Attributes and Duality
Aisha Bennett:
Hey Michiel
This is very true. Some times the presumed attributes are very different from reality. We can make a generalize statement saying that nothing is perfect in every sphere. While you focus on many attributes, few will still lacking.
Thanks for this wonderful post.
Michiel R:
Thanks Aisha, but I'm not sure if this is really a wonderful post. It does'nt give that much answers.
I like the aproach of "in a wicked age", where -as I understand it- the attributes steer the kind of reaction. So here is a direct connection to behavior and attributes.
Next to this I also like the Fudge approach which emphasises the skills in stead of attributes.
As to not be perfect. I think this is the nicest thing about roleplay. Things such as gambling problem, being chased by someone, falling for the wrong kind of people, wanting to help everyone (easy to fool), etc.
Probably these disadvantages could be coupled to the attributes in some way.
I'm not sure if balancing two sides is the answer to a 'realistic' systeem of attributes. Like has been said: why not distribute a set of points to attributes the way people like to?
Though now I think of it, setting disadvantage to low scores, can make even low scores interesting or more important.
thedroid:
Quote from: Michiel R on November 29, 2011, 11:32:07 AM
I have found in game play that attributes not always live in the imagination of the player. Some attributes are problematic to roleplay.
At least I have often forgot for instance an attribute such as low charisma or intelligence.
I'm quite new here so probably there are lots of topics and ideas adressing this issue. (I would like to hear from them)
I myself have an idea and would like to know what you fine lot of people think of it.
The idea is based on differation of skills. A kind of duality like mind and body. I think this duality is also present in both body and mind themselves.
So is a very strong body (builder), less agile.
And are persons who are very intelligent, frequently a bit less social.
Of course someone can be balanced in all, but not shining in one area or the other. Also one can be both strong and agile, but not that strong in thinking and social skills.
I think of first dividing points amongst body and mind. E.g. 12 points, body 10 and mind 2.
Then these points can be distibuted amongst two dual attributes.
For body: strengt and agility. E.g. body 10: strenght 8 agility 2
And mind: cognitive and social. E.g. mind 2: cognitive 0 social 2
Total points can be calculated by adding the main and dual individual attributes. Thus for body: strength 18 (10+8) and agility 12 (10+2) and mind: cognitive 2 (2+0) and social 4 (2+2)
The result is a simple system of body and mind. And a system to differentiate between specialities.
One can also think of two axes (like in math). One body and one mind.
Like to hear comments. (Sorry if this is not the right place to post this)
I played around with this in one game idea where the opposed atributes were more like opposite ways of solving a problem. Like Combat and Diplomacy. Or Stealth and Perception. Or Resources and Survival (figuring that someone with few resources would have be good at surviving). It's appealing, but sort of too balanced, if you know what I mean.
I also tried subdividing attributes into different, though not exactly opposite, approaches to allow players to tweak them by shifting the point balance. Say you've got 6 Stealth. Within Stealth there's Hiding -- avoiding being seen or heard -- and Deception -- tricks that distract the viewer. You could decide to specialize in one at the detriment of the other. Say you want 8 Hiding and 4 Deception instead of an overall 6 in both. I kind of like this system better, because it allowed for some specialization right off the bat, before earned skills came into the picture.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page