The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

[zornwil]

Can anyone cite where the more-or-less accepted notion that +5 points to a characteristic, power, etc. means double power (note the small "p", I am not referring to actual impact in game mechanics terms)? I mean the idea that someone with a 15 INT is twice as smart as someone with a 10 INT.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

As far as I've ever known, the '5 points doubles power' concept only applies to Strength (via lifting) and perhaps Energy Blasts. I'm unfamiliar with the idea that five points of INT means you're twice as smart, 5 points of PRE means you're twice as impressive, etc.

[Lord Mhoram]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I'd just assumed it came from the STR lifting chart.

[SuperKlaus]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

You getting this from the doubling of equipment rule? I gotta say, same as Collie, that 15 INT never meant twice as smart as 10 to me.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I think it's been around sice 1e, and cited simply as a means of alowing normals and Supermen to exist in the same game without needing stats in the millions.

 

Mayfair's DC Heroes ddid more or less the same thing, but theirs had every point doubling power. Normals had stats of 2.

[zornwil]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

Hugh, I know it's been around since the beginning, but are you aware of an actual written comment by any of the designers (even in later editions)?

 

(PS - not asking for anyone to produce an exact cite necessarily, of course, but if anyone can at least say "I remember George MacDonald saying..." or "on the champs-l listserv I remember Steve Peterson saying...", that sort of thing. It's amazing to me that something that us old-timers have so long "known" isn't something I can find documented.)

[keithcurtis]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I think the "rule" only existed when describing power, like Strength or Energy Blast. I'm not sure what "twice as intelligent" or "twice as dextrous" would even mean, nor how one could quantifiably measure them in the real world, let alone a game system.

 

Keith "needs several +5 pts. to my bank account" Curtis

[zornwil]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

Shrug, I've heard it often discussed this way as a known metarule - and specifically with INT.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

Shrug' date=' I've heard it often discussed this way as a known metarule - and specifically with INT.[/quote']

 

Hm. I usually cling somewhat near the '1 point of INT=10 IQ points' theory, myself.

[SCUBA Hero]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I've inferred it from the STR chart lift / damage stats, from the Object Body Table, and more recently from the +5 points = 2x equipment rules... but I've never seen or heard of offical support for this.

[Edsel]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

The 5-point doubling rule for equipment is on page 456 of 5ER.

 

As for CHAR and the like. I have only heard of the +5 points equal double for STR which is borne out by the STR chart when you look at lifting amounts. I think that some people then make the leap that +5 Active Points equal a doubling of any attack's strength. 10 STR = 2d6, 15 STR lifts double and does 3d5 therefore each +1 Damage Class must equal a doubling of power.

 

For INT I have heard it equated that 10 INT = 100 IQ since 10 is average INT and 100 is average IQ. Therefore 15 INT must equal 150 IQ, and 18 INT is 180 IQ. However I don't think that these are really rules, just popular benchmarks that some people use.

[zornwil]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I've heard Hugh, RDU Neil, a couple or 3 old-timers in my group, and I know others refer to +5 = 2x for chars and even in general.

 

Of course, this is all very abstract - obviously, the actual effect in-game is not 2x, it's much more complex, as I said above.

 

FWIW, I don't personally subscribe to this in terms of how I use the system. I don't say "you can't be 8,192 times the intelligence of the average person, that doesn't make any sense" to someone who wants a 100 INT.

[Robyn]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I don't say "you can't be 8' date='192 times the intelligence of the average person, that doesn't make any sense" to someone who wants a 100 INT.[/quote']

 

Ah, but it only "doesn't make sense" to GM's who don't have an IQ of 800,192

[Lucius]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

In some cases, it is most emphatically NOT the case that each 5 pts is a doubling. For BODy for exmple, eace ONE pt is a doubling.

 

The same is true for defenses. PD of 2 will, on average, stop the BOD damage of a STR 10 attack. Double the STR, STR 15, calls for a 3 PD to stop the BOD on an average roll.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

For +5 pts I can summon double the number of palindromedaries....

[zornwil]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

In some cases, it is most emphatically NOT the case that each 5 pts is a doubling. For BODy for exmple, eace ONE pt is a doubling.

