I say bah to the intelligence questions; being non-American I couldn't use SAT scores which would surely have got me 18, and was stuck with IQ which I'm pretty sure doesn't correspond as given at all. (And then I went with an average-IQ-test score, resulting in 16, that various IQ tests could put me anywhere from 14 to a high-18. Holly proves this, by having approximately the same IQ as me but having a percentile score she can convert to SAT and thus easily claim 18.)

And bah to the strength rating, that I don't remember what I bench-pressed the one time I did a weights thing, but I *think* it was 120lb, but that was for repetitions anyway and also 8-10 years ago, so I have no idea at all what my do-it-once maximum benchpress is now.

And bah to all the others too, of course. I am highly constitutional and dexterous (14), mehly wise and charismatic (11). Which is fair enough what with wisdom being measured as D&D cleric-goo rather than as anything worthwhile, and charisma half being measured on results rather than potential. (If you never leave the house, you are not charismatic.)

Mm, that's why I mentioned going with an average. At the low end, I've IQ'd at one-twenty-some, on IQ tests where the average and standard deviation were taken from people who were taking an IQ test for their own amusement on a website (thus obviously a skewed baseline). At the high end, I've scored "170+" on a test that didn't go beyond that. But the going-with-highest-option effect doesn't annoy me as much as the SAT/IQ non-parallel.

I do wonder whether they *should* be parallel though - both are supposed to score by percentiles, and it's possible the person did the math and matched them up to theoretical equivalent boundaries.