearly miraculous for the culture in question

30- Miracles.

 

In a fairly realistic Pulp campaign, a hero with 11- Weaponsmith could maintain his weapons and make small real world modifications. 15- would get him the very best pistols possible for the world at the time. 21- gets him an Uzi. 30- gets him a nuke.

 

In a four color world with low realism, you can build a Death Ray out of stuff in your garage with no statted skills at all, as long as you have the points. Call it Everyman Skill: Silly Science.

[Kirby]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I like your chart there.

 

If I were to do something like that, I'd probably put "Current Cutting Edge Technology" at 20, so my chart would be bumped one, but be very similar to yours.

[Hermit]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I like the chart, but I would allow for sudden jumps into a higher bracket. For example, Dr. Parsec (what can I say, I've been inspired) is working on a robotic assistant to help around the base. Normally, AI's are beyond him, and he's not even trying for one, but his player rolls a crit on the robotics skill roll....

 

Later, he discovers the robot is surpassing its original programming, seems to have self identification, emotions, and potential for spiritual growth???

 

It may be many years until he can figure out what fluke occured to allow this!

[Kristopher]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

IMO, the only Primary Characteristic that needs to get much above 30 is STR, which is that way simply because of the mechanics, damage, etc. I know many people don't agree with me, but that's my opinion.

[Hermit]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

IMO' date=' the only Primary Characteristic that needs to get much above 30 is STR, which is that way simply because of the mechanics, damage, etc. I know many people don't agree with me, but that's my opinion.[/quote']

 

I hate your opinion, and I hate the bands you like!!!

 

Err... sorry, had an NGD moment there

 

I actually tend to want a good reason for 31 plus characteristics (besides STR for bricks) myself, but once that reason is given I'm cool with it.

[Vorsch]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

You or i can no more play a 30int character than a 60 int character

 

its just a bonus to skill rolls, and paying 5 pts for +1 level all skill roll rather than staight int is silly.

 

Now if int was costed at 2..........

[Enforcer84]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

You or i can no more play a 30int character than a 60 int character

 

its just a bonus to skill rolls, and paying 5 pts for +1 level all skill roll rather than staight int is silly.

 

Now if int was costed at 2..........

Sure we can! It's all in the hand waving

I mean I've played people with 40 PRE and Conversation. Let's just say for the sake of arguments that I lack those in real life

 

I getcha and you're right but hey, comics have set the bar Low for what superhuman intelligence means

[Enforcer84]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I like the chart, but I would allow for sudden jumps into a higher bracket. For example, Dr. Parsec (what can I say, I've been inspired) is working on a robotic assistant to help around the base. Normally, AI's are beyond him, and he's not even trying for one, but his player rolls a crit on the robotics skill roll....

 

Later, he discovers the robot is surpassing its original programming, seems to have self identification, emotions, and potential for spiritual growth???

 

It may be many years until he can figure out what fluke occured to allow this!

 

Ofcourse. See below.

 

The Hero INT stat mainly represents speed of thought, memory and perceptiveness as well as less quantifiable forms of intelligence. You could be a scientific genius who was self absorbed and absent minded, and thus had a lowish Hero INT but very high Science skills. So, I'd do it by skill level in the science in question:

 

11- May maintain and develop modern technology, by the standards of the culture in question

15- May maintain and develop cutting edge technology

21- May maintain and develop technology that is nearly miraculous for the culture in question

30- Miracles.

 

In a fairly realistic Pulp campaign, a hero with 11- Weaponsmith could maintain his weapons and make small real world modifications. 15- would get him the very best pistols possible for the world at the time. 21- gets him an Uzi. 30- gets him a nuke.

 

In a four color world with low realism, you can build a Death Ray out of stuff in your garage with no statted skills at all, as long as you have the points. Call it Everyman Skill: Silly Science.

 

Curse you Bob, I thought of that about the time I was falling asleep!

This allows the normally not quite as intelligent to create things like a big hat that increases their intellect! But my chart was to reference about what you'd expect that intellect to do. Sure, my 10 INT "Scientist" hero might het a hugely successfull roll and create something beyond his normal abilities, but what ever he did would be well with in the realm and rather mundane in scope for the INT 30 guy.

