Thread 3808113

How would you handle it?
>DEX/AGI does too much to stay as one attribute.
>Wits (and it variations) feels like it was tried several times but never caught on.
>CHA is either broken or useless with no in between.

>>3808113 (OP)
Dexterity literally means "right-handedness," and refers to the ability to manipulate things. It's distinct from Agility, which is the ability to throw your body around. So any DEX/AGI stat should be split into two.
Wits should just be merged with Intelligence, but if this makes INT too powerful, it could be differentiated into Reasoning (ability to work things out), Education (store of knowledge) and Intuition (potential for cognitive leaps and flashes of inspiration.)
Charisma isn't useless if your game system actually uses it. Considering that you interact with NPCs all the time, CHA should be in near-constant use.
Stamina is a measure of physical fitness rather than ability to absorb damage. Resilience in combat is down to sheer Size (which is a stat in Runequest) and Willpower (which is based and should always be used.)

>>3808113 (OP)
>>DEX/AGI does too much to stay as one attribute.
This is a problem in DnD and some of its derivatives and no where else.

>>3808813
>being able to mend watches means you must be good at acrobatics

>>3808113 (OP)
>DEX/AGI does too much to stay as one attribute
For me, it’s dexterity and sinisterness.

>>3808821
If you're complaining about stat implications every single stat has those when you tie each stat to an immutable list of skills. Pick your battles,

>>3808113 (OP)
all depends on setting.
game without magic doesn't need willpower and dungeon crawl doesn't need charisma.

>>3808113 (OP)
I like substats to stats: like Dexterity breaks down into Hand-eye Ordination, Agility, Speed, etc.
Rizz breaks down into looks, charm, intensity, etc.
We can make these things more complicated now that we live in the Future and aren't limited by 1980s game computing & design heuristics; like HP is an over simplification of health that we got lazily used to. Same goes for the rest of the stats.

>>3809116
Why is more complex automatically good? Just because you can make something more complex doesn't mean you always should

In early RPGs, DEX and AGI are just different names for the same stat.

>>3808808
>Charisma isn't useless if your game system actually uses it.
My point is that it is either really strong or really weak.

>>3808970
GURPS only has 4 attributes where IQ & DX cost twice the amount of ST & HT. IQ does way too many things at once. Also strangely, HP is determined by ST not HT.

>>3808113 (OP)
A Beauty stat was never really interesting . The separation of Charisma and Manipulation doesn't really make much sense. I think that Will makes more sense as a split from CHA. Will is supposed to be an aspect of CHA.

>>3808985
Out of the classic 6 stats, Wisdom has the most confusing name. Daggerheart decided to call it Instinct which is better but it makes weird for Clerics. WIS has the most interesting evolution. Wizardry and most JRPGs turn WIS into Piety or Faith which became Mind (for some reason) which dictates Magic def, healing, & MP regen. Fallout turn it to PER which made it purely about senses.

Wits should probably be renamed as Composure since it is supposed to be a defensive stat but people would expect some overlap with CHA.

>>3809244
Because I'm tired of shit being dumbed down and I'm smart enough to handle the complexity/depth in games.
What's your excuse for making games simpler?

>>3809286
>A Beauty stat was never really interesting . The separation of Charisma and Manipulation doesn't really make much sense. I think that Will makes more sense as a split from CHA. Will is supposed to be an aspect of CHA.
nWoD/CoD Storytell_ing attribute system is a straight up upgrade over Storyteller
the matrix of
>physical
>mental
>social
x
>raw power
>finesse
>defense
is intuitive, works well in game and makes actual sense
it's probably my favorite attribute system [as isolated from the rest of the game]

>>3809308
>I'm smart enough
you are dumb and that's not depth

>>3809286
>Daggerheart decided
to fix the INT/WIS confusion while introducing the AGI/FIN confusion
I swear to god Daggerheart is the second worst system I've ever read
and Spenser Starke makes an impression of a certified mental retard

It's going to be funny as hell when the marketing budget dries up and DH will be shifted into candela obscurity [see what I did there?]

>>3809308
Why would you not go for simplicity if it makes sense? Complexity should never be a goal, it's completely pointless to only want things to be complex so you can say you're not dumb. Things should be as simple as necessary for the design goals. Why would you spend 1000 lines of code on what could be achieved in 5?

If your reason for making a mechanic more complex is "I am very smart" you're making a dumb decision. A dozen substats for each stat just increases number management in a vacuum. I play dungeon crawl stone soup sometimes. That game wouldn't be improved if its 3 stats became 10, it would get in the way of what are meant to be simple baseline mechanics. Having fewer stats was a deliberate decision that moved the game closer to its design goals.

You'll never get video games to completely model reality, so you really need to pick and choose when you decide what to abstract and simplify.

>>3809326
>t. your argument for simplicity/yourself

>>3809329
Because reality has a certain complexity that frankly makes living interesting, exciting, and hard to pin down even for the smartest and dumbest of peoples here. I enjoy the complexities of life and the microcosms of it that get expressed in games. I think this a fair defense for my desire of more complexity in games from old basic design concepts from a past era where the game engines couldn't handle that kinda depth.
Like we shouldn't see -1,000,000,000 HP appear everytime we hit a monster anymore as a heuristic for health; we should be able to visually see what kinda cumulative trauma we're actually causing and have the computer literally computer that up and show-not-tell us that information (great for immersion in RPGs).
I'm impressed with games like Rimworld & Dwarf Fortress that have adopted this new philosophy on old mechanics.

>>3809329
and yes, there's a place for simplicity in games; but over-reduction of a game to something so basic is just good for toddlers.
I sometimes feel there is a type of cathartic joy to the artificial complexity/micro-managing found in these games. It definitely keeps the mind stimulated and engaging as a 4X game would.

>>3809286
I honestly think 4-5 stats is a lot better for spreading things around than 6. Shadow of the Demon Lord only has 4 (strength, agility, will, intellect), and it gives every class a reason to want every stat.

Tough, I think more games should take the abstraction pill. As much as I don't like Powered by the Abyss as an RPG system, I do like being able to say "My character has a +3 to 'Sneaky' which means they're good at anything that requires being sneaky" without worrying that stealth is dex, lying is cha, hitting someone from stealth is strength etc. Obviously doesn't work for every game, but I think it works for more games than what currently use it.

>>3809332
then what you want is not an rpg
because rpgs, on a very fundamental level, are not simulations and even those systems that are referred to as "simulationist" are fundamentally not simulations
naturally you don't understand that because you are dumb

>>3809341
no. I'm asking for a better RPG.
A Role Playing Game. Remember?
I want to immerse myself Playing in a Role in a Game.

>>3809116
In theory nothing fundamentally prevented older RPGs from having six billion different attributes or even diegetic damage, it's just some extra lines of code/text. They're just not good ideas if you actually think about it. There's a reason why games you named as examples of depth are sandboxes with indirect control of characters.

>>3809332
>Because reality has a certain complexity
Right, but you can't capture all of reality so game devs have to decide whether it's worth capturing all the things that go into different actions via multiple stats.
>Like we shouldn't see -1,000,000,000 HP appear everytime we hit a monster anymore as a heuristic for health; we should be able to visually see what kinda cumulative trauma we're actually causing and have the computer literally computer that up and show-not-tell us that information (great for immersion in RPGs).
A lot of RPGs let you turn off damage numbers and HUDs, but here you're just advocating for the number crunching to be moved under the hood.
>Rimworld & Dwarf Fortress that have adopted this new philosophy on old mechanics.
They're simulation games that focus on watching numerous AI characters interact, the experience is different from the majority of RPGs, though I know DF added adventurer mode at some point. Here their complexity directly contributes to the end game design goal of watching an unpredictable world whose randomness is the sum of many different systems interacting. That's not the end goal for a lot of games.

Picking a random example from a game I like: in Dragon's Dogma your stats are attack/defence/magic attack/defence. These aren't realistic simulations of real world attributes and they're not meant to be. What they are is conducive to the experience of being able to use the strengths of one class on another, while still possessing a degree of choice and optimisation. i.e. they make it so building a warrior earlier lets you translate your high attack power and defences to a ranger without having to worry about "warriors build strength, but rangers actually use dex to attack sorry!". That's an experience the game directly encourages. It wouldn't be helped if there were 6 different types of physical attack stats and 8 different types of magic defence.

>>3809424
You can "optimize" qualitatively without the quantitative data being UX of Excel.
For example, instead of Longsword +2, it's called Darung's Bane and glows more intense than +1 weapons. Instead of take 10 HP of damage, you're character animation looks slightly more sluggish and haggard (less sharp & lucky).
I like having to guess more and using my intuition now given how deep into metagaming I've (we've?) gone into RPGs (particularly cRPGs).
There's a lot of stuff that can be simplifed to let way to more interesting (and perhaps novel) complex system in games (not card draw mechanics, I hate that shit).

