Quote from: GeekyBugle;1099936I'm hoping it'll be the definitive Pulp S&W. Who knows, you might even like it!

You have a good sense of humour so I am sure that I will like it.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1099838I figured you'd be in agreement with the crazy that wrote that garbage. And to justify it you cite realworld stuff (without evidence).

I disagree with their central premise, and I explain why. I don't think it is inherently a problem to use Intelligence in a role-playing game.  It looks like you either failed to read the entire blog-post, or my entire response.  

In any case, here is an article talking about a Harvard Law Suit and how tests were developed to restrict the number of Jews enrolled; here's an article by the National Education Association about the racist beginnings of standardized testing.  

There are additional articles specifically about IQ testing, especially in conjunction with the Eugenics movement.  

Saying IQ Tests or Standardized Tests were often developed to 'prove' that one group was superior to another is not controversial.

That doesn't mean they don't have a place - even an important place - in research in academia.  But quite obviously a test that is administered in English may not reflect the true ability of someone with a limited grasp of the language, regardless of actual intelligence.  That does not mean that every individual is equally intelligent as every other individual; it does not mean that you must (or should) have characters of the same intelligence in your RPGs; in fact, super-genius characters are a popular trope for players.

Iq doesnt = g

I agree that the article in the OP is dreck, and is misrepresenting science. I don't trust IQ tests, and they have had a lot of racist bias in them. However, that doesn't mean that the whole concept of intelligence is inherently racist. That article pushes multiple intelligences, which are on shakier scientific grounds than IQ tests. It makes sense that there are different functions that different brains can perform more effectively, but we have no better concept or measurement of those than we have of IQ or "g".

On the other hand, the D&D Beyond blog post only has a passing mention of racism - the central focus is on encouraging more variety in class/race combinations. The comment it makes is:

QuoteThis is to say nothing of the fact that linking ability score penalties (which are thankfully absent from the fifth edition Player's Handbook, at least) to your choice of race has distasteful similarities to real-life racist ideology.

What this is saying is there are similarities to racist ideology, not that it's inherently racist. Racists tend to have inflated views about genetic racial differences, and consistently portray different races as more different than they actually are. It's not racist to suggest that a particular genetic difference between races. However, as someone has more and more beliefs about the importance of racial differences, then it starts to sound more like racist ideology.

I'm fine with the Tolkienesque races, but it bugs me how attached people are to those -- given the huge range of other fantasy.

Quote from: jhkim;1100032What this is saying is there are similarities to racist ideology, not that it's inherently racist. Racists tend to have inflated views about genetic racial differences, and consistently portray different races as more different than they actually are. It's not racist to suggest that a particular genetic difference between races. However, as someone has more and more beliefs about the importance of racial differences, then it starts to sound more like racist ideology.

Or alternatively, it just makes sense on a basic level for halflings, with an average height of 3 ft and weight of 40 lbs, to be less strong than humans. Or for a 120 year old elf - a member of a race that spends its days ruminating on the mysteries of the world - to have higher intelligence than a 20 year old human.

Fantasy races are way, way, way more differently biologically and culturally than human ethnicities are from one another. Giving them innate differences in things like intelligence is no different from giving a frost giant more hit points than a kobold, or making a mind flayer more intelligent than an ogre.

Racists are not the ones making fantasy races 'problematic.' And nobody in the real world gives a fuck about this stuff. It's a small number of woke ideologues whose brains short-circuit whenever the subject of race comes up who are obsessed with this stuff. They can't seem to help themselves. The mind of a zealot is a strange and terrifying thing.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1100014I disagree with their central premise, and I explain why. I don't think it is inherently a problem to use Intelligence in a role-playing game.  It looks like you either failed to read the entire blog-post, or my entire response.  

In any case, here is an article talking about a Harvard Law Suit and how tests were developed to restrict the number of Jews enrolled; here's an article by the National Education Association about the racist beginnings of standardized testing.  

There are additional articles specifically about IQ testing, especially in conjunction with the Eugenics movement.  

Saying IQ Tests or Standardized Tests were often developed to 'prove' that one group was superior to another is not controversial.

That doesn't mean they don't have a place - even an important place - in research in academia.  But quite obviously a test that is administered in English may not reflect the true ability of someone with a limited grasp of the language, regardless of actual intelligence.  That does not mean that every individual is equally intelligent as every other individual; it does not mean that you must (or should) have characters of the same intelligence in your RPGs; in fact, super-genius characters are a popular trope for players.

Things were bad at one time, therefore those things will always be bad. Rockets were developed by the nazis, should we avoid that tech?

Any test should be administered in the language of the country where it's being administered.

Is it racist against gringos that we only have tests in spanish?
Is it racist that portuguese only have tests in portuguese?
Is it racist that in Japan they only have tests in Japanese?

If you're taking those tests here YOU should have a really good grasp of our language. It has nothing to do with racism, in how many languages are you going to have them? And having people that don't speak your language is going to be good for them or your country?

Should the migrants learn the language of the host or the host be forced to learn the myriad languages of the migrants?

FeeFees aren't a good way to set policy.

I've heard both sides, that good IQ tests are nonverbal and not language-specific. Like ones that use Raven's Progressive Matrices. But I'm not familiar with specific IQ tests.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1100037Things were bad at one time, therefore those things will always be bad. Rockets were developed by the nazis, should we avoid that tech?

