It's been on my mind a lot, here lately.
Does my mix of BoL + OSR no classes totally not Conan game counts?
Yes I have, it's still untested but I'm working on it, instead of classes I got several backgrounds that make your character and that give it it's abilities.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136582It's been on my mind a lot, here lately.
Are you talking about things like Runequest?
Quote from: Razor 007;1136582It's been on my mind a lot, here lately.
Yes. Especially in Mongoose Traveller where there are no classes. Some would argue that it has classes though.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1136606Are you talking about things like Runequest?
I had no particular rule set in mind; just the concept of playing anything, based off those 6 Ability Scores.
It's almost an uncontrollably urge to want to change the six D&D ability scores when playing any D&D game after AD&D 1E or BECMI. And a little tempting in BECMI. So the last thing I'm going to do is use the traditional six in another system.
I rather like having Power and Size in Runequest.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136615I had no particular rule set in mind; just the concept of playing anything, based off those 6 Ability Scores.
You mean like playing a game using ONLY the "6 Ability Scores" (assuming D&D here), with NO other abilities? Or just build off of those abilities, but without classes? Like a skill-based system, using D&D scores specifically? Cuz I've tried Attribute + Skill systems, but usually I tend to deviate at least somewhat from D&D attributes when making homebrews for a variety of reasons. And most skill based systems tend to have different attributes than D&D, even if they're essentially equivalent. But I could see a skill-based system based entirely out of D&D ability scores, kinda the way that 5e handles all ability checks through Proficiencies now, but ditching classes entirely and handling everything by using skills.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1136619You mean like playing a game using ONLY the "6 Ability Scores" (assuming D&D here), with NO other abilities? Or just build off of those abilities, but without classes? Like a skill-based system, using D&D scores specifically? Cuz I've tried Attribute + Skill systems, but usually I tend to deviate at least somewhat from D&D attributes when making homebrews for a variety of reasons. And most skill based systems tend to have different attributes than D&D, even if they're essentially equivalent. But I could see a skill-based system based entirely out of D&D ability scores, kinda the way that 5e handles all ability checks through Proficiencies now, but ditching classes entirely and handling everything by using skills.
Only the 6. Or maybe plus Skills. Just exploring what others think about it. Sit down with a group and tell them we can play anything. Arrange this stat array to taste, and let's go!!!
My friend Bob created a classless WW2 RPG which used the six D&D Attributes, AFAICR. It was basically still D&D but there was some clever stuff with the phased combat system which combined squad level 15 second rounds with 3.75 second individual phases. This was in the early '90s before many people had heard of Boyd and the OODA loop.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136621Only the 6. Or maybe plus Skills. Just exploring what others think about it. Sit down with a group and tell them we can play anything. Arrange this stat array to taste, and let's go!!!
Well, maybe not just the six, per se. But I've considered the possibility of making a super simplified system that's basically just the attributes, plus a handful of perks and flaws that give you extra bonuses and limitations, and special features and such. Some of those perks might be "skills" or similar functions (like chosen enemies or terrain) but just give you a flat one time bonus (like +2), others could be extra HP, special attacks (natural weapons, knockdown, fire bolts, etc.) or racial features (like Darkvision), etc.
But everything's pretty much handled through the ability scores for purposes of ability checks and figuring stuff like HP and such. Though, you could just make damage a saving throw vs a DC based on damage level, and every time you fail you stack a "wound" till you die. Then you don't even need HP (the HP perk could just be a bonus to Con checks to resist damage). The level of stuff like special attacks or spells could be based on a key ability score as well, so you don't even need to track individual power levels. You just need the perk that grants you the ability and its key ability score to determine how powerful it is.
Um... theres alot of RPGs that use variations on the six abilities but are classless.
GammaWorld and Metamorphosis Alpha come to mind right off.
Shadowrun is another. It has some archetype examples. But you can freeform chargen.
Gurps comes to mind. Using 3 of the 6 stats.
Mercenaries Spies & Private Eyes uses the standard stat format but has no classes.
Pretty much all the WOD games are another.
Technically maybe Call of Cthulhu as it has professions, which can act as classes in other RPGs but in CoC do not really. (Least not in the edition I have)
And many more.
The 6 Abilities have been used to cover a lot of bases in D&D.
I have had to say "No" before during a D&D game, because something didn't fit into My concept of medieval European fantasy; but I could have very easily handled the mechanics of it, with the 6 abilities and a d20 roll.