>>3808113 (OP)
>core:
>VIT - health, simple as
>END(urance) - defense, simple as
>SPD - general speed (not dexterity!)
>CON(stitution), how well you can take hits. reduces the impact of attacks
>class:
>STR - general strength, mostly relates to melee. can also make things that need force quicker.
>+++melee, +rogue
>DEX - general manipulation capabilities. improves the ability to handle small, delicate, and complex items
>+++ rogue, +melee
>INT - general ability of the mind. improves your ability to catch onto things, do logical tasks, and also influences your ability to perform magic
>+++ magic, +ranged
>FCS - general attentive capability. improves your aim and the ability to handle longer tasks.
>+++ranged, +magic
>misc:
>WIL - how capable you are of forcing your will over that of others.
>LCK - increases the chances of things happening, for better or worse.
>CHR - how well you come across to other people.
>AGI - your ability to dodge, evade, and generally throw your weight around on a moment's notice. also makes you stealthier.

>>3809286
>A Beauty stat was never really interesting . The separation of Charisma and Manipulation doesn't really make much sense.
It works for Vampire because it's a social game. Just having one social stat like charisma would make it too powerful.
Separating agility and dexterity might seem like a good idea as they are different things, but then you run into balancing issues like in cyberpunk 2020 where everyone max their reflexes and dump their MA (movement allowance.)

>>3809286
>GURPS only has 4 attributes where IQ & DX cost twice the amount of ST & HT. IQ does way too many things at once. Also strangely, HP is determined by ST not HT.
GURPS HP is based on body size, which scales with ST. HT is general health and stamina. Something like a rat would have good HT but almost no HP.

>>3809789
I understand that Charisma needs to be split but like >>3809325 said this makes more sense. Beauty is interesting when being butt ugly has consequences otherwise it is just slut stat. Either way it works better as a perk. Manipulation makes more sense when contrasted with Presence & Composure.

>Separating agility and dexterity might seem like a good idea as they are different things, but then you run into balancing issues
You made a good point but how is making them one stat any better?

>>3809328
>to fix the INT/WIS confusion while introducing the AGI/FIN confusion
>I swear to god Daggerheart is the second worst system I've ever read
They should have went with AGI/DEX. A lot of Daggerheart feels like it is reinventing the wheel and making it gay.

>>3809336
I think 4 stats is too small. 5-6 is the sweet spot which would be weird to say since I would be bringing up my idea of a 10-15 attribute system. The idea was to force the players to build the physical and mental traits of the character. The mind and body stats have their own pool of points with 7 points that can be allocated on either side. Basically, lowering something like STR below the default value of 5 will give 1 point that can be spent on other body stats but not mind stats like INT thus why they represent in separate stars. The 3rd star is for when the character "awakens" so it is unavailable in the start and it is the only part that I didn't make to be setting agnostic.

>>3809885
>how is making them one stat any better?
Like i said, it's balancing issue.
Imagine dnd if dex was split into dex/agi and charisma into cha/beauty. wizard could dump them all while bard would run out of points.

>>3809998
Well that is the problem with casters vs martials. This is part of the reason that I made the green star in >>3809885 That and I wanted to keep magic special. That is also the problem with having an avatar character. D&D is a party based system.

I was thinking in terms of something like Fallout. In D&D, the stats are balanced with 3 physical stats and 3 mental stats.

>>3810320
What would dex even do in fallout?

>>3810565
When I said something Fallout, I just mean Underrail. Underrail has greatly improved on the Fallout formula to the extent that I can't think of anything mechanically from Fallout that I prefer over Underrail.

>>3808113 (OP)
DEX accuracy stat
AGI dodge stat

What are some games with some interesting and or complex attribute systems? I love a good hero maker with tons of attributes to define your little heroes with. I get bored with how many just lean back on D&Ds six core attributes. I like complexity, lots of secondary derived stats from two or more attributes, novel systems and mechanics. Feels lazy when you load up a new game and its just STR DEX CON WIS INT CHR again.

>>3811338
The game's a little divisive here, but it's hard to beat Disco Elysium in terms of unique skills and skill interactions. Though, given your post I'm assuming you want something more traditional and dungeon-crawly instead of a pseudo-detective game about divorce and politics.
>Feels lazy
Lazy is a little uncharitable, most games don't have a reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to stats. If anything the lazy part is using all 6 instead of just a few of them when they often don't actually need all 6 (like games where Charisma is useless)

>>3809998
>>3811338
D&D is based on doing a lot of rolling so it can't really afford to make the math too complicated. Tim Cain commented that had a bad habit of putting a lot of skills in the category of DEX/AGI. In FO1, Unarmed and Lockpicking used AGI; but in FO3, Unarmed used END and Lockpicking used PER.

>>3811338
FFXI is mechanically the best RPG system ever devised. Shame it was only ever used in an MMORPG. It should have been the basis for the rest of the series going forward at the very least. Its cool how the Attributes, Magic, Affinity, Skills, all tie into eachother along with stuff like day, weather, and even cardinal direction playing a role as well. And because of how gear works (you can freely swap it at any time) the amount of useful gear you can find is staggering. In another game where you pick up some boots with +5% cure potency youd never use them as anything but a dedicated healer, but in FFXI you add them to your healing magic midcast set. Also with the Job system you get to select any other job you have leveled as a support job, which is half the level as your main job. You get all its skills, abilities, and job traits at half the level of your main job. it created so many cool combos and synergistic choices.

FFXI is impossible to beat if you want a complex RPG system to play around with.

>>3811364
>most games don't have a reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to stats
They should, thats the primary reason I play new and different RPGs, otherwise id just be playing Infinity Engine and Aurora Engine games the rest of my life. I play RPGs for the novel systems and mechanics and I want the wheel reinvented becuase the wheel still has those rough edges like CHR being useless in most games. I like exploring how games use numbers to define a characters physical and mental abilities and seeing how these systems interact.

>>3811611
>>3811364
The problem is that DE is just using pretentious alternative names for things we already know.

>>3812587
It's not "just" doing that. A fair number of its skills have no direct analogue in regular RPGs, and the way it actually uses those skills is unique compared to a lot of RPGs due to picking the highest skill dialogue option not automatically being the best option whenever you see it and the fact, since your skill levels determine your approach, having high skill levels can sometimes be detrimental in an interesting way.

>>3812672
I think the single best thing about DE was that failing checks was often more interesting to the player than passing them. Most RPGs make a failed check just cut you off, in DE a failed check often just made another branch. Its like a tabletop with a DM who's keeping the story going but in an entertaining way.

>>3813028
I was gonna mention that but figured it doesn't count as being part of the attribute system itself, but you're totally right. A lot of the time in video game RPGs even successful skill checks can be boring. A failed check is often being cut off from content like you said, but successful checks are also just "You win the interaction/you skip the combat". With DE even if you can succeed a check you have to ask yourself "Is it actually a good idea to try and exert authority over everyone just because I have the option? Should I really listen to electrochemistry just because it has a high number?". Being able to make both successes and failures more interesting is game design/running skill I'm envious of as someone who plays a lot of TTRPGs.

>>3813054
Some of the most memorable moments and optimal outcomes in DE came from failing a check, so I found it particularly impressive. If you succeeded that first hard suggestion check against klassja its actually a pretty boring introduction vs blurting out you want to make fuck with her.

>>3809308
>oops you played without a guide and put all your points in skill 273 when you should have put them in the very similar skill 524-C now you're softlocked

I use CE and max out every single attribute.

>>3808113 (OP)
What game is this?

>>3813235
Guessing vampire the masquerade, arcanum, and underrail

>>3813202
Just let players respec, solved. I dont know why of all the leftovers from D&D people hold onto no respeccing so fiercely. CRPGs arent tabletops, if I want to reroll into a mage half way through the game I should be able to.

>>3808113 (OP)
>Strength ; Endurance ; Dexterity ; Agility ; Intelligence ; Smarts ; Wisdom ; Charisma
Is 8 stats too much?

>>3808113 (OP)
It's simple, different stats should have different buy value.
>>3808808
>So any DEX/AGI stat should be split into two.
Drakensang did that

>>3815104
>It's simple, different stats should have different buy value
This is an interesting idea. Sorta like DnD 2nd edition having different XP tables for different classes

>>3808113 (OP)
>Body
>Mind
>Soul

The rest are derivatives.
I'm right.

>We have computers that will handle the skills meaning we can have an higher number of skils/attributes with many complex interactions.
>NOOOOOO I WANT STR/DEX/AGI/CON/INT

I fucking HATE you all.

>>3815343
>Games should be more bloated because we have the technology to bloat them better now
No.

>>3815336
This actually isn't half bad. Elegant.

>>3815546
RPGs based around incomprehensibly complex attribute systems with a tangled web of interactions and secondary derived stats referencing huge data sheets using advanced math functions is always better than fewer attributes, simplified abstactions, and easily understood systems based around simple math you can do in your head at a table.