Else Earth, (or perhaps, Earth Chad) is my home grown world. Right now it involves all the "neat" ideas I've ever had and a bunch of curiously familiar ideas that I have liked from over the years. You might remember the Doctor, a character I posted a whle back. His brother, the Engineer is who I was thinking about when I made the chart. These two guys are really engines of creation and mystery rather than allies or foes. So if I want a Dr. Doom knockoff supervillain, I wanted to see where I thought he'd fall inbetween the Engineer and others...hence my chart.

but I like what I've been hearing so keep discussing!

[sinanju]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

It's late and I'm getting sluggish, but I'm still awake.

 

So here goes.

 

if you were so anal retentive that you actually spelled out what level of intelligence (ie INT score) was needed to develop certain technologies, what would your's look like?

 

1. INT 10 30 AP Technology: Current available technology
   
2. INT 15 45 AP Technology: Current Cutting Edge Technology
   
3. INT 20 60 AP Technology: Blaster & Force Field Technology
   
4. INT 25 75 AP Technology: Advanced Movement Tech (Flight, Swimming, Running, Leaping), Animal Abilities grafted to humans
   
5. INT 30 60 AP Technology: Tractorbeams, Artificial Psionics, Cloning
   
6. INT 35 70 AP Technology: Teleportation, Dimensional Travel, True Artificial Intelligence, Unique Life Forms
   
7. INT 40 120 AP Technology: Regeneration, Anti Aging, Cold Fusion, Wonder Alloys
   
8. INT 45 135 AP Technology: Terra forming, Reverse engineer highly advanced alien technologies
   
9. INT 50 150 AP Technology: Resurection? Universe Creation?
   

 

Etcetera?

 

I wouldn't. I don't believe that modern humans are any smarter than humans thousands of years ago. There can be individual geniuses, of course. But the average human is no smarter now than the average human thousands of years ago.

 

When someone invents a revolutionary microchip or a fantastic new medical procedure, he's simply standing on the shoulders of giants. His innovation is possible only because he starts out knowing far more than those guys in the past, because he had the good fortune to be able to learn by studying what they had to discover the old fashioned way. Had he lived in the past, knowing no more than those in the past knew, he'd do no better.

 

I think a superhumanly intelligent character in a Champions game would qualify as an individual genius, but he still has to start from what the scientific community as a whole understands. Reed Richards is a supergenius. Tony Stark is a genius. Victor Von Doom is a supergenius. INdividually, they can all create wonders--but put them all in the same universe, where they can cross-fertilize one another's understanding of the universe, and suddenly they're all going to be that much more productive.

 

That's my view, anyhow.

[Zed-F]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I'll agree with your stipulation that intelligence and knowledge are not the same thing. Nevertheless, the average human today is quite probably a good deal smarter than the average human of yesteryear. Good nutrition, sanitation, and medical care has more impact than on average life expectancy, height, and shoe size. While you may argue that our potential for intelligence has not altered much over the millenia, some of the innovations we have developed over the course of that time really have affected our ability to reach that potential.

 

It's difficult to speculate how that trend will continue in the future as we don't know what technologies will be developed and accepted for use on humans which could further increase native intelligence. Genetic optimization? Cybernetics? Psionics?

[sinanju]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I'll agree with your stipulation that intelligence and knowledge are not the same thing. Nevertheless' date=' the [b']average[/b] human today is quite probably a good deal smarter than the average human of yesteryear. Good nutrition, sanitation, and medical care has more impact than on average life expectancy, height, and shoe size. While you may argue that our potential for intelligence has not altered much over the millenia, some of the innovations we have developed over the course of that time really have affected our ability to reach that potential.

 

Mmmm...no. I still don't agree. I'll stipulate that more humans today _reach_ their potential, thanks to good nutrition and medical care. But I don't believe that their potential is any greater. A well-fed, healthy human in ancient Egypt or China would be just as intelligent as a well-fed, healthy human today. When we reach the point of truly understanding intelligence and how it arises from the combination of genetics and environment, we may be able to truly increase the average intelligence of humans...but we aren't there yet.