My settings have been limited to my concept of D&D, but I believe I could easily run a game of a different genre with the same 6 abilities (plus maybe 2 or 3 more I guess). I'd like to offer the option of running "anything", sometimes; and see what happens.
What other abilities or attributes would you recommend that I consider?
I have thought of possibly adding Luck, and Appearance.
My favourite attribute system is Mini Six, which has four - Might (STR & CON), Agility (DEX), Wit (INT & WIS) and Charm (Charisma), with stuff like Attractive bought as perks. I definitely prefer STR & CON as a single attribute. I'd like a Perception attribute, and probably a Willpower attribute, though that can be included in Charm at a stretch. I don't like Wisdom as an attribute, it only seems to exist because of the Cleric class and 5e has overloaded it with the kind of stuff Thieves ought to be good at.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136632The 6 Abilities have been used to cover a lot of bases in D&D.
I have had to say "No" before during a D&D game, because something didn't fit into My concept of medieval European fantasy; but I could have very easily handled the mechanics of it, with the 6 abilities and a d20 roll.
My settings have been limited to my concept of D&D, but I believe I could easily run a game of a different genre with the same 6 abilities (plus maybe 2 or 3 more I guess). I'd like to offer the option of running "anything", sometimes; and see what happens.
What other abilities or attributes would you recommend that I consider?
I have thought of possibly adding Luck, and Appearance.
IMO, you don't really need any attributes beyond the 6. If anything, you could reduce the 6 to just 4, focusing on physical and mental speed and power, by folding STR and CON into a single
Physical Power ability (call it Might, Fitness or similar), INT and WIS (sans willpower elements) into a single
Mental Speed ability (call it Awareness, Wits or similar), and WIS/willpower and CHA into a single
Mental Power ability (call it Presence, Bearing or similar), then DEX remains a single ability but gets melee accuracy as well. Something like Might, Dexterity, Wits and Presence is really all you need. Anything else tends to be superfluous or lags behind.
Systems that move beyond the 6 to add more attributes tend to include a lot of unnecessary abilities that don't really need to be framed as attributes. Like Attractiveness, which is really just a perk that simply modifies interaction rolls (based on whatever "social" attribute you already have in the game), or Movement, which works better as a static base value that could maybe get modified by certain perks or special abilities (kinda how its handled in D&D) rather than devoting an ENTIRE attribute to the idea that some people kinda sorta walk
somewhat faster than others. I also disagree with adding Perception as an attribute because, even if you want to argue that its technically a "natural" ability that can't or doesn't need to be developed through training (which I disagree TBH), that's still too specialized to have an ENTIRE attribute devoted to the idea that you can spot stuff. Its better to just handle that as a skill based on whatever "mental agility" attribute exists in your game than screw people over by making them choose between a real attribute and spotting hidden enemies.
Granted, you could try to turn a "Perception" attribute into a more general ability by giving it ranged accuracy as well, but then that complicates things by splitting DEX into a agility and coordination attribute and making people choose between dodging things and spotting/shooting things, when technically speaking you need to be kinda good at spotting things in order to dodge them effectively. I'd rather just have one universal "physical speed" attribute (DEX in D&D) that covers all that, then handle specifics like dodging, spotting and shooting through skills.
Quote from: S'mon;1136649My favourite attribute system is Mini Six, which has four - Might (STR & CON), Agility (DEX), Wit (INT & WIS) and Charm (Charisma), with stuff like Attractive bought as perks. I definitely prefer STR & CON as a single attribute. I'd like a Perception attribute, and probably a Willpower attribute, though that can be included in Charm at a stretch. I don't like Wisdom as an attribute, it only seems to exist because of the Cleric class and 5e has overloaded it with the kind of stuff Thieves ought to be good at.
Perception as a separate attribute, is a fine idea.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136710Perception as a separate attribute, is a fine idea.
In the game writing I've done, there is no "intelligence". There's Perception and Education, which is to say: what you notice and can figure out, and what you know. Putting the two together is up to the player, not the character.
The OP sounds like he's ready for something completely different. Try e.g. Houses of the Blooded. It has just a few abilities that are used for practically everything, although it also has Aspects which may or may not be your cup of tea.
Quote from: Trond;1136938The OP sounds like he's ready for something completely different. Try e.g. Houses of the Blooded. It has just a few abilities that are used for practically everything, although it also has Aspects which may or may not be your cup of tea.
I looked into that. I don't know about embracing Aspects, but Wagers do sound like they might be fun.