>>3815555
>RPGs based around incomprehensibly complex attribute systems with a tangled web of interactions and secondary derived stats referencing huge data sheets using advanced math functions is always better than fewer attributes, simplified abstactions, and easily understood systems based around simple math you can do in your head at a table.
Quads of Interstella.
If you aren't using the gamma function in your stats, are you even trying?

>>3808113 (OP)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dangerous_Journeys

Still hasn't been topped for creative character building and diversified counterplay.

>>3815336
>>3815551

You should recognize this then.

I will add that binary checks to skip combat generally suck. Everything should work on some kind of percentile system. Persuasion getting you more percentage of gold out of a store is a good example.
Rolling to skip entire combats with a line of dialogue is a bad example. It would be better to roll to or provide allies/buff/tactical advantage on a sliding scale for some situational/conversational reason. Opposite for weak stats and bad rolls of course.

5e range bound system is hugely important too, but d20 rolls make a temporary genius out of a moron, and a temporary clutz out of a ninja. It's always jarring and clownish to how your character is designed.

This all needs to tie in with XP and treasure rewards not being tied to enemy kills but instead completing objectives which would make games play more naturally instead of the constant desire to grind every enemy and loot every GP.

>>3815555
>>3815556
You should only have the stats that your mechanic actually use. No point in having Charisma in a linear JRPG with no dialogue choices. And having an extra stat that just show up in one place to slightly change a number the players will ignore for raw damage is not good enough.

And what mechanics you have depens on what content you want to make. I have been working on a game for a bit and you discover entirely new issues when you're working on your 400th spell. I've gone form D&D stats to giant webs of primary, secondary and tertiary stats, to Pokemon level simplicty and back to something in the middle. E.G, starting with 10 elements, now down to six, Psychic damage gone, so Charisma lost the damage option, now I gotta shuffle things around so it doesn't become useless.

>>3815336
These are all the same stat.

>>3808113 (OP)
If Dexterity can act both as a defensive and offensive stat then Strength should do the same and be combined with Vitality

>>3815336
That’s just the Tri-Stat system. >>3815170
That’s Champions/HERO System.

>>3814985
Yes.
Attributes and stats should be a fundamentally core part of your character. Anon >>3815336 is right to say they need to be as broad as possible as long as it makes sense.
There's no better fundametally core division than physical, mental, and metaphysical actions.

>>3815546
What exactly is complicated about it exactly?
Each skill should correspond to actions that are actually used in the game, since there is no point in designing skill checks for actions that barely ever show up, to vizualize how derivative skills work, you can imagine that your game has a separate skill for each type of weapon:
>Longsword
>Katana
>Rapier
>Dagger

These skills should be connected. Investing in Longsword should give you partial bonuses in other similar weapons. For example:
100 points in Longsword might give you
>20 in Katana
>10 in Rapier
>10 in Dagger

Now let's say your character wants to do a >Longsword action, depending on the type of action, different attribute bonuses are used:
>Phisical (+body)
>Mental (+mind)
>Metaphysical (+soul)

These interactions are not complicated. There are just numerous, a proper cRPG should have hundreds of derivatives skills/actions but you do not need to memorize them, the computer does it for you and rolls it for you.
Things need to be simple in tabletop because too much complexity slows the game downs.
That's NOT an issue with CRPGS.
But of course, some of you insist on clinging to crutches designed for tabletop play.

Because you guys are retarded.

>>3817896
Plus "Umbrella" skills. For example
>Armizare
Developed by Fiore dei Liberi, it's a Italian fighting style which encompasses grappling, dagger, arming sword, longsword, polearms, and mounted combat.

So you could either put your 100 points in >Longsword directly
Or you could put those into Armizare for a
>40 grappling
>60 dagger
>60 Arming Sword
>70 Longsword
>70 Polearm
>60 Mounted Combat.

You can tweak the numbers as you seem fit, if you think the division is unfair, remember that a 100 points Armizare could probably never defeat a Pure Longsword used in a straight longsword duel.

>>3817896
>you can imagine that your game has a separate skill for each type of weapon:
Why would I choose for my game to do this
>proper cRPG should have hundreds of derivatives skills/
Why SHOULD a game do this?

You're obsessed with bloating numbers and options for no other reason than "But computers can do it!!!!". That doesn't tell me why they SHOULD do it.
>you do not need to memorize them
If you are going to give me a list of skills for my character I should be interacting with it in some way shape or form. Either I need to know and understand the hundreds of skills to allocate my skillpoints and understand what my character is doing, or I don't interact with them because they're excessively complex and numerous. In the latter case, what's the benefit for having the player unable to comprehend their own character's abilities?

>>3817902
>Armizare could probably never defeat a Pure Longsword used in a straight longsword duel.
Yeah but why should I care if I can btfo him in 5 whole other categories with ease? While still being firmly in "still pretty good" territory with longswords? Exception being if the game has sections where you're forced to use longswords only. But if it has a section where you're forced to use daggers or mounted combat the longsword specialist is screwed beyond belief. It should fundamentally be far more expensive to level an umbrella skill like that, which is something some tabletop games do

you can choose two to add to the holy quadrinity of STR/DEX/INT/PIE
who do ye choose?

>>3817896
I kinda disagree. Its like saying RPG should only use Armor Class without seeking to complexify defense.

>>3817896
>That's NOT an issue with CRPGS.
But what is an issue is designing around all those options so that they don't just become cosmetic differences or the same thing but with higher/lower number. And on top of that you have to create content for all these things and can't rely on the human DM making it up on the fly depending on what the player needs. Sticking with your weapon example, the Pathfinder games have a ton of options for favoured weapons. But if you pick a Star Knife you're shit out of luck and 95% of loot is pointless now.

Those skills you describe are in essence just very, very specialized attributes. Look at MMOs or ARPGs and you will find exactly things like "damage with swords", just with less descriptive names.
If you can actually attach distinct mechanics and content to each one, by all means go ahead. But if you can't you should reduce your options or maybe look at creating additional systems, like one "Swords" skil tree with some branches for katana, great sword, etc.

>>3808113 (OP)
Behold!

Stats:
Physical
>Athleticism, Finesse, Agility
Mental
>Intellect, Perception, Memory
Spiritual
>Faith, Arcane, Disposition

Skills(examples for rogue):
(Five levels: Amateur -> Novice -> Adept -> Expert -> Master)
>Footwork(Adept)
>Aim(Adept)
>Sneak(Expert)

>Daggers(Adept)
>Throwing(Expert)
>Short Bows(Novice)
>Straight Swords(Novice)
>Curved Swords(Amateur)

Traits(ex: rogue):
>Attractive
>Silver Tongue

Explanation and examples:
>Athleticism
strength + vitality + maximum speed
>Finesse
accuracy + tool use + steal chance
>Agility
dodge, reactions(counter, parry...) and terrain movement (like vertical reach)

>Intellect
figuring things out or deceiving people. Also how fast you learn spells and how complex they can be
>Perception
finding things, detecting enemies, and figuring out their equipment and skills
>Memory
how many spells you can recall and how many skills you can learn (combined value)

>Faith
being granted divine powers, their effectiveness and as a luck modifier for god-aligned actions
>Arcane
magic power, magic defense and using magic tools/scrolls
>Disposition
represents an evil-good alignment and also replaces "charisma" with a disposition comparison between two interacting characters

Skills:
General skills like "Footwork" give generic bonuses to battle actions, so a skilled warrior can still be effective with a weapon he's not used to or unarmed
Accuracy has a range malus, so it requires the generic aim skill to counteract

Traits:
"Attractive" or "silver tongue" give flat bonuses to the disposition comparisons.
Say a negative disposition male (rogue) talks to a positive disposition female (priest). The priest naturally finds the rogue disturbing (disposition difference and perception check), but he gets the attractive (flat value, for opposite sex) and silver tongue (flat value) trait bonuses added so she trusts him anyway

Items:
Armors get a flat dmg reduction value
weapons might have stat requirements for full dmg

>>3818357
It's the exact opposite, retard-kun.

>>3817914
Retard.
You are using a COMPUTER do you understand that any relevant information it can give you simplified by the the UI?

It will show you that your chance to hit is X% but you want to know the whole computation behind it.
Because you are a retard.
Because you want to have the whole system behind your head like you were an enciclopedia, and because you won't be able to fit in that smooth brain of yours anything more complex than D&D devs have to keep retards like you in mind and won't be developing something truly complex.

>>3818946
THEN WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT
>hurr durrr you can have all these stats
>but you never interact with them
>you can use them for all these calculations
>why? uhhh because you can
You didn't even answer the fucking question and have the audacity to call me a retard. I didn't ask about fucking hit calculation I asked about SKILLS AND ATTRIBUTES. The PLAYER chooses their skills and attributes BEFORE YOU DO ANY CALCULATIONS WITH THEM.

