Describing me in DnD's terms

Back in 2009 I ran into an internet questionnaire (requires scripting) whose aim is to characterize the subject in the terms used for describing characters in the game Dungeons and Dragons (a.k.a. DnD). At the time, I wrote about the results I obtained; subsequently, I've revisited the subject (because it amuses me). As the original recedes further into the past, it gets to seem less appropriate to update a though-of-the-moment page, so I've since moved the discussion here, where I feel it's more appropriate to materially revise pages over time. This page deals with variation in the results; another explores more details of the first results I got.

Variability

Here's a table of the results I've obtained on the various time I've taken that test:

As I noted when first playing with the form, a little wilful humility made a significant difference to the results; so naturally I take some interest in how sensitive the form is to variation in how I answer the questions. After all, many of the questions are somewhat contrived (i.e. they don't realistically relate to life as I experience it, obliging me to deal with implausible counterfactuals) and, in many cases, none of the answers offered comes close to what I would answer for myself. So it's natural to expect significant variation in how I interpret the questions and resolve the problem of choosing the least bad answers; which shall, naturally, lead to variability in the form's conclusions. I also have some reservations about how it turns its details into final conclusions.

Notes on each re-try

For some comments on variations the first day I tried this, see the original page.

Spring 2010

Coming back to the test four months later and dealing differently with the assorted false dichotomies and questions where none of the answers are apt for me, I came out as a lawful neutral human druid/sorcerer (4th/3rd) with Str=12, Dex=13, Con=11, Int=14, Wis=13 and Cha=11. On the lawful-chaotic axis, I'm fairly evenly spread; reading the one point difference favouring lawful as truly making me lawful seems inappropriate when both neutral and chaotic are only one point behind; I'd read the same details as indicating neutral on this – a fairly clear example of balance. For good/evil, I'm tied between good and neutral with evil at zero; so, likewise, the form's neutral conclusion seems inappropriate; at the very least, I obviously lean towards good. So I'd read the form's own detailed answers as putting me on true neutral or neutral-good, not lawful-neutral. As before, on race, halfling is just one point behind human, with elf close behind. The change in class is interesting; sorcerer and druid both get six points, with fighter, monk, ranger and wizard all on two and everything else negative. A few hours later, deliberately choosing the other answer wherever I'd previously considered two roughly well-matching (or, at least, not so poorly matching as the others), I emerged as a lawful good human ranger/sorcerer (4th/3rd) with Str=13, Dex=16, Con=11, Int=16, Wis=13 and Cha=16; again, I read the alignment details as favouring neutral good, but at least this time it agreed with me on good. Elf, halfling and half-elf all tied for second place, on ten points, behind human on thirteen. For class, ranger and sorcerer tied with a mere four points each; next, on two points, were fighter, monk, wizard and even paladin. Druid has dropped to −17, but I've now read enough of the site's FAQ to recognize this as including a −21 penalty for not matching alignment; with my reading of alignment as neutral good, it would thus also have had four points, tying with ranger and sorcerer; the same adjustment would also wipe out paladin and monk. Indeed, a little gentle nudging of some ambivalent answers away from lawful then turned me into a neutral good human druid (7th level), with elf and halfling tied on twelve points, barely behind human on thirteen; ranger and sorcerer are still on 4, with fighter and wizard on two; all other classes had negative scores.

So, in autumn I was a wizard/sorcerer; in spring I'm a druid or a ranger/sorcerer. Despite being tall, I'm almost a halfling.

Summer 2011

A year and a third later, having another go, I see fighter, sorcerer and druid all scoring four; ranger and wizard each score zero while all others are negative. Initially, I was listed as Fighter/4, Sorcerer/3 but minor tweaking turned Sorcerer into Druid. As ever, the initial alignment matched Good and Neutral equally well, with Evil ruled out entirely; while chaos is only one point behind lawful and neutral on its axis; so Neutral Good would likely be a more accurate description. This time, Elf is only one point behind Human, with Halfling lagging by another two. The tweaking towards Druid strengthened Neutral relative to Lawful (still one point ahead of Chaotic) and put Good behind Neutral by a point. Sorcerer dropped from four (where fighter and druid stayed) to two, meeting ranger on its way up; and halfling fell further behind (unchanged) elf and human. Toggling 81, from doing to studying, pushed Sorcerer down to zero and pulled Wizard up to two, with no other difference; undoing some of the earlier tweaking and tweaking some other details made chaotic and neutral equal but one point ahead of lawful; Elf remained one point behind Human, Halfling three behind Elf and several others one behind that.

So, for some reason, I seem to be coming up consistently fighter now, with Druid as secondary more often than not; and my halfling tendencies have given way to elven ones.

Early Summer 2012

Before Opera moved offices up the hill (which I expect shall cause me to get rather more exercise than I've had in the last several years), I ran the test again. Lawful was a couple of points stronger than Neutral, which was a point stronger than Chaotic, in each case; but the fractional differences are small, so I'd read that as Neutral myself. Good was almost as strong as neutral and much stronger than evil, so overall true neutral with good leanings would seem a better description of the results. Elf was only a couple of points (at 10) behind human (at 12); halfling (at 10) and half-elf (at 9) weren't far behind; and even dwarf (at 8) made a showing ! Monk equalled fighter and sorcerer (at 4), with only twice the score of the other non-negative classes (druid, ranger and wizard).

Spring 2015

The alighnment amuses me. Law = 10, Neutral = 8, Chaos = 8; Evil = 1, Neutral = 11, Good = 17; and the two axes are independent. The answers that have made it come out thinking I'm Lawful, however, are in large part driven by my willingness to make laws deliver the good they are meant to deliver to the less powerful, where power all too often sways the system if decent folk don't help the good in the laws to do its work. As usual, the proportional differences on the Law–Chaos axis are small compared to those on the Evil–Good axis; I view the test as having mistaken part of the second signal for a contribution to the former. My actions, all the same, match those of the Lawful Good better than my motives.

High Con is a bit of a surprise; I suspect it's rather sensitive to questions in which how I interpret the question makes a large difference to how I answer it. For class, Druid, Fighter and Wizard were (at 14) only two points behind Sorcerer (at 16), with Monk, Paladin (!) and Ranger at successive steps of two down (12, 10, 8); then (at 6) come Barbarian, Bard and Rogue, with Cleric in last place (at 4). For race, Halfling (at 12) was only one point behind Human (13), with Elf another two points behind (10) followed by Dwarf, Gnome and Half-Elf (all on 8); last was Half-Orc (4).

Tweaking a few questions on which I was ambivalent duly brought my Con down to 15, without changing other stats; it also swapped Chaos and Neutral and narrowed the differences on that axis (Law = 9, Chaos = 8, Neutral = 7) while widening the other axis (Evil = 1, Neutral = 12, Good = 16). Class and race weren't significantly changed; overall, I remained a 7th level Sorcerer and a Lawful Good Human.

This was my last run of the test before turning 53 and, as a human, being classified as Old – which drops my Con, Str and Dex by one (on top of the one at age 35, before my first check of this test, when I gained in Int, Wis and Cha).

Written by Eddy.