Quote from: Razor 007;1136966I looked into that. I don't know about embracing Aspects, but Wagers do sound like they might be fun.
Beware, if you like it you may have turned into one of the dreaded "story gamers". :D
Or so I think, the definition is a bit vague.
But kidding aside, it's a fun game, designed to be run with virtually no prep time.
Ok, I think I've settled upon:
Strength
Dexterity
Constitution
Intelligence
Wisdom
Charisma
Luck
Appearance
Perception
Save vs Magical Effects
Arrange a Stat Array to taste. Nevermind the Ability Scores. Use the Modifiers.
Perhaps +2, +2, +1, +1, +1, +0, +0, +0, -1, -1
I created some pregen character sheets, and every time I was tempted to put those +2s in Perception, and Save vs Magic. A new player might not do that; but as an old hand, I know those things will help keep my character alive. In the end, I only did it for half of the pregens.
In my OSR games, Perception is largely tied to Wisdom.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1138403In my OSR games, Perception is largely tied to Wisdom.
Yes, perception is normally tied to wisdom in RPGs; but I began to question whether someone who is battle hardened, or otherwise lives in chaotic surroundings might not learn to be very observant? Victims of abuse, people who grew up around armed conflict, etc. Always watching and waiting for the next outbreak of chaos; without necessarily being very wise.
Quote from: Razor 007;1138407Yes, perception is normally tied to wisdom in RPGs; but I began to question whether someone who is battle hardened, or otherwise lives in chaotic surroundings might not learn to be very observant? Victims of abuse, people who grew up around armed conflict, etc. Always watching and waiting for the next outbreak of chaos; without necessarily being very wise.
Spitballing here.
I think there's still an argument that hard circumstances increasing wariness and not destroying people requires "something-like-wisdom" to temper them.
That "watching and waiting" element can easily be dysfunctional and paranoid, and often is in people who lived through real world situations like that. If everything looks like a threat, real threats are hard to distinguish. Abuse and conflict tend to force people to develop "wariness" but without something to moderate it it's not necessarily a safety mechanism. Even with say "strength of character", PTSD for example seems to be linked to old evolutionary defense mechanisms that are maladaptive when running away from being eaten is not your primary danger. So you get the increased watchfulness at a price -- something has to mitigate the stress effects or else it's a disorder rather than a benefit.
I think if you wanted to model what you're getting at with RPGs, you either need to get crunchy enough to model both heightened sensitivity and threat assessment, and then make perception based on those two elements, or you simplify and wind up back at something like wisdom -- experienced enough to know what looks funny and to always be watching for it, but steady enough not to be shaken by it.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1138418Spitballing here.
I think there's still an argument that hard circumstances increasing wariness and not destroying people requires "something-like-wisdom" to temper them. [...] I think if you wanted to model what you're getting at with RPGs, you either need to get crunchy enough to model both heightened sensitivity and threat assessment, and then make perception based on those two elements, or you simplify and wind up back at something like wisdom -- experienced enough to know what looks funny and to always be watching for it, but steady enough not to be shaken by it.
In AD&D1e, you could add the fighter's level to their initiative, or to modify their chances of being surprised. mindspring is down at the moment, but when it's back up, this article (http://www.mindspring.com/~ernestm/wt&d/issue2/wtd2.pdf) discusses a person being able to act usefully in combat as a skill; on a failure they do nothing, or repeat their last action, etc.
I believe that's realistic but most players would be annoyed at having to roll to act each round, so in a game I'm writing (focused on modern combat) I've put it like this - just some excerpts.
Quote from: ConflictSTEADINESS may be thought of as the lubricant for the friction of combat: you get one action for each level of Steadiness. This means that those with Steadiness 0 will not act at all; they may only drop to crouch or prone, or flee if they think themselves unobserved. Most people will not act usefully in a trauma situation without training, experience or leadership.
Social background may grant 1 level of Steadiness, having a combat skill 1 level, and extensive combat or trauma experience 1 level.
Surprise and initiative are determined by each side rolling 1d6 and adding their Steadiness, with relevant skill modifying, for example the Stealth of an ambusher and the Observation of the ambushed.