If the PLAYER CANNOT USE UNDERSTAND THEIR SKILLS HOW ARE THEY BUILDING THEIR CHARACTER? HOW ARE THEY LEVELLING UP?
>hurr durr the computer can do complex calculations
Is not a fucking answer to WHY DO YOU NEED COMPLEX SKILL CALCULATIONS TO BEGIN WITH? Your NUMBER OF SKILLS has nothing to do with how complex you make your damage formulas or how you calculate your hit chance. Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup has complex damage calculations and a large number of skills, but the skill system is SIMPLE because the devs aren't stupid enough to think they need to add 100 more to jerk themselves off. What is the benefit to having 100 skills if you immediately have to hide them from the player so they don't know they have 100 skills and do not actively interact with any of them?


You're a fucking pseud, your answers are based purely on the fact that you think advocating for more numbers makes you smarter instead of making you sound like a fucking moron. Utterly fucking insufferable. Can you not read? Are you dodging the point on purpose? I'm trying to understand how someone can be like this.

I think that 6 to 7 attributes is ideal. 4 attributes is pushing it. Anything above 8 is too much without some kind of thematic grouping. 3 is for Skyrim-likes not RPGs.

The most appealing system to me is an intuitive version of Oblivion amd Morrowind split along physical/mental lines. With complexity that emerges from how you use those stats to interact with the world and combine into different playstyles.

Physical -
Strength
Endurance
Agility
Speed
Beauty(in combat acts like reverse Luck on enemies making all stats worse)

Mental -
Intelligence
Willpower
Personality
Faith (stat effect changes to fortify some aspect associated with your deity)
Perception

And then Luck

Skills should be variable and wide enough that you can make a viable mage, thief or warrior out of any combination of attributes. Like for destruction that wind magic scales off and perks unlock from Speed and so a wind mage feels mechanically different to play than an ice mage who scales off Endurance or a lightning mage who scales off of agility.

>>3808113 (OP)
Strength. Endurance/Vitality. Intelligence. Practicality. Agility. Perception. Charisma. Willpower.
Thats it.
Derived stats are Health, Stamina, Health/Stamina regeneration, Resolve, Morale, Aptitude, Comprehension, Determination, Resolve/morale restoration, Speed (attack/defence, movement, action), Precision/Accuracy, Reaction/Reflex. Appeal/Attractiveness. Grace/Composure. Encumberance limit/thresholds. I think there is a place for tuning this, because derived stats are usually from combination of two main attributes/stats - Willpower and Endurance yield Determination, which influences attacks, spellcasting, stamina and stamina regen (even allowing you to do full movements/attacks when your stamina is depleted, or you are under maluses/debuffs, and acts as a resistance stat/check).
One other stat that is Luck, but you cannot train/condition/increase it directly, unlike other main stats.

Skills under no circumstances should be governed solely by one attribute. For example, daggers (of any kind - cutting, piercing, etc) should be governed by agility and perception first (via precision and speed), and then by strength and by practicality to a lesser degree (so reaction/reflex). Same with magic, say elementalism - intelligence and willpower (so resolve) and then by willpower and practicality (comprehension), and so you would focus more on willpower stat. So if you have invested into agility, you will swing those daggers a bit faster, and if in precision - you will hit often, but you will be slow. Same thing for spells - intelligence? - higher damage and lesser chance for enemies to deflect/resist/annul your spell/magic. Willpower? It costs less resolve and you can cast it faster. Practicality? Doesnt cost you resolve, doest backfire, can be used as enchantment. Charisma? Greater chance to debuff enemy/bypass resistances. Stuff like that.

>>3815336
Define Soul. I'll wait.

>>3808113 (OP)
Race

Vril if European
Qi if East Asian
Prana if South Asian
Gold if Semitic
Melanin if African

>>3819791
Metaphysical related, for magical related values.
Dunno why you tought it would be something so difficult to do.

>>3818966
Look at this retarded faggot malding his ass off because he's too dumb to understand that we can have many skills interacting with each other and that there's no need for the player to force himself to remember all of them.

Retard-sama, king of all retards, why don't you think for yourself for even 5 seconds?
I don't need to answer this for you, if you weren't to retarded and lazy you'd know that for the player to know the interactions that are happening the computer itself will give all the information already digested to him.

Do you know that if we pass the cursor over a skill it can give us all relevant information about it?
WOW

Yeah, it's true, it's the magic of UI.

>>3820479
>still spouting off about muh UI and muh large numbers
>still can't defend said large numbers beyond "b-but they're possible!"
>still incapable of even addressing the question
Go jack off to your calculator, moron.

>>3808113 (OP)
Was

>>3808113 (OP)
If you create a new system, hb some new attributes? Just don't use "might".

>>3816907
Do the same with intelligence and wisdom/spirit, and have each of the 3 major stats run both offense and defense. That's what Tactics Ogre Knight of Lodis does.

>>3820023
Shitposting aside, you can be as complex or as simple as you want with stats, but it's easier to balance a system where the number of defensive stats is less than the number of offensive stats.

>>3816907
Individual attributes can definitely do multiple things at once and honestly I like it better when they do.

I like a simulation approach more than easily digestible and elegant abstraction. What would it really mean to have high "strength" how would that realistic manifest in a person. Let's take Spider-man for example, hes got the size and build of an average guy but hes got enough strength to pick up a car, hes more durable than an average guy but not on say Wolverine's or Colossus' level. So I still think that Constitution has a place to exist but if Strength as a secondary effect also increases Durability to some lesser degree I think thats fine too. Its hard to imagine someone strong enough to lift a car simultaneously being delicate and made of glass.

Dark Souls 2 did this with Attunement and Attunement both governing your 'Agility' which was a secondary derived attribute which increases your action speed. High agility made you very powerful, it made everything you do come out faster and in a game ablut rolling though enemy attacks it was huge. You couldn't put points directly into Agility, you increased it by putting points into Attunement and Adaptability which both had different functions. Attunment was primarily for casters increasingly their spell capacity and Adaptability was about increasing resistances to status effects and stunlocking.

>>3821219
Do you even know how to use one of those, or "the too many options" there scare you too?

>>3808113 (OP)
the wargame I'm working on has 10/11 attributes and all of them offer either raw damage or bonus damage except Luck

>>3811472
true

>>3822158
I just realised calculators aren't your speed, the options on them actually serve a purpose. I'm not sure anything out there has the meaningless bloat you crave; maybe you'll be happy writing down random numbers?

>>3819511
What kind of attribute name is Practicality?

>>3819176
It is an interesting secondary function for Beauty but it still seems pretty niche like "Nerve" was in Fallout New Vegas.

>>3822713
So do my example from before you retarded faggot.
When you have a formula it can have many different components, decimal digits, letters, arithmetic operators, all of them working in tandem to achieve the desired result.

YOU would look at them and say
>Buuaaaaaa too many options!!!! Too much BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAT!!

Just like you do when someone suggest various different skills and attributes working together.
You are simple minded retard, who is deathly afraid of complexity, it's thanks to retarded niggers like you that the industry won't evolve.

>>3823827
What fucking desired result. What result are you looking for. Scratch that, actually. What part of using decimals requires 1 billion fucking stats? Do you even understand your own argument? because you're conflating "having 999 gorillion stats" with "doing complex calculations in the background", which lots of (arguably even most) rpgs already do with how esoteric some damage and armour calculations get.

You have no clue about what you're talking about, both in the sense that you've lost argument and in the sense that your actual argument has no point or aim.
>See, you can use these big numbers
FOR WHAT? How many times do you need the exact same question repeated before you even pretend to answer it? I CAN go quit my job, cut off contact with everyone I know, and spend the rest of my life foraging in a forest. But WHY would I do that? I'm well aware a computer CAN handle lots of numbers at once, but WHY am I making it do that when it gets the same job done with only a few?
>You are simple minded retard,
No, that's you. And you're so insecure about it you hide behind
>le big number!!!!!
because in your head smart people sometimes use big numbers, so that makes you smart. Stop it, you're being profoundly idiotic
>you that the industry won't evolve.
If you had any influence over the industry whatsoever it'd crash and burn in a day. The only question is if the devs would be driven to suicide over your stupidity before or after the crash.

>>3823827
Also if you mean this >>3817896 example, you didn't even actually respond to the replies point out it's silly.
>still no mentioning why you would have so many disparate skills
"but muh computer would ha-" the player has to interactive with their skills and attributes to make their character unless you're going for completely random characters. If you put in 100 skills, that's 100 skills the player has to consider if they want to be good at and focus on. Also it's just pedantic. You can do a lot of splitting with weapon skills, but when you get to "actually you can't use this blade because it's technically a saber and you only have points in scimitars and longswords, not sabers. Oh this other sword is a katana, you have no points in that. This one? Tanto." it's pedantry for pedantry's sake. i.e. It's trying too hard to be complex for no other reason than saying it's complex.
>For example: 100 points in Longsword might give you
You can do this without 100 skills. RPGs out there do this already without 100 skills. Even tabletop RPGs sometimes do this, the ones you think are so primitive that they don't have computers spitting out numbers in standard form every few seconds.
>different attribute bonuses are used:
This the most basic TTRPG shit ever, and you're acting like it's an advanced computer function that NEEDS skill bloat.
>what if... a skill sometimes used a different stat!
You'd have been laughed out a tabletop design conversation several decades ago.