 

The same is true for defenses. PD of 2 will, on average, stop the BOD damage of a STR 10 attack. Double the STR, STR 15, calls for a 3 PD to stop the BOD on an average roll.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

For +5 pts I can summon double the number of palindromedaries....

Yes, I have seen BOD listed but it's the only exception I've seen.

 

But as to defenses, now you are talking about EFFECT, not "power" - whatever that means....

 

As I said, it's a very abstract consideration. If we say chars double in power at +5, that doesn't really sync with the increase in skill rolls, for example, so clearly it's not an effective basis. It's a pretty esoteric basis for argument, in my book. This was discussed somewhat in the exponential versus linear thread.

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

In some cases, it is most emphatically NOT the case that each 5 pts is a doubling. For BODy for exmple, eace ONE pt is a doubling.

 

The same is true for defenses. PD of 2 will, on average, stop the BOD damage of a STR 10 attack. Double the STR, STR 15, calls for a 3 PD to stop the BOD on an average roll.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

For +5 pts I can summon double the number of palindromedaries....

 

Good catch! It's also pretty clear when you look at Growth and the Object Body Table for breaking things...

 

Hmmmmm....

 

Gee... My buddies Dwarf in our old FH game with his 23 Body should have weighed in at 800 tons.

 

Whoodathunkit?

[Robyn]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

Hmmmmm....

 

Gee... My buddies Dwarf in our old FH game with his 23 Body should have weighed in at 800 tons.

 

Whoodathunkit?

 

It gets more complex from there:

 

If we assume the epidermal layer (which covers the whole body) to be an equivalent of a "full coverage suit of armor", we can give it the "mass" Limitation.

 

We can then reverse-engineer from 800 tons that the natural "thick-skinned" DEF should be 36*.

 

*Math was not checked. See page 487 in 5ER, under "Buying Armor", for details.

[radioKAOS]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

p40 of 5ER has a characteristics comparison table and some write up, but it does not mention the 5pt doubling thought at all.

[Warp9]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I've heard Hugh, RDU Neil, a couple or 3 old-timers in my group, and I know others refer to +5 = 2x for chars and even in general.

The system has always been a bit schizo in regard to the exponential vs linear thing. So I really doubt that the matter is set in stone anywhere.

 

 

Of course, this is all very abstract - obviously, the actual effect in-game is not 2x, it's much more complex, as I said above.

I agree.

 

However, looking at the "in-game" effect of something like DEX, I can make a strong argument that it is not linear.

 

For example, if DEX were linear, then DEX : 10,000 is half what a DEX : 20,000 would be.

 

And if DEX were linear, then DEX : 10,000 is almost exactly the same as a DEX: 10,030

 

However, if DEX is exponential, then a DEX of 10,030 is FAR greater than a DEX of 10,000.

 

But how does this play out in the game? ( is there a big difference between 10,000 and 10,030 ? )

 

You'll find that a character with a DEX of 10,030 *IS* far better than a character with a DEX of 10,000.

 

Looking at their Combat Values (3,333 vs 3,343), you'll find that the DEX 10,000 character will almost never hit the DEX 10,030 character (1/216 chance). And the 10,030 will almost always hit the 10,000 character: better than 99 percent odds.

 

 

FWIW, I don't personally subscribe to this in terms of how I use the system. I don't say "you can't be 8,192 times the intelligence of the average person, that doesn't make any sense" to someone who wants a 100 INT.

 

Actually, assuming a +5 = X2, then a 100 INT would be somewhere on the order of 256,000 times greater than a 10 INT.

 

My argument for going with the exponential view is that it does allow for characters with radical abilities in the game without resorting to stats in the thousands or millions.

 

And if you did go with the "+5 = X2," that does not doom your game to characters with insane levels of stats. Nobody says that you have to have characters with 100 INT in your game, unless you really want a character who is almost a million times smarter than an average person.

 

If somebody wants a character who is about 10 X average that would be just a bit over 25 INT. And if you assume that 8 is average INT then 25 would be almost exactly 10 X normal intelligence.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

My two most promising sources (2e Champions and an old issue of Different Worlds containing a discussion of the 1e/2e changes by the creators; it has the X-Men on the cover) have vanished into my other gaming materials. However, I'm sure I did not intuit the doubling effect way back in 1e/2e, but that it was explicitly stated somewhere.