[Kirby]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Mmmm...no. I still don't agree. I'll stipulate that more humans today _reach_ their potential' date=' thanks to good nutrition and medical care. But I don't believe that their potential is any greater.[/quote']

Sounds to me like your mixing up some things. Even if your theory that the potential is the same is accurate, it doesn't mean that someone today isn't smarter than someone 1,000 years ago. I quite easily believe that we are.

 

I would say that everyone on these boards are quite smarter than someone in kindergarten. Now, does that mean we have different potentials? No. But for game terms, a kindergarten student isn't going to have a 10+ Intelligence without super powers. Also, a person who has a doctorate in any field is going to be smarter than someone who dropped out of junior high or high school. It doesn't matter that they have the same potential; in game terms, one with a doctorate is going to be smarter than a drop out, pure and simple. Intelligence, like Strength isn't listed as what our potential is, but what it actually is. Otherwise all stats would remain equal.

[assault]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Also' date=' a person who has a doctorate in any field is going to be smarter than someone who dropped out of junior high or high school. [/quote']

 

Define "smarter".

 

Is someone who can feed themselves in a wilderness smarter than someone who can't?

[Teflon Billy]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

I don't feel Intelligence is in any way related to the ambient tech level in which the person with intelligence exists. A person is smart whether they can solve Grand Unification Theories or tactically out wit Napoleon. While one has something to do with technology; the other does not, but they both reflect a level of Intelligence for the person in question.

 

Intelligence is a much more general concept, even in Hero.

 

TB

[Kirby]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Define "smarter".

Since smart has over 20 definitions, it's pretty much pointless to do smarter. Suffice it to say, do you think we are equally or less intelligent than those from the year 1005? And as far as game mechanics go (since this is what the thread is really about) an NPC from the year 1005 isn't going to be as educated as one from 2005.

 

Is someone who can feed themselves in a wilderness smarter than someone who can't?

But now you're talking about skills, not intelligence.

[OddHat]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

But now you're talking about skills' date=' not intelligence.[/quote']

 

Which is the problem of using "Intelligence" to determine the level of technology someone can create. I'm willing to bet that Leonardo DaVinci was more intelligent than I am. None the less, I can create a reasonable web page in an hour or less, where as Leo, living in his time, couldn't. The infrastructure wasn't there, and the layers upon layers of accumulated knowledge that make the Internet, computers, phone lines, etc, etc, possible, weren't there. Increasing his raw intelligence (as in ability to process information) wouldn't have directly helped much either. What he would need would be to personally develop the vast body of knowlege, the skill set, that would allow him to create electricity, computers, etc, etc, etc, and eventually web pages.

 

Raw Intelligence would make it easier to develop that skill set, but without the skill set, infrastructure and knowledge base Intelligence is not going to get the page made.

 

So, I'd look at the original question from the point of view of what skill levels you'd need, and what skills, to produce tech that was advanced compared to the times in which you lived.

 

And of course, in some story settings, you might not need any skills at all.

[Kirby]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Which is the problem of using "Intelligence" to determine...

Determining intelligence is still a disputed today. I score anywhere between 145-165 on IQ tests, but I don't think they're an accurate reflection of Intelligence. (My wife generally scores 5-10 points below me, but she's actually more booksmart than I am while I'm more common sense/problem solving savy than her.) But it *is* a measuring stick regarding game mechanics for INT-based skills. A 5 INT being (say, Grond) isn't going to be anywhere near as smart as 35 INT being (like Dr. Destroyer).

 

As for the Leonardo example, he was from 1452-1519; however, I consider him to be much smarter than the average joe of his day. He was like the 'good' Dr. Destroyer of his day. Minus the "Destroyer" part.

[Enforcer84]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Darn Intellectuals...

[sinanju]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Sounds to me like your mixing up some things. Even if your theory that the potential is the same is accurate' date=' it doesn't mean that someone today isn't smarter than someone 1,000 years ago. I quite easily believe that we are.[/quote']

 

No, I don't think we're smarter now than people 1,000 years ago. We have access to far more information. More knowledge =/= smarter.

 

I would say that everyone on these boards are quite smarter than someone in kindergarten.

 

Yeah, but a kindergartener's brain hasn't fully developed, either. So that comparison is invalid.