And there's everything >>3818368 said.

You DO NOT know what you're fucking talking about. You don't even grasp the systems you're proposing.

>>3823835
>>3823841
What a retard, you're spouting about 999 gorillion stats or 1 billion fucking stats like a jew spouting about le 6 gorillion.

What's the point of arguing with a sperg like that?
My point:
>Computers can handle more complex interactions with skills and attributes and have more of them than TTRPG without bogging down the game, we don't need to be stuck with DnD clones.
Your interpretation:
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I DON'T WANT 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 STATS THE PLAYER CAN'T HANDLE LE BIG NUMBERS NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

Didn't even bother reading the rest, you wrote all that for nothing, if you think I'd ever read the rest of an argument that opens like that.
Fucking retard.

>>3823922
>Ahhhh hyperbole
>Only I can be hyperbolic about what other people are saying
Get over yourself
>jew spouting about le 6 gorillion.
How edgy
>Didn't even bother reading the res
Because you know you're fucking wrong and are scared to admit it
>WAAAH YOU DIDN'T ADDRESS MY POINTS
>Oh uh... actually I think I'll not read anything that addresses them...
>>Computers can handle more complex interactions with skills and attributes and have more of them than TTRPG without bogging down the game, we don't need to be stuck with DnD clones.
You disingenuous fuck. Why even enter the discussion if you can't defend or even admit what you've said? The posts are right there
>DnD clones
You don't know shit about TTRPGs, stop invoking their names.

>>3823926
Kek, you want to have the last word so fucking bad.
Too bad I ain't reading it, faggot

Are attributes really needed?

I mean, you choose your race and this race has some bonus for some actions rolls. Then you can just buy some feats and then those feats give you bonus for some other action rolls.

Even training can be summarized into feats.

>>3823934
>Trying to get the last word with a "You want the last word!!!"
You pussied out after demanding someone respond, dumbass

>Not drawing roach at all
>not drawing bayle till turn 9
Uhh, forest gods? how does this work exactly?

Seems like there are two groups who want different things, one sees the numbers as a regrettable means to an end where you only quantify these things with numbers strictly becuase you have to and you should seek to make those numbers and interactions as simple, digestible, and elegant as possible because its the roleplay thats important not the numbers, and the other group likes the numbers for numbers sake because they get enjoyment out of figuring out and playing around with the various ways these numbers interact in a big complex system, and the roleplay side is just a way to make these numbers and interactions less abstract.

>>3824020
No, because this isn't tabletop where the DM can just wing whatever and it's easier to wing it without complex systems.
In a CRPG the more "numbers' you have the more opportunity for roleplay, you keep things too simple in a CRPG and you just end up having less interactions and possibilities.

>>3824062
Sounds like you're of the second group. First group prefers games like Disco Elysium, Fallout 1, and Planescape torment where the numbers really don't matter all that much and just define what sort of playthrough you're doing and the interactions they're looking for are largely just a flowchart. Meanwhile your group wants a really crunchy game where you plan out builds, party compositions, and strategize about combat encounters.

What are your favorite RPGs anon? I'm more of a group 1 person, I'd like to know what games you prefer that scratch your itch for number crunching and complex number interactions/possibilities. I could probably stand to broaden my horizons into some more numbers heavy RPGs. What RPGs in your mind have the best number systems to play around with?

I wonder if there are any games where "Luck" does something besides stat stuff(like increasing crit chance).
Like something fun or random happening/spawning in the world, or you surviving a bomb, etc.
I think fo3 or nv has stuff happen in the world if you choose a certain perk.

Anyways - I always choose the "fun" stats to increase (like luck and speed).

>>3824131
Fallout 1 had those special random encounters that were more common with high luck, like finding the Godzilla footprint and the Dr. Who phonebooth. Seems like a very Fallout thing to make luck work like this, most other games just make luck a crit chance thing.

In Xenogears "Speed" was the most broken stat in the game, not only did it make you evade enemy attacks more often, and made it harder for enemies to evade your attacks, but it also made your action bar fill up faster. High speed characters would often get 2 or 3 turns for every 1 turn a low speed character would get and they'd evade most of the low speed character's attacks making them waste what few turns they did get.

>>3824062
>In a CRPG the more "numbers' you have the more opportunity for roleplay,
How so? You objectively have more number interactions for sure, but in terms of things like dialogue options and world interactions having more stats doesn't allow for more interactions, it does mean there's a higher likelihood you won't have enough stats for a given interaction, however. You can have two options that say
>Punch the guy (strength)
>Move the rock (strength)
or make them say
>Punch the guy (strength, striking)
>Punch the guy (strength, lifting)
but you haven't inherently increased the number of options. I'm also not so huge on gating large amounts of content based on numbers, which having more attributes encourages you to do, vs having things being more based on the player's choices in quests.

Our of curiosity, which tabletop games are you familiar with? I don't think you're giving the medium enough credit at all.

>>3808113 (OP)
Only have two attributes, STR and MAG.

>>3824212
>I don't think you're giving the medium enough credit at all.
To clarify what I mean, there are games with only a couple of stats/skills (less than DnD), games where you have no stats, games where you don't even roll dice, games where you have dozens upon dozens of stats and skills, games complex enough that it's considered folly and/or needlessly tedious to make characters *without* a computer to calculate your numbers for you, and classless games where you objectively have more rules for your character options than you do in any CRPG.

Pretending all tabletop games are 6-stat DnD games implies an ignorance of the medium. There's no consensus that more stats = more roleplaying even though there's a huge number of potential stats you can have without relying on a computer. Large swathes of players and GMs suggest the very opposite, even. It's odd to assert that more = objectively better for a CRPG like some hard and fast rule. The stats you see in tabletop are not merely limited by human mental capacity, they're deliberately chosen to be the way they are regardless of calculation power.

Using the examples of individual weapon skills, you can do that in tabletop. Hell, the most current and casual edition of DnD checks your weapon skill based on type (like "daggers" and "greatswords" instead "short blades" and "long blades"). When you think about why a CRPG might not want to do that, you have to consider that you don't have a DM who can tailor your loot, and that you might have more types of weapons. No one wants to put 100 points in daggers, but they only ever find 'knives' in their loot, which they have 0 points in. Hence, broad categorisations. Not as a limit, but as an active design goal.

>>3824138
speed being broken was a feature for atb, not a bug. They wanted to show off what ATB could do as opposed to turn based

>>3809286
I always found it strange that (some) attributes have use in fights and in interaction (open look, persuade), while others haven't. What if a character has a set of combat stats and a set of interaction stats?

>>3824226
It was never quite as stark in the other ATB games like Final Fantasy IV~VII and CT, as it was in Xenogears. Rico is bad because his base speed is 7, Citan is good because his base speed is 13. The strength of a character is directly tied to their base speed stat in that game. Its nuts just how the entire battle system which has half a dozen parameters boiled down to who had the highest speed.

>>3824123
Pathfinder games with toybox so I can customize characters and numbers as I see fit on the fly.

>>3824212
>How so?
Role-play is not just dialogue options. It is how you approach the game.
Take Zomboid for example. It is a survival game, but by choosing to play as a Veteran I made a character who is sneaky, good with a knife, has some basic survival skills, is desensitized, and knows how to use guns.

With him, I went off to the woods, using tents and clearing the area silently for a while until I found a cabin. When the helicopter eventually struck, I fought the approaching horde with my guns.

In another playthrough, I played as a mechanic, hotwired a car, then cruised around for parts and built a stronger van as my mobile base.

See? There is more role-play there than in some conventional cRPGs.
I can do that because there are plenty of skills that fit each character. More skills and interactions directly translate to more customization and more varied gameplay approaches.

This is just an example though, cRPGS can benefit from more complexity than role-play only instead of just being DnD clones, and yeah, most cRPGS are DnD clones when you reffer to their attributes systems, they really should try experimenting more.

>>3824311
Despite the dizzying number of options available in Pathfinder the game to me felt wide as an ocean deep as a puddle, the attributes boil down to the same old D&D ones and the interactions between them boil down to a sea of +1 -1 bonuses to a D20 roll. Which makes combat feel like you're either missing every attack or killing everything in seconds with very little space between. Felt hard to strike a comfortable balance, if I go full tryhard by looking up build guides and minmax everything , pre-cast 20 buffs before every fight and build every companion to be as optimal as possible I completely overpower the enemies and curbstomp what are supposed to be difficult encounters, meanwhile if I just play normally or thematically its like I'm hitting a brick wall, neither feels very good and the numbers themselves and the interactions between them don't feel good, its very all or nothing.

I can see the appeal, and I want to like it, but it didn't do it for me.

>>3824344
I don't think it's ideal either, but ToyBox helps it somewhat.

>>3823947
Attributes are a staple of RPGs since the start but other games tried a trait based character system where you choose a few of positive and pick some negative traits to get more.

