From: cffitzge@IASTATE.EDU (Charles F Fitzgerald)
Subject: net.rpg: response.FAQ
Reply-To: cffitzge@IASTATE.EDU (Charles F Fitzgerald)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 05:58:04 GMT

I thought I would respond to some of the things mentioned in the FAQ.

"Q17.   Magic? how does it work?"

On the point that magic should be restricted to NPC's:  I feel this
makes the job of game design easier.  I also feel it makes the job
easier for the GameMaster.  I also feel that magic being restricted to
NPC's is an element of genre.  I think if net.rpg is to be multi-genre
we _must_ plan for player character magic users.  It is not sufficient
to say that we prefer to run magic this or that way in our campaigns;
we should try to create a system which allows the choice of genre to
be made by the GameMaster.

I feel that the intelligence based magic (or knowledge in the magical
arts) should be a skill and handled with the same mechanic as any
other skill.  This, in my opinion, allows for impredictability if the
GM desires but would also allow for a more "scientific" approach to be
followed.

I dislike using psionics with magic.  If psionics are a _form_ of
magic, however, I might consider using them.  Further, if this is to
be a multi-genre game, psionics might be useful in some genre.  It is
therefore probably a good idea to come to some type of understanding
for psionics as well.  I think that putting them under magic is good
because it allows a GM to ignore a branch of the ability tree and, in
so doing, ignore the possibility of psionics.  If it were an
Intelligence, Memory, etc. stat, it would be harder to isolate psionics
from the rest of the game.

I do not like the quote in the FAQ pertaining to psionics.  I do not
see how the ideas presented in the paragraph would be applied to a
role-playing game.

"Q18.   Skills, how do they work?"

The idea of a hierarchy of skills isn't too bad, but I think we should
be careful.  First, I feel that skills are influenced by abilities
(one of the things I disliked most about the FUDGE rules I read was
the independence of skills from abilities).  Second, I am not sure
that a given skill is influenced by only one ability.  In fact I
believe that most skills are influenced by at least two, and possibly
three, abilities (this depends greatly upon how many and how detailed
your ability tree is).

I do not like having one great big hierarchy of stats and abilities.
I believe there is too great a distinction between my usage of the two
terms.  First, I do not feel abilities should change during a
character's career; skills, on the other hand, should change as a
character becomes better in his or her area of expertise.  I have
stated the reasons for this before and do not feel like reitterating
my previous posts.  (If anyone is new or has forgotten or failed to
read my previous articles dealing with these points, I will e-mail you
my reasons.)

Basically, I do not think that skills/abilities are similar enough to
warrant the fusion of the two concepts into one mechanic; both
versatility and realism will be lost by such a merger.

"Q15.   Are there any attributes yet?"

I favor the freeform tree (which should come as no surprise, seeing as
I created the one appearing in the FAQ).  I allow that it might be
some what more difficult to create a point based allocation system for
a freeform tree, as has been pointed out, but I do not think that this
is sufficient cause to warrant symmetry in the ability tree.  I think
that with the creativity at our disposal we should be able to overcome
the added difficulty and produce a very usable system using the
freeform approach.  

I have yet to see a symmetric ability tree of at least four levels
that provides the realism in characterisation that is obtained with a
freeform tree.  In symmetric trees, one must either continue a branch
when there is no real reason to, or eliminate the branch, thus losing
a potentially important ability.  For example, the binary tree given
in the FAQ lacks the Charisma stat which I as a GM have found a lot of
uses for.  In the original article, the author of the tree suggested
that Charisma be incorporated with the Willpower stat.  This is
definately a loss of realism, which was recognised by the author of
the tree.

Since net.rpg is meant to be multi-genre, it must be flexible.  This
means the ability tree should be flexible as well.  I do not feel that
a symmetric tree (whether binary, trinary, or quad) can provide that
flexibility.  The added trouble for point allocation type generation
systems must be addressed, but I feel the freeform tree is the only
choice that is suitable to our purposes.


--
Charles F. Fitzgerald | '....Life's but a walking shadow,
Iowa State University | a poor player, that struts, and frets
cffitzge@iastate.edu  | his hour upon the stage,
                      | and then is heard from no more....'
                      | _MacBeth_, by W. Shakespeare.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design