Jump to content

Calculate your FE constitution.


Silith
 Share

Recommended Posts

Unfortunately, it IS pretty innacurate...where did Silith exactly get this? Because I highly doubt a woman would even be 14 Con? That's saying as big as Dorcas, Oswin and even bigger than Boyd, Ike and Zelgius, and Zelgius and Oswin have an armor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think it should be based on your body fat-to-mass ratio rather than pure weight itself.

Since muscle do weigh more than fat and a person, while overweight on numbers, could actually have very little body fat and is completely jacked for all I care.

But then the math could get complicated.

(And going by this I'd have 6 con. I could have fun having crit fests while being a Myrm, yay!)

Edited by Luminescent Blade
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, it IS pretty innacurate...where did Silith exactly get this? Because I highly doubt a woman would even be 14 Con? That's saying as big as Dorcas, Oswin and even bigger than Boyd, Ike and Zelgius, and Zelgius and Oswin have an armor.

Why wouldn't a woman have 14 con? I've seen a girl taller than I am, and right here in our own forum, we have Harudoku/Utsuho Reiuji who is 197cm (that's 6'6''), much taller than most guys. It's not very common, but it's not impossible, either.

Edited by Robin Mask
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't a woman have 14 con? I've seen a girl taller than I am, and right here in our own forum, we have Harudoku/Utsuho Reiuji who is 197cm (that's 6'6''), much taller than most guys. It's not very common, but it's not impossible, either.

Yes, I know this. But even being tall wouldn't be enough to make you have a high Con, Harudoku must indeed be around 14 Con thanks to her height, but she said she isn't overweight or even fat. And by this criteria, the taller and thiner you are, the higher Con you get. Then what can I say about Warriors? They must be pretty heavy thanks to all those muscles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being tall isn't enough to have a really high con, but being tall and having a large build is, even if you don't have very large/well-built muscles. And according to Haru, she has somewhat of a large build, so...

Edited by Robin Mask
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I asked her right when I made that post and she said she has somewhat of a large build. You see, unlike a lot of people, I double check my evidence. My argument is infallible. You lost before I even posted in this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a fair point.

But at the same time, for someone who's 5'11 like me, 180 pounds is considered to be 'healthy' even by the biased BMI standard. And you still don't do anything to address the fact that 200 pounds on a male 5'11" frame may be incredibly overweight for one person (high fat%) and muscular on another. As in, given my really thick frame, I literally cannot weigh less than 175 or so healthily before I start starving myself because I have a lot of muscle and bone mass. But by this scale, I would basically be overweight. (I am of course, but that's because I've put on some weight over the past 3 years since I weighed 180...)

apparently, you have the same constitution as a 20 year old 5'8'' female who weighs 110 pounds.

that, no matter how you put it, doesn't sound right

i highly doubt that i can even do half the things you can do when it comes to strength.

when it comes to constitution, you can't only apply weight, since constitution is a sort of overall fitness thing. i've seen more than a few guys who are incredibly fit and low percent fat that always seem to appear overweight on scales such as the BMI because it doesn't account for activity level and muscle mass. this scale has the same problem

Edited by Champion Cynthia
Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay, now I'm starting to doubt I calculated this right~

I'm 17, meaning -1

I'm 1,92 m and 62.5 kg

calculated that to 6.29 feet and 137.8 pound

that's +13

ending up in 12

but I'm just a tall skinny guy and I think I could barely even lift a steel sword, iron lance or bronze axe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WannabeVikafanboy ninja you calculated wrong. First of all yo checked the female tables. The Male tables go up to 6,4. Counting onwards to 6,5 with 238 weight means your con is a whopping 14. The same as me. With that you're the third to be tied for highest Con right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Age: 17

Height: 6'2

Weight: 176 pounds

Looks like my CON according to this system is 14. ...but I can't lift heavy stuff for crap. I'd give myself like 9 Con at most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further proof that either CON means nothing, or this table is silly.

Kitty is thus as constitute as Wil, a strapping young man in his prime.

wut?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WannabeVikafanboy ninja you calculated wrong. First of all yo checked the female tables. The Male tables go up to 6,4. Counting onwards to 6,5 with 238 weight means your con is a whopping 14. The same as me. With that you're the third to be tied for highest Con right now.

Er...thanks for that DeludedVikaFangirl! :sweatdrop:

(14 Con eh? Oh well, could be worse I suppose...)

Edited by NinjaMonkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...