>>3824020
>one sees the numbers as a regrettable means to an end where you only quantify these things with numbers strictly
Numbers have always been thing more so when human DM is removed.

>>3824131
Certain random encounters in FO1 and 2 are locked behind Luck threshold. Also, Luck was used as niched solution for saving Tandi from the Khans where you coincidentally resemble the leader's dead father. FO:NV had for guessing a password but also made it a low int check too.

>>3821234
SMT:SJ is weird in that regard where it determines the damage dealt by the player except when he uses magic stones.

>>3824229
I was trying to fix the murderhobo/skill-monkey problem with my attribute system >>3809885 (img) by dividing the attributes to physical and mental. The only point of dividing the stats this far is to have separate point pools for the physical and mental stats.

>>3809885
>I think 4 stats is too small. 5-6 is the sweet spot which would be weird to say since I would be bringing up my idea of a 10-15 attribute system
This is for hardcore fans. Most people will be overwhelmed or even intimidated.
Other than that it's fantastic. Unique cncept5, relatable, yet refreshing.
>>3824348
I remember it, I gave you input once again. Looks good. Is the system ttrpg or rpg or both? If you make a game, you could make a boni or whatever in form of a free adventure. Solo adventures are cool, albeit a testimony of forever alone.

>>3824344
>>3824344
kingmaker is an impressive game but pathfinder was not really 'designed' as a game, its just a bunch of sourcebook slop

>>3824388
>Is the system ttrpg or rpg or both?
It is for a CRPG, I am at the mindset that the frontend should be intuitive while the backend is complicated.

I think that the problem with stat system isn't necessarily the complexity but the issue of choice paralysis. A class based system is more complicated than a skill based system but it is easier to balance. The separate points pools for the 2 categories of stats is supposed to make the trade off easier. I started with the Fallout SPECIAL system then Underrail's system but I realized that there are only 2 "mental" stats vs the 4-5 physical stats. D&D has 3 physical stats and 3 mental stats. Obviously there is going to be some overlap like mental stats such as WILL and CMP will be useful in combat while STR, PER, DEX, and AGI can be useful for problem solving. There is a lot of inspiration taken from AoD's physical and mental experience system.

>>3823947
Completely possible to reduce numbers to a minimum. Unsure if such a system is better than a number based one. Needs testing imho.

>>3824220
you meant Lasers and feelings

>>3824318
Ah, I see what you mean now. I still don't think you need an insane number of skills to make that work, I'd even argue the number of skills most RPGs currently have enable that level gameplay difference already. The issue is mainly that devs aren't designing for it.

You can have a couple dozen skills but have all characters play the same way, or only a handful that make characters play very differently. It's really up to how many options the devs are willing and able to put into the game for different playstyles. The more sandbox-y the game design the closer you'll get to what you want. Skills aren't the only way to introduce differences like that, things like feats/abilities, classes, and character background options can also be used to create those playstyle differences without necessarily increasing the skill lists.

Its kinda strange when Int is not used by warriors. Like, why Int can't be used to formulate tactics, or to figure out weaknesses?

>>3825709
INT very easily becomes a god stat if you keep giving it stuff to do like that. Sure it follows that high INT should make you better at pretty much anything you put your mind to, but then you're in a situation where everyone always invests in INT regardless of any other aspect of their character because it always makes you better.

Regarding the discussion from before, I'm on team complexity and depth.

Imagine a system where every action your character takes, like Dodge, or a specific technique, has a formula combining weighted attributes and specific skills, producing an Action Score. The system shows exactly which attributes and skills are relevant to the action you want to improve, and you can spend skill points, representing years of training, on either broad attributes such as Strength, Speed, and Awareness or focused skills and different skills or attributes can have different costs.

You can expend your points however you want, specializing heavily or spreading training for versatility, while talents multiply the effect of training in certain attributes to create unique strengths and/or effects. Since each action uses different attribute weights, your choices directly shape your character’s performance and playstyle add diminishing returns for balancing and there you have it. You can get up to hundreds of skills and attributes with a system like this.

Wants a character that can jump high? You can have it. Run fast? You can have it. A Spearmaster that runs fast and jump high for a devastating diving attack? You can have it.
Such freedom, I crave for something like this.

Here’s a formula for a simple action:

>Dodge
Dodge Score = (Speed × 0.35) + (Awareness × 0.35) + (Dexterity × 0.25) + Dodge Skill + Modifiers

Or a technique.
Asura's Strike Score = (Strength × 0.30) + (Speed × 0.30) + (Dexterity × 0.25) + (Toughness × 0.15) + (Magical Power × 0.10) + (Magical Control × 0.15)
+ Unarmed Strike Skill + Asura's Strike Technique Skill + Modifiers

These are just examples of course, but that would be the gist of it.

>>3826394
Now layer dodge skill, weapon parry skill, and shield block skill, and you've got FFXI.

>>3808808
>Dexterity literally means "right-handedness," and refers to the ability to manipulate things. It's distinct from Agility, which is the ability to throw your body around. So any DEX/AGI stat should be split into two.
I can't help but notice your explanation has no relation to game balance or design, just realism.

>>3826524
If dex and agi are separated you can have a character with high accuracy but low evasion, or a character with high evasion but low accuracy, allowing for more character types.

>>3826422
Seriously? If it's anything like this system I'd love to give it a chance, is it the MMO one? Or is it plagued by classes and you can't freeform at all?

>>3826524
I preffer Speed/Dexterity myself.
Agility feels like a mix of both.

>>3826622
Yeah, the mmo one.
https://www.bg-wiki.com/ffxi/Shield_Skill

The game has the classic ff job system, but with the twist of support jobs, which is a second job at half the level of your main job. So you can be a lv 50 warrior and sub whitemage at lv 25 for healing spells, or sub monk for better hp and guarding skill, or sub thief for treasure hunter, ect. You can level all jobs on one character so you can mix and match and experiment with different job/subjob combos as much as you want.

>>3808113 (OP)
>STR
>AGI
>SPD
>Looks
All objectively measurable, everything else should be relegated to a skill.

>>3826647
>Looks as a core stat
Yeah I'll lie to the guard +looks. Then I'll cast fireball, its damage scales off of looks.

>>3826703
To a sensible person fireballs and lying are not tied to the measurable aspects you sarcastic faggot.

>>3826887
Okay, but why not use relevant, frequently used measurable aspects like Intelligence, Willpower, or Charisma instead? What possesses one to make fucking Looks a core stat above all of those? If you're making something a core stat it should relate to things the player does often, so why looks specifically?

>>3826629
I see.
Guess I'm finally giving an MMO a chance then.

>>3827163
>Okay, but why not use...
>Intelligence
Character's intelligence always equals or is below player's. No need to track it.
>Willpower
Tied to character progression, is effectively a character level.
>Charisma
A combination of player's intelligence, character's level and looks. It's not needed.

>What possesses one to make fucking Looks a core stat above all of those?
Inherently inborn + most obvious gate to social interactions. Looks is the primary conversation starter regardless of sex and/or competency.

The mistake is thinking stats need to be balanced.

>>3827399
>Character's intelligence always equals or is below player's. No need to track it.
Not really true. The player isn't the one who remembers and casts spells, recalls lore, or interacts/tinkers with mechanisms.
>Tied to character progression
Doesn't inherently have to be, whether it is or not is ultimately arbitrary.
>intelligence, character's level
You can be stupid and highly experienced and still have terrible charisma.
>Inherently inborn
Looks are going to involve your physical stats too, the more fit your character is, the better looking they are. Does the stat get a huge boost to max level if you cast an illusion spell? Does it turn off if you wear a helmet? What about when dealing with characters that have non-human beauty standards?
>most obvious gate to social interactions
Would still be Charisma/Presence. That covers all types of social interaction, from being charming to being deceptive to being intimidating, without getting caught up on edge cases. Looks affect Charisma, but there's not to it than that even when it comes to first impressions, like body language, tone, and confidence.

STR - Earth
DEX - Fire
INT - Air
WIS - Water
CHA - Dark
END/STA - Light

damn... the 6 stats that matter... associated with the 6 rpg elements...

>>3827461
Tactics Ogre (1995) had this system
Fire (STR) melts Ice (INT) blocks Wind (AGI) erodes Earth (VIT) grounds Lightning (DEX) shocks Water (MND) douses Fire (STR).

Light (CHR) illuminates Dark (Mana), but Dark (Mana) also eclipses Light (CHR).

Each of these had their own associated god
Xoshonell - Goddess of Fire
Lyuneram - Goddess of Ice
Hahnela - Goddess of Wind
Vaasa - Goddess of Earth
Nestharot - Goddess of Lightning
Greuza - Goddess of Water
Ishtar - Goddess of Light
Ashmedai - God of Darkness

>>3827509
RPS elemental systems are bad and you should feel bad for liking them.

>>3827510
Nah, they're great.