Any test should be administered in the language of the country where it's being administered.

Is it racist against gringos that we only have tests in spanish?
Is it racist that portuguese only have tests in portuguese?
Is it racist that in Japan they only have tests in Japanese?

If you're taking those tests here YOU should have a really good grasp of our language. It has nothing to do with racism, in how many languages are you going to have them? And having people that don't speak your language is going to be good for them or your country?

Should the migrants learn the language of the host or the host be forced to learn the myriad languages of the migrants?

FeeFees aren't a good way to set policy.

Raven's Progressive Matrices are non-verbal. I'm not familiar with specific IQ tests, but I'd think language would be an easy thing to compensate for.

We can quibble about single stat IQ vs multiple intelligence models, if general IQ exists or is just an abstraction, or even if it makes sense to try and differentiate between player and character intelligence, but at the end of the day this is just more of the extreme left's war on reality.  The real enemy here isn't IQ or even "racism", but the natural qualitative differences between human beings.  This is the same problem as that revealed by the profound differences between male and female strength.  This is far less common on the right, as the right recognizes hierarchy as a feature, rather than a bug, in human existence.  You do still see it in places, like the "meninists" frustration and resentment at female social ability and de-facto positive regard.  There are of course other problems on the right, but they aren't currently in political ascendancy.  Give it a few years and unfortunately the pendulum will likely swing to the other extreme.  

IQ and STR stand out as fields of contention because they are the most obvious and measurable differences between individuals.  Their very existence explodes the dream of ultimate equality that drives the left.  That is what  progressives are "progressing" towards.

Quote from: Brendan;1100044We can quibble about single stat IQ vs multiple intelligence models, if general IQ exists or is just an abstraction, or even if it makes sense to try and differentiate between player and character intelligence, but at the end of the day this is just more of the extreme left's war on reality.  The real enemy here isn't IQ or even "racism", but the natural qualitative differences between human beings.  This is the same problem as that revealed by the profound differences between male and female strength.  This is far less common on the right, as the right recognizes hierarchy as a feature, rather than a bug, in human existence.  You do still see it in places, like the "meninists" frustration and resentment at female social ability and de-facto positive regard.  There are of course other problems on the right, but they aren't currently in political ascendancy.  Give it a few years and unfortunately the pendulum will likely swing to the other extreme.  

IQ and STR stand out as fields of contention because they are the most obvious and measurable differences between individuals.  Their very existence explodes the dream of ultimate equality that drives the left.  That is what  progressives are "progressing" towards.

Meninism and meninists are just a parody of feminism and feminists, a joke, a prank. Not anything anybody but the feminists point as a serious thing.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1100049Meninism and meninists are just a parody of feminism and feminists, a joke, a prank.

Yeah, that's how I meant it.  I was specifically thinking of Stefan Molyneux and his recent tirade against the "female privilege" of wearing lipstick to business meetings; and I hear [D]oosh V was agitating against women wearing pants.  The argument being that lipstick and tight fitting pants both display secondary female sexual characteristics to social advantage.  To which I respond, "So?"

Quote from: Brendan;1100053Yeah, that's how I meant it.  I was specifically thinking of Stefan Molyneux and his recent tirade against the "female privilege" of wearing lipstick to business meetings; and I hear [D]oosh V was agitating against women wearing pants.  The argument being that lipstick and tight fitting pants both display secondary female sexual characteristics to social advantage.  To which I respond, "So?"

Roosh has gone apeshit. It's amusing that he fucked his way into his 40's and now is bitching about loose women. I suspect neurosyphilis.

The thing I do agree with is how disingenuous the idea that women's appearance shouldn't be a factor in any human relations. Yes, if a woman wears cleavage at work, I'm probably going to notice. Deal.

Wait...intelligence scores in a game are now considered fascist?

We really are living in some bizarre mashup of Animal Farm, Brave New World, Demolition Man, and Idiocracy, aren't we?

I need a fucking drink...

Quote from: Doc Sammy;1100056We really are living in some bizarre mashup of Animal Farm, Brave New World, Demolition Man, and Idiocracy, aren't we?

Closer to Demolition Man and Idiocracy I think, but yes.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1100037Things were bad at one time, therefore those things will always be bad. Rockets were developed by the nazis, should we avoid that tech?

That's exactly my point; the blog post isn't wrong about IQ tests having been developed in support of racist policies but it is wrong to pretend that you can't have quantitative differences between people.  Thus, I disagree with getting rid of intelligence as a stat.  

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1100037Any test should be administered in the language of the country where it's being administered.

You're completely on a tangent that I didn't start.  A genius (like Einstein) who doesn't have a good grasp of Chinese may do poorly on a test administered in China; it would not reflect the reality of his ability to think creatively and effectively in an abstract way (ie, prove he was intelligent).  

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1100037Should the migrants learn the language of the host or the host be forced to learn the myriad languages of the migrants?

I don't know what you mean.  I live in a country where myriad languages are spoken and not one of them is the official language.  There have been discussions about making English the official language, but as far as I know, they have not gone anywhere.  In other places, there are multiple official languages and everything is available in all official languages.