From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Advantages
Date: 10 Nov 92 22:29:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.40852
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Nov9.193918.26832@news.columbia.edu> jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>
>	To some degree, this is just an argument over notation. Some people 
>like to have things well organized, and look in a given place whenever they 
>want to reference something. Others prefer as compact a notation as possible, 
>only writing down a few things, and figuring out the others when needed. 

	And that's just a problem of a character sheet or two :)
>
>	Neither of these is strictly simpler or more complex. Whether it is 
>easier or harder depends on the person. 

	And I think that we're all intelligent enough to make the
situation easier on ourselves if it's all too complex to handle.
(Joe the Multi-Advantage Boy would be easier to run if the player
just wrote down his Will and Perception at the bottom of the Advs/
Disads section)

>	That said, I would comment on:
>
>	Again, (and no one seems to notice this), the advantage is 
>deceptive, because someone who is "Weak-Willed" could easily have a higher 
>Will roll than someone who is "Strong-Willed", because their IQ's are 
>different. That higher IQ's correspond to stronger Willpower is fairly non-
>intuitive to most people, hence this generates some confusion. 

	I personally don't like the name Higher Will Than You'd
Normally Have, do you?  It's more accurate, though.  HWTYNH... no
problem remembering that one... :)

>	OTOH, I also disapprove of attributes that combine too many diverse 
>elements. I think HT in GURPS is a good example of this - covers size and 

[size?  I think I missed something.  What size?]

>toughness (hit points), general health, and many others (even to the point 
>of governing Sex Appeal!). Charisma in AD&D and other games also strikes 
>me as being extremely vague - this might be solved with 'aspecting' as 
>suggested by Ars Magica, Vampire, and most recently Bryce. This is writing 
>in a verbal description of *how* your character is charismatic. I.E. 
>Charisma (Commanding Presence) 15. 

	I seriously doubted that I was the first person to think
this up...I was trying hard to figure out where I got it from.
Vampire, perhaps...more likely someone here on the net who mentioned
it in passing...shoot.
	The more open you allow aspecting to be, though, the more
problematic it can get.  And, as I learned from my little RPG-
designing foray, the system you create can directly inhibit your
options.  As an example, try creating GURPS characters with 10
statistics instead of 4...the effects are strange and really don't
work out at all.  (Or at least not for me...)  5 seems acceptable,
though (if you want to add the elusive Will/Perception stat)
	And aspecting can be completely abused.  I decided that
aspecting was for somewhat minor changes to characters (-3 to +3
GURPS-wise or so) while Talents/Deficiencies were for characters who
were meant to be seriously better or worse at one thing or another.
The number of aspects one could select absolutely had to controlled
as well...I never intended aspecting to be a major part of character
creation, but I could already envision ways for people to go out of
control with them.  (Characters limited to 1 or 2
Talents/Deficiencies, maximum of 4 aspects...even then that's too
much.
	Unfortunately for me, I happen to like the extra-broad
categories that GURPS defines (a matter more of How Much Detail Is
Enough For You than, Is This System Truly Flawed), although a little
aspecting thrown in would make characters interesting.  The only
thing GURPS really needs is a unifying system for defining aspects.
It's already got quite a few...Will, Altertness, Voice, etc...
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>John Kim                    | "You don't need a weatherman to know which way
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | the wind blows."
>Columbia University         |                             - Bob Dylan