 

Also, a person who has a doctorate in any field is going to be smarter than someone who dropped out of junior high or high school. It doesn't matter that they have the same potential; in game terms, one with a doctorate is going to be smarter than a drop out, pure and simple. Intelligence, like Strength isn't listed as what our potential is, but what it actually is. Otherwise all stats would remain equal.

 

A high INT score doesn't represent a Doctorate, or a comprehensive grasp of hyperdimensional physics. Perk: Doctorate and PS/KS: Hyperdimensional Physics represent those things. A character with an INT score of 7 can still have a doctorate or a PS: HD Physics. He'll have to spend more points (i.e., work harder) to attain the same skill roll, but that's because his INT score actually is lower. A character with INT 25 and no degree doesn't, in fact, have a doctorate; and unless he's studied HD physics, he has no skill at it.

 

But that's really getting away from the argument. Any particular individual may be smarter or dumber than any other particular individual, past, present or future. But the average human IQ (raw intelligence) is unchanged from 5000 B.C. to 2005 A.D.

[assault]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

But now you're talking about skills' date=' not intelligence.[/quote']

 

But you've already suggested that an adult who has done a PhD is "smarter" than one who hasn't. That is, that some skill sets and background experiences indicate greater "smartness" than others.

[assault]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

But the average human IQ (raw intelligence) is unchanged from 5000 B.C. to 2005 A.D.

 

Agreed, with the nutrition/health caveat.

 

Plus, of course, acknowledging the well-known difficulties in measuring IQ. (Culturally biased testing, etc.)

[Ken Solo]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

A high INT score doesn't represent a Doctorate, or a comprehensive grasp of hyperdimensional physics. Perk: Doctorate and PS/KS: Hyperdimensional Physics represent those things.

Waitasecond. Is it very common for people to use a Perk to represent PhDs? It does not sound like a bad idea, even if it should only be 1 pt. But I've never seen it done before, and it never occured to me to require it. I have always just assumed that a SS skill over a certain level gets you a PhD.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

There's two different kinds of Intelligent.

 

How well, and how quickly, do you think/problem solve.

How much do you know.

 

In HERO I've always thought of the intelligence stat as the first option. Because the way the skills are set up they easily cover the second option.

 

A person with a 10INT may have SS: Chemistry at 19- due to years of study.

A person with a 18INT may have SS: Chemistry at 13- due to taking a couple courses in college, and being able to pick up on things quicker (leaps of logic, fast leaner, etc...)

 

Let's look at an example:

Thomas Edison invented the modern lightbulb in 1879. The first artificial lightsource (light bulb) had been invented in 1811 by Sir Humphrey Davy discovered light could be created by arcing electricity through two poles. Later James Prescott Joule theorized that electricity passing through a filament in a vacuum would produce light. Sir Joseph William Swan actually invented the first lightbulb, but couldn't maintain a vacuum. Thomas Edison created the final product 68 years after it first came into being.

 

Who was smarter? Davy? Edison? Joule? Swan? [my great grandfather worked for Edison and had some definite opinions how how smart Edison wasn't, but that's another story...]

 

They were all probably equal. Edison had the advantage of Hindsight, better KS skills and building on what was already there. Heck, the filament wasn't even his idea! He just found the right one.

 

Modern people are not "More Intelligent" than people from years past in the sense of a higher INT. We just have the advantage of not having to repeat their mistakes: a better or higher KS skill set.

 

Linking tech levels to a raw INT score is, IMO, a very very bad idea.

[pinecone]

Re: Limits to Superhuman Intelligence?

 

Waitasecond. Is it very common for people to use a Perk to represent PhDs? It does not sound like a bad idea' date=' even if it should only be 1 pt. But I've never seen it done before, and it never occured to me to require it. I have always just assumed that a SS skill over a certain level gets you a PhD.[/quote']

I've always done it as a perq. if you're brilliant and got the skill you know As much as a Ph.d....a Ph.d is a piece of paper, it has much to do with stuburness and money, and fairly little to do with smarts beyond some minimum ammout.....For me its a Perq. because Dr. Savant gets more call backs than Mr. Savant, and has an easier time getting into restricted stacks and the like....YMMV....