>>3827163
>why not use relevant, frequently used measurable aspects like Intelligence, Willpower, or Charisma instead
They're vague pigeonholes for many common use cases and used to simplify dice rolls which RPGs inherited game from TTRPGs but that doesn't have to be the case because we're way into the computer age and complex calculations for which player attributes should be just one variable can be done on the fly.
>If you're making something a core stat it should relate to things the player does often, so why looks specifically?
I'm assuming non violent interactions are between human beings and we have big brains just to see better so it's the dominant sense in those interactions.

>>3826647
Huh. You mind if I borrow this system for my project? Looks neat.

>>3827594
It's an idea posted on 4chan not a system but knock yourself out.

>>3827562
There's literally zero reason those other skills have to be used in less complex calculations. Not using them because of that is asinine, especially when keeping strength.

And if you want more complex multi-layered calculations why are you cutting down on skills? Let alone on skills that apply to more than one thing?

>>3808113 (OP)
Str, dex, int. Done.

>>3809329
>I play game that was successively ruined by removing complexity
>it wouldn't be better with more complexity
Especially in roguelikes, where the player learning how the game works and what they can do IS THE GAME, this is completely retarded.
The end point of your argument is there should be one enemy and the player has one attack; and then the game is over.

>>3827813
"Intelligence, Willpower, or Charisma" is made up bullshit whereas strength, speed, and agility are sufficiently irreducible and can be reasonably tied to character progression.

>>3827856
>successively ruined
lol
>completely retarded
There are many roguelikes where the entire point is how simple they are
That (You) don't personally like them doesn't make the idea fundamentally flawed

>>3827985
>is made up bullshit
They're not though? Do you think charisma just doesn't exist?
>sufficiently irreducible
What makes something "sufficiently" irreducible? That's arbitrary.
>can be reasonably tied to character progression.
You can tie any stat you invent to character progression as easily as any other stat

>>3828228
>Do you think charisma just doesn't exist?
Its not quantitative, you cant measure charisma, its nebulous and subjective. Strength, Speed, Endurance, those are objective, he can lift this much weight, run this fast, and for this long, ect.

>>3827829
I bet you think atk-def=dmg is a good formula.

>>3828786
>he can lift this much weight
absolute negative IQ retard take
one dude can bench press more the other can deadlift more, who has a bigger str score?
it's all an abstraction ultimately divorced from reality, and treating it any different is just an indication of low IQ

besides if you can't think of a way to measure rizz doesn't mean there isn't a way to measure it

Of course, the way to fix Charisma is to rename it Rizz.

>>3828786
How are you quantifying dex/agility? Are you quantifying speed based on movement speed (which is rooted at least partially in strength), physical reaction speed (rooted in dex/agility), or mental reaction speed (rooted in the mental stats you deem unquantifiable)? How do you quantify the "take a hit" portion of endurance, especially when accounting for things like people who are generally tanky but have glass jaws?

>>3829355
>one dude can bench press more the other can deadlift more, who has a bigger str score?
Good point. I'm often amused at how many weight-lifters can't do a single pull-up.
If you really want to quantify strength you'd have to consider all the different muscle groups, or even individual muscles.

>>3827829
You RPG-lite types make me sick. Stuff your Trolls up your Tunnel.

>>3829394
>If you really want to quantify strength you'd have to consider all the different muscle groups, or even individual muscles.
you could, but that is pointless in context of RPGs, TT or C

>>3829355
>one dude can bench press more the other can deadlift more, who has a bigger str score?
Look at the powerlifting total of squat + bench press + deadlift, to smooth this out into one number.
>Good point. I'm often amused at how many weight-lifters can't do a single pull-up.
A reasonably strong man should be able to do at least one pull-up, unless they are very fat. I am tall and fat and I can do maybe 1-3 per set. When I was ripped with abs, I could do maybe 10 per set. Depends on strength-to-weight ratio, a short and efficient manlet will likely be able to do many more pull-ups than a tall man.

We used to approximate our strength score IRL by approximating press ~= max load, deadlift ~= 2x max load
>Lifting and Dragging
>A character can lift as much as his or her maximum load over his or her head.
>A character can lift as much as double his or her maximum load off the ground, but he or she can only stagger around with it.

>>3829430
Whoops, meant to also quote >>3829394

>>3829355
>one dude can bench press more the other can deadlift more, who has a bigger str score?
Pretty easy to solve this by just averaging out their relative scores across a variety of lifts. Take 10000 guys, find out a statistical average for each lift, set 1 to the perfect statistical average and compare their scores as a relative ratio to that average, then you take an aveage of those ratios,
guy A is 0.8, 0.7, 1.5, 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5
guy B is 1.1, 1.2, 1.1, 1.0, 1.1. 1.2, 1.3
A1.18avg > B1.14avg
So guy A has a higher STR score

If you want to go full simulation it would be easy to generate a relative scores for every muscle group which you hide and average those out into a broad STR score that you display to the player.

>>3808970
To be fair the act of being dextrous vs being agile is quite different and applies to different things in games.

A dextrous person would be quick to handle a flint lock pistol, or would have an easy time throwing darts.
An agile person would have no issue climbing, flipping around, or walking a tight rope. Inherently different actions.

A solely dextrous person can't run fast.
An agile person can.
A solely agile person can't use a needle and thread very well.

>>3829712
Dex just sounds like an assortment of manual skills, Agi sounds like a combination of coordination and strength.

>>3829715
Dexterity is hands, agility is feet.

>>3808808
What if we let willpower change throughout the game instead of remaining static? For example, maybe your character has a base 40 willpower, but when they’re defending their friends that doubles to 80. Though this would probably work better in a Tabletop system.

>>3829355
>one dude can bench press more the other can deadlift more, who has a bigger str score?
The deadlifter obviously. It's a compound exercise which recruits more muscle groups so it's a better metric for absolute strength.

>>3829963
Bench press is also a compound exercise.

>>3829965
For the upper body, sure, but a deadlift covers more muscles so it's a better test of strength.

>>3829967
Imo, express the powerlifting total relative to body weight.

>>3829355
>besides if you can't think of a way to measure rizz doesn't mean there isn't a way to measure it
Give examples of ways to objectively measure and quantify 'rizz'.

>>3828786
Charisma increases your co-op damage bonus, your co-op odds and your smirk odds.

>>3825709
it bothers me that I can't use INT for INITIATIVE for some reason

>>3825709
An RPG that separates its warriors from its mages will have its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards.

>>3829373
I'm NTA but it seems we're mostly on the same page. Of the attributes common in RPGs only STR, AGI, and SPD are objectively measurable and it's important to establish that as a first principle.
There may be overlaps (particularly at their peak) but that's a given because they're all measures of fitness.
>Speed
Movement speed as determined by biomechanics (body shape, leg length, height, etc.) but also aerobic efficiency which improves naturally over time when running.
>Agility
This covers the physical and mental reaction times, they're the same thing but traditionally AGI subsumes some of STR and INT takes the rest; what's left is some amalgamation of different unrelated things like eye-hand coordination which falls under dexterity but dexterity is a learned ability specific to some activity not a measurable quality common to all people.
>How do you quantify the "take a hit" portion of endurance
Throw END/CON and the health bar into the trash and put the non-health related parts like stamina under SPD, there's no one attribute that can determine a person's hit points so that part should definitely go.
>things like people who are generally tanky but have glass jaws?
In boxing that's down to poor technique and neglecting the neck muscles. If I were to gamify that it would be a weak spot on the head.

no stats, all damage is based on equipment ratings. leveling up lets you wield better equips. HP stays the same throughout the game. stop relying on these gay old DnD ideas

>>3828786
>you cant measure charisma
number of sycophants acquired through rizzling activities?

>>3825709
>formulate tactics
in most video game rpgs tactics are formulated by the player, not the characters, so it's something rooted in player INT. You could do it in something really narrative like CYOA game where you select the "Use my intelligence for tactics" choice to win a fight or something.
>to figure out weaknesses?
Honestly a fare use for the skill. Though I guess that's one of those things that becomes useless with on repeat playthroughs or with any sort of meta knowledge.
>>3826349
In most games, including actually tabletop ones, int is rarely worth raising unless your class stats scale directly off it. It could become a god stat if you keep buffing it, but it's probably better to deal with that if an when it happens rather than refuse to buff the stat just because it could happen.
>>3831377
>>leveling up lets you wield better equips
>arbitrary level requirements on equipment
don't complain about old gay ideas if you're just going to replace them with other old gay ideas

>>3831444
>tactics are formulated by the player
i think anon you reply to here is thinking basically of a feat system - fighter can raise int to get feats that "exploit battle tactics" to move faster, act more frequently, etc.

>don't complain about old gay ideas if you're just going to replace them with other old gay ideas
well a lot of the "new" ideas for relating gear and attributes fucking suck, so maybe it's more so that some gay old ideas become dominant over good old ideas, then the gayness of the gay old ideas lead incompetent people to design shittier replacements, so now its time to go back to old ideas and see what the market neglected in its blind rampage to swallow the planet

>>3831377
Everything being based on equipment quality is basically just WoW

>>3826524
A super special coder/hacker has high dexterity but low agi

A defensive lineman might have high str and agi but low dex

Dex matters for gunplay. Agi matters for parkour.