If at least 1 person is firing continuously into an area with an automatic weapon, or 3+ people firing single shots, or explosives going off in the area, it is considered a "kill zone." Those moving through an area of fire lose 1 Steadiness for that time, which is to say they lose an action; those of Steadiness 0 can do nothing except cower, those of Steadiness 1+ may be able to do something.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1138432In AD&D1e, you could add the fighter's level to their initiative, or to modify their chances of being surprised. mindspring is down at the moment, but when it's back up, this article (http://www.mindspring.com/~ernestm/wt&d/issue2/wtd2.pdf) discusses a person being able to act usefully in combat as a skill; on a failure they do nothing, or repeat their last action, etc.
I believe that's realistic but most players would be annoyed at having to roll to act each round, so in a game I'm writing (focused on modern combat) I've put it like this - just some excerpts.
That totally makes sense. I like your steadiness mechanic. The way you describe it seems like more support for the wisdom-tempered theory, to me: it's not just having been through combat or trauma that lets you act, but having been through it and come out "steadier" -- in some ways, a bit "wiser".
I'm not sure it's "wisdom" as such. It's having your shit together. When the adrenaline hits it's hard to concentrate, and you miss things. For example, a woman crashed her car into the tree in front of our house. I went to the driver's side door and it was locked. Passenger door behind it, also locked. Over to the other side of the car and the passenger door unlocked, I opened it and got in and checked on her. As it happened, she'd not had her seat belt on and the vehicle had skidded out, so she was lying on her side between the seats facing the driver's side of the vehicle, so that was exactly where I needed to be - where I could check on and support her without being in her face and where I'd have to move once the paramedics came. But here's the thing: the driver's car window was open. I could just have reached in and unlocked it, but I didn't think of that. I think I would have noticed that had there not been an unconscious casualty lying in a wrecked car with fuel leaking out onto the road, I found that kind of distracting.
On the other hand, the vehicle was quickly surrounded by 10-12 people, one of whom was leaning in the car window filming. none of them tried doors or noticed the fuel leaking from the vehicle, they just stood around until I started shouting instructions at them. Which is to say: most people do not act usefully in a trauma or combat situation without some training or experience, but even those with just training or just experience will miss some things, like a window being open. But the paramedics who showed up wouldn't have missed the window being open, they had much more training and experience.
As the situation amplifies in chaos, drama and violence, fewer and fewer people will act usefully. This isn't wisdom, I think, nor courage. It's just having your shit together in a trauma or combat situation. Having done a first aid course, or done a few years as a paramedic or soldier, will tend to give you this skill. Absent training, lots of experience will do it, too, I'm sure people who grew up during the siege of Sarajevo have their shit together better than most of us.
Now, you can have some sort of "steadiness" mechanic to simulate this, and it might require a roll or not. But in lots of games you can just use the skill or character class. If you have 66% sword skill and the other guy has 20% sword skill, you probably should go first in a simple standup fight, though if he ambushes you it might be different. Or it can just be your class level - 5th level fighter knows more about fighting than a 1st level fighter, we can simulate this with to-hit rolls and all that, but it also applies more generally, I think. People are probably going to naturally defer to that 5th level fighter in a trauma or combat situation, the same way the bystanders deferred to me, and I deferred to the paramedics. Having your shit together gives you a certain "presence" - so it acts like Charisma, too.
I was also primarily separating Save vs Magic, from Wisdom too. Will Saves always seemed kind of hokey to me, because they were based upon wisdom? If you are wise, you can resist magical effects? I don't like that association. By separating it from Wisdom, now a DM / GM is free to explain Save vs Magic, by any means desired. Perhaps we all have a trace of Dragon's blood flowing through our veins, but the amount varies from person to person?
Me and a buddy worked on this idea years ago. We got stuck on skills, but these days I'd just treat skills as granting Advantage (though you would take the lowest roll).
Quote from: Sunsword;1139376Me and a buddy worked on this idea years ago. We got stuck on skills, but these days I'd just treat skills as granting Advantage (though you would take the lowest roll).
Which is actually Disadvantage?
Quote from: Razor 007;1139436Which is actually Disadvantage?
The way I envisioned it, yes. You roll 2d20 and take the lowest for Advantage under this system.
However, you could treat it as a blackjack system and choose to take the highest successful roll for Advantage.
I know people say subtracting is harder than adding, but I never had trouble with THAC0 or determining how much I rolled under an Ability in AD&D.
I've messed around with designing my own game and the Ability scores I settled on were as follows
Strength
Agility
Constitution
Intelligence
Perception
Willpower
Charisma
Appearance
Luck
It'd be interesting to see what people could do with a minimalist game system based mostly on Ability Scores, but I've moved on to just enjoying and making stuff for my favorite commercially available games, as noted below.