From:  (Spike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Net.rpg: New tree offer
Date: 19 Nov 92 19:30:39 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: GE Power Generation

This is my most recent brainstorm re:stats. It
takes the "Build, Fitness," etc. stuff and 
incorporates (somewhat) the Gardener
intelligences everyone loved so much.

Starting from the beginning: what *is* a
human being? What are hir *assets*? 
Generally, it is considered that there are
three: Body, Mind, and Spirit. Let's start 
there. We want to have a hierarchical 
ability structure, so people can choose
the level they want to play at. Let's say
that these are Tier 1 abilities. What's 
beneath them? Here's where we can use
the stats we've been playing with:

(Did these flowcharts vertically, because
of variable screen width. If persons who 
do not use proportional fonts have 
problems reading this, let me know and I'll
work something out.)

T1{            BODY
                 /           \
T2{  Build             Fitness
             |                          |
T3|Strength           Health
     |Stopping      Endurance
     |                          Stamina
     |                         Recovery

T1{                 MIND
                      /          \
T2{ Reason           Instinct
              |                           |
T3|   Logic                   Wit
     | Language        Intuition
     |  Recall                 Luck
     | Common         Deduction
            Sense 
     |                          Perception

T1{           SPIRIT
                /              \
T2{  Will                 Empathy
            |                            |
T3| Courage         Charisma
     | Determin-     Aesthetics
                ation 
     | Self-             Animal Empathy
           Discipline
     | Faith               Manipulation
     | Psi                  *Kindness
     | Magic             *Patience
     | Power             *Tolerance
     | Pain Resist.  *Honesty

* = EXTREMELY leery about using these
as attributes, but they fit the mold.

Below T3, there are three tiers of skills:
T4 are broad skills, T5 detailed skills, and 
T6 Specializations. F. ex.:

T4 Photographer (Aesthetic)

T5 Photography      Mechanical:
        (Aesthetic)        Photography
                  |                      (Logic)
                  |                             |
T6     Lighting          Specific brand
           Filters             Specific accessory
      Spec. subject
      (nudes, landscapes)

"Mechanical" is intended as a broad 
"knowing how devices operate" skill.
Knowing how to fix things (how they
work) I would term Technical.

Implementation:

1. Stats/skills (is there a difference?) should
work with the same dicing mechanic. The 
easiest way I see of implementing this is to
use the "dice + ability" method. If skills 
simply add to existing stats, you have a 
built-in "default" way of using the skill, without
calculations.

2. Re: PA - The abilities in each tier should be
more expensive than those in the tier below it.
This makes T1 gross attributes cost a lot, 
T6 skill specializations cost very little. Let's
say T6 specializations cost 1 point to increase
1 level (whatever that is). This gives us a 
"standard" for the value of 1 point. A PA cost
scheme derived from this might be:

T1 100 points
T2 50 points
T3 30 points
T4 15 points
T5 5 points
T6 1 point

3. Scope: Consider that there are over 30 T3
attributes in this hierarchy. If each of them 
controls 3-4 broad skills, this means over 
100 broad skills. If each broad skill maps to
5 detailed skills, that's over 500 detailed 
skills - more than any other game - without
accounting for specializations. That should
be enough detail for anyone, I think.

4. In case it wasn't obvious enough, I favor
the "lesser attribs inherit superior attribs"
approach, enhanced to "skills inherit stats" 
as well. Let's not base skills on weird 
attribute calculations. See point 6.

5. You may have noticed some gross 
omissions. We need some Dex-type
stats; I favor Agility, Flexibility and 
Coordination. The only place I can see to 
put them is under Fitness, but I am not
completely comfortable with this. Maybe
there should be *3* T2 attributes under
BODY?

6. Cross-pollinating - Realistically, some 
abilities should be functions of multiple
superior abilites. F. ex., some have 
suggested that Strength is a function of
Build *and* Fitness. I don't support this.
It will make the hierarchy too complicated,
without adding anything to the realism 
level. Building a character will be made
dramatically more complex if the player
must perform sophisticated calculations.
So long as the player has the option to 
look at his character and say "This guy
has a high Fitness. His Strength should
be better than his Build dictates. I'll buy
it up," I think reality is maintained.

7. At the low end, players should be allowed
to rearrange the tree for their characters. 
A player should have to make a convincing 
argument as to why hir Bedside Manner 
skill should be based upon Charisma instead
of Kindness, etc. This frees individuals from
suffering under our dictates of the way an
individual skill should work. Skill agreements
should be recorded in writing, to prevent
arguments.

8. Lastly, T3 abilities might be boolean, 
particularly in the diceless game. I.e. you
are "Courageous," you don't have "Courage
+3" (since this would mean nothing in diceless).
Similarly, attributes and skills can be bought
*down* - "Coward" is minus (whatever) to Courage.
This handles most liablilities (disads) nicely, I
think, with room for making provision for the
oddballs.

Spike
Newsgroups: rec.games.design