>>3827985
>>3828786
Point of charisma is specifically that it can be measured. You instinctively know when you meet a charismatic person, just as you instinctively know when you meet a guy with a charisma dump stat

Same with intelligence. Same with willpower. These are relevant stats.

I like when luck is a stat and effects everything in subtle ways during normal play. I also like luckmode NG+ where you have max luck and you're popping crits and getting drops like crazy.

>>3834620
>Point of charisma is specifically that it can be measured
are you going to explain how or do you think programmers are wizards who can turn human instinct into game logic?

>>3834802
'the abyss within' is great for this. Luck increases your ilevel loot drops and gives you more cards from booster packs. You go from 3 cards to 4 cards to 5 cards to 8 cards. Feels like the most important stat beacuse +HP on gear is so important

>>3834947
What does that have to do with charisma as a stat?

The existant framework of magic incantations is wholly separated from INT as a stat

>>3835068
On 4chan it's good etiquette to read the thread before posting.
>What does that have to do with charisma as a stat?
It's not measurable, it's a collection of qualities that are mostly subjective. This thread is about improving RPG attributes and I think more objective stats would make scaling them and the play styles they affect more interesting.

>The existant framework of magic incantations is wholly separated from INT as a stat
What

>>3834947
>do you think programmers are wizards who can turn human instinct into game logic?
Yes. A programmer says, "Bob has a charisma score of 10, and Charles has a charisma score of 13. Charles is able to seduce Isabella, whose love difficulty score is 12. Bob isn't."

>>3835503
>charisma score
Does the programmer pull that out of your ass?

>>3835400
>>3834947
>stats would make scaling them and the play styles they affect more interesting.
NTA but what exactly is more interesting about strength than wisdom? Is it just the fact you can tie it to how much you can comfortably carry?

The only "easy" to measure stat is Strength, and even this thread shows that's a pain when accounting for how you can be strong in different muscle groups, and how strength also translates to things other than lifting. The vast majority of stats do not have objective scales so I think that's a weird thing to get hung up on. Dexterity and agility certainly don't, intelligence is more quantifiable than them since we have (as flawed, disputed, and non-comprehensive as they are) IQ tests in real life as some sort of measure. But people ITT believe intelligence cannot be numbered and agility can. It's all arbitrary.

A dev should pick stats based on what their game needs, not what online nerds can easily quantify to satisfy their compulsions.

>>3835532
It's kind of like how your rude nonsensical reply here indicates that both your charisma and intelligence are below average.

>>3835688
See >>3831333

>>3835688
>But people ITT believe intelligence cannot be numbered
They’ve been subverted to deny objective reality because they dislike the conclusions that objective reality leads to.

>>3835716
Kek if you're worried about rudeness on 4chan you're on the wrong site. Saying that, you flung the first shit by disregarding the contents of my post to make a snarky comment and I only matched your rudeness.

>>3835799
And based on that comment, your perception is below average too. I pointed out how a programmer can turn human instinct into numbers rather easily, and my message contained neither snark nor rudeness. Keep posting, and we'll generate a whole set of RPG attributes off one mentally deficient person alone.

>>3835955
Nah, you failed to see the scope of the problem and waited 120s and solved a captcha to post so you can be derisive and make yourself look the fool.

>>3808113 (OP)
So, there are two aspects to take into account.
First, the attributes need to be realistic.
Second, they need to be somewhat balanced in usefulness for gameplay purposes.
It's not just about being able to holistically describe what someone is like, every attribute needs to have a fair use-case scenario.
That being said, here's mine.
Physical:
>Might
>Grace
Mental:
>Knowledge
>Ingenuity
Social:
>Aura
>Sensitivity
Defense:
>Resolve
Every aspect has a power/finesse split, except for defense which is combined into one stat because, frankly, nobody likes investing in gay defensive stat. There doesn't need to be a different resistance stat for multiple different types of problem.
Additionally, I like the idea of using two attributes for every calculation rather than just one. For example: Might/Resolve for calculating health, Sensitivity/Resolve for noticing a lie, Might/Grace for a purely physical check, Might/Ingenuity for blacksmithing, Grace/Ingenuity for painting a picture, etc.
Ideally every attribute should have a use for every kind of character as well, though obviously some are going to have preferences. I hate that Intelligence is always a dump stat in D&D unless you're a wizard, for example. As if a fighter can't be better and more effective if he isn't a retard and can have better technique and tactical awareness, for example.
Where my stats have generally bizarre names is to make them a bit broader and more abstract. For example, I think the player should generally provide the character's personality, appearance, vibe. But having an attribute state pretty explicitly EXACTLY what's up with them is limiting. Attributes are a mechanic, and while they should inform the fluff of a character, I dislike it when it's completely definitive and I like at least a degree or so of separation.

I sometimes wonder if charisma should be a thing at all. There's no reason why dialogue checks should rely on that instead of STR for intimidation, INT for persuasion and AGI for lying/manipulation- each preferably having different outcomes. Maybe have CHA as a skill that somehow encompasses all of them

>>3836890
A party leader has charisma anyway, otherwise no-one would follow him.

>>3836890
I really don't like Charisma being the be-all-end-all of every social interaction, but at the same time some people are just charismatic.
>Agility for lying
This one feels contrived

>>3836890
>>3836920
Agility for dodging the truth. Dexterity for juggling lies.

>>3836890
Force of Will/Ego makes more sense

the problem is not the stat, the problem is the skill system, which was brought over from runequest and stapled on for marketing reasons

Brains, Brawn, Senses, Celerity and Vitality

>>3836384
>Every aspect has a power/finesse split, except for defense which is combined into one stat because, frankly, nobody likes investing in gay defensive stat. There doesn't need to be a different resistance stat for multiple different types of problem.
The power and finesse thing is a common divide but people usually add defense to that which would lead to 3 def stats (Endurance, Wit, Composure). Yes, people don't really want to invest on defense stats (at least I don't).

>>3836890
That is pretty retarded.

>>3837433
Underrail replacing CHA for WILL makes sense when they want de-emphasize the "speech-boy" build from Fallout. Speech is so powerful because its only job is to pass skill checks.

>>3808113 (OP)
I know this is mostly about tabletop/tabletop-inspired games, but I swear dex/agi/speed is like the most consistently strong stat in most rpgs I've played. Like, unless they make it completely useless, it is either the god stat that decides almost everything or at the very least the one secondary stat that you never dump.

>>3838342
It's almost always better to not get hit.

>>3838351
>A collision at sea can ruin your entire day. -Thucydides

>>3838342
action economy is king

Muscle
Acuity
Reflex
Vitality
Endurance
Logic

>>3808808
>Wits should just be merged with Intelligence, but if this makes INT too powerful, it could be differentiated into Reasoning (ability to work things out), Education (store of knowledge) and Intuition (potential for cognitive leaps and flashes of inspiration.)
This is why INT and WIS tend to be different things.

>>3809998
>>3810320
Not really. The point of Wizards back in the day was you traded being fairly shit early in the game to nuking the entire field every round in late game, while a Fighter started good, and stayed good but let's be real is not dishing out anywhere near the kind of damage the Wizard is at high level. The problem is modern game design utterly despises the idea of starting at a shit point so that it'll pay off later.

>>3838342
There is only ONE game I have ever played where having more turns could actually be to your detriment, and funnily enough it was Black Souls 2 of all things. Now action economy being in your favor is absolutely god-tier in that game, but there is ONE specific fight where it isn't, and it's a boss where the gimmick is he gives both you and him 900% damage buff, neither of you can die no matter how hard you hit for the next 20 turns, so you're supposed to keep smacking each other for narrative reasons. As a result, you WANT to be slower than him so that he reaches 20 turns before you do.

Tie speech-related stats to weapon use. Intelligence should be the autism stat, so high INT users use weapons that require a high degree of specific skills, like a crossbow or sniper rifle. CHAR is usually correlated with strength, so heavy melee weapons would be the high CHAR user's choice. WIS users would use weapons that call for a degree of creativity rather than purely technical knowledge, like magic or improvised weapons. Tie the three stats to speech checks such that you get points in a relevant stat when you choose certain options. So an option that would normally require e.g. an INT threshold to pass would instead raise your INT stat. In this way, your roleplaying is all tied together. If you act like a meathead, your character will become a meathead. Want to be a wizard? You have to actually behave the way a wizard would.

>>3808113 (OP)
How do you handle it?
Whatever feels soulful.
If you want to nerf dexterity split it into finesse (representing shit like being able to thread a needle without having a stroke) and reflexes (the main thing dexterity usually gets).
Charisma is an RP stat.
Wits is basically just social reflexes. Many people who would die a thousand times in a gunfight could see shit coming in a social situation that would kill trained warriors a million times over.