 

As Warp9 points out, the relative benefits of another +30 DEX (or +5 DEX, or what have you) remain constant at al levels. This indicates a non-linear scale.

 

On the other hand, BOD must logically be linear. If it doubles for each +1, for example, then an attack getting 1 BOD through the target's defenses in two successive attacks should reduce it to 0 BOD (if the first one took out 1 of 101 BOD, and 101 BOD is 2x 100 BOD, the second should take out the same amount - another 100 BOD).

 

To me, the "doubles every 5 points" statement was a means of allowing vastly different power scales wthout needing characters with stats of 10,000. It doesn't link through perfectly with all mechanics, but it's not a wholly unreasonable benchmark for most stats (BOD excluded). To my knowledge, it was never suggested this aply to figured stats. Applying it to SPD, for example, would be ludicrous as the impact of +1 SPD is objectively measurable.

 

As for IQ, I'm pretty sure that one's unofficial. It also doesn't jibe, given the following:

 

An IQ tells you what your score is on a particular intelligence test, compared to your age-group. The test has a mean score of 100 points and a standard deviation of 15 points. What does this standard deviation mean? It means that 68 percent of the population score an IQ within the interval 85-115. And that 95 percent of the population scores within the interval 70-130.

 

Some examples:

 

What does it mean when your IQ is 100? That means that half of the population scores higher than you. The other half scores lower than you.

 

And what does it mean when you have an IQ of 130? That means that 97,5 percent of your age group scores lower than you. Only 2,5 percent scores higher.

 

An easy way to interpret an IQ is to use the following rules:

 

A score that is no more than one standard deviation (=15) away from 100, can be interpreted as a normal score.

 

A score that is between one and two standard deviations away from 100 can be interpreted as low (70-85) or high (115-130).

 

A score that is more than two standard deviations away from 100, can be interpreted as very low (lower than 70) or very high (higher than 130).

 

Anyone want to argue that anyone with INT greater than 13 is so intelligent that they are matchedf or equalled by only 2.5% of the population? I think, given normal vs legendary characteristics, it would be more rational to set an IQ of 130 at about an 18 to 20 INT. Anyone higher is outside the human norm (in the top 2.5%). This would, however, require acceptance of base negative INT for individuals with IQ's well below 70 (the very low), since we would clearly have some people above (even well above) 20..

[Warp9]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

and an old issue of Different Worlds containing a discussion of the 1e/2e changes by the creators; it has the X-Men on the cover

I have that issue too, if memory serves, it came out in 1982.

 

That magazine had all the X-Men stats in Champions terms; I didn't know the game system at that time, but I could tell that it looked cool.

 

And it was that very magazine which motivated me to start playing Champions.

[Manic Typist]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I don't use INT as a measure of... well, intelligence. I think of it as more of a "how fast do you think?"

 

A good combination of INT with Knowledge skills etc, is much more of a measure of intelligence (to me).

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

I don't use INT as a measure of... well, intelligence. I think of it as more of a "how fast do you think?"

 

A good combination of INT with Knowledge skills etc, is much more of a measure of intelligence (to me).

 

 

Thats why society differentiates between Intelligence and Knowledge. They are not one in the same. Intelligence (I.Q.) represents your ability to calculate and reason. Knowledge represents how much information you've successfully absorbed and retained. These two things are not one in the same, though they can and do affect one another. The higher Intelligence indicating someone who can absorb and retain information faster than others and those who retain more knowledge being able to reason better because they have mental access to better referrence material to aid in correct decision making.

 

In game terms, the INT stat represents pure calculation/reasoning ability, not knowledge. Knowledge is represented via skills.

 

In todays society, we mistakenly refer to people as "intelligent" when in actuality they are "knowledgable". Referring to someone as intelligent should be used to indicate someone who picks things up very quickly in comparison to other people.

[rjcurrie]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

Other than what is written in the rules, I have never heard the +5=2x concept expressed by anyone from Hero Games.

[keithcurtis]

Re: The Genesis of +5 = 2x power?

 

As I said earlier, I don't even know what "twice as intelligent" could possibly mean. Either in real world or game terms.

It's just smart and smarter, or dumb and dumber. Equating it to real world benchmarks is a vain attempt, because there are no real world benchmarks for intelligence. Not any that anyone agrees on, anyway.

 

Keith "STR is unique among characteristics" Curtis