Many games have various mental statistics (Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma, etc) as well as personality (Neutral Good, Miscreant, etc).  Some games even add additional traits in the form of phobias, mannerisms, etc (eg. Ars Magica).

What do these statistics mean in the games you play?  Are they simply descriptive hints for roleplaying, or do they restrict the actions players are allowed to take without some type of penalty?

Does it make any difference if the character has a very low Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma if the player controlling that character is very knowledgeable, shrewd, insightful and strong willed at the table?  Does a low Willpower matter if the player can make the character walk across burning coals if they want them to?  

Would you let a player do anything they want in a game with alignment or would you play it by the books, including any associated penalties for chaning alignment (eg. Lose 1 Level in 1st Ed. D&D).

Basically -- do these items on the character sheet mean anything beyond the occassional modifier to saving throws or skill points?  Are they just a place for players to dump lower attributes to game the system?  Would a game without any mental attributes, alignments, etc. be your preference?  What balance do you prefer, and what games come closest to what you'd like?

Edit: Clarified the D&D Alignment Question...

Quote from: StuartBasically -- do these items on the character sheet mean anything beyond the occassional modifier to saving throws or skill points?

Only rarely and in the most extreme cases.  I expect Paladins to behave according to their alignment.  PCs with extraordinarily low mental or social scores will sometimes be misttreated by me, on the grounds that a dump stat should be grounds for occasional pimp-slapping.

But if D&D lacked alignment or mental stats I don't think I would miss them much.

Quote from: StuartWhat do these statistics mean in the games you play?  Are they simply descriptive hints for roleplaying, or do they restrict the actions players are allowed to take without some type of penalty?

Descriptive hints mostly, unless a player comes up with a plan of action that their 3 INT cleric would never be able to work out, frex.

Quote from: StuartDoes it make any difference if the character has a very low Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma if the player controlling that character is very knowledgeable, shrewd, insightful and strong willed at the table?  Does a low Willpower matter if the player can make the character walk across burning coals if they want them to?  

Depends on the situation, really, though I try to make it clear to my players if I think they're pushing the limits of their characters' abilities.

Quote from: StuartWould you let a player do anything they want in a game with alignment (eg. 1st Ed. D&D) or would you play it by the books, including any associated penalties for chaning alignment (eg. Lose 1 Level).

In a game like D&D, where alignment is pretty much hard-wired into a lot of game mechanics, I'll penalize what I feel are egregious violations, but the occasional drift will pass uncommented.

Quote from: StuartBasically -- do these items on the character sheet mean anything beyond the occassional modifier to saving throws or skill points?  Are they just a place for players to dump lower attributes to game the system?  Would a game without any mental attributes, alignments, etc. be your preference?  What balance do you prefer, and what games come closest to what you'd like?

I'm not sure I have a set standard; if it's appropriate for the game to have them (with regard to genre, mechanical interplay, whatever), then they should be there.  For the homebrew I've been working on sporadically over the past few years, I've gone back and forth on an intelligence/reasoning stat.  Currently, the game does not have one, but then I run into some issues when dealing with bonuses/penalties on knowledge-based skills.

I guess everything on one's character sheet should not only have a mechanical effect in game, but also serve as a RPing guideline.

I think you should role-play your character, but prefer character definition systems that allow you freedom in roleplaying traits from mechanical ones. For example, I have no problem playing an absent minded professor, with intelligence 18 and trait "space case". Or whatever. Or an int 8 dolt who is clever.

An int 8 inventor is right out, though.

What about a really high-level restriction on player character behaviour?

PCs can not be "Evil" -- Evil characters are controlled by the GM.

This would still give the Players lots of control over their characters, but might help Novice GMs avoid their Novice players derailing the game by attacking random people / other PCs or other types of extremely obnoxious behaviour.

Quote from: StuartWhat about a really high-level restriction on player character behaviour?

PCs can not be "Evil" -- Evil characters are controlled by the GM.

This would still give the Players lots of control over their characters, but might help Novice GMs avoid their Novice players derailing the game by attacking random people / other PCs or other types of extremely obnoxious behaviour.

Can we get a definition of evil?  I'd be fully behind a 'don't be a jackass' rule if that's what you're meaning.

Quote from: StuartWhat do these statistics mean in the games you play?  Are they simply descriptive hints for roleplaying, or do they restrict the actions players are allowed to take without some type of penalty?

Depends on the game.

Pendragon's personality traits, for example, I would never dispose of. They only really become compulsory when you get extreme scores in them, they represent important ethical and moral considerations that frequently face Arthurian kngihts, and a vital theme of Arthurian fiction is that sometimes you succeed not because of how skilled you are or high-born you are, but because you are a virtuous, good person who deserves to succeed.

Other games, I'd let the players decide how they'd roleplay their character.

QuoteCan we get a definition of evil? I'd be fully behind a 'don't be a jackass' rule if that's what you're meaning.

That's what I'm meaning.  I didn't think to write a long explanation of "what is evil" but rather trust that the group would have an implicit understanding that "I attack the Barmaid!" for no reason aside from being a Jackass would be an "evil act".  

Maybe in old school D&D terms that would be:  CE, NE, LE ?  Although again, I'd rather leave it loose and mostly intend it as an "In case of Jackass, Break Glass" type rule.

If you want to talk D&D, those traits have specific mechanical consequences.  How can a wizard with an 8 Intelligence learn a difficult, high-level spell?  A Cleric with a low Wisdom is doomed.  How does a Bard with a low Charisma wow the crowd. So, in the case of D&D, these mental/personality abilities aren't just role-playing guidelines, they are part of the mechanics.

What's difficult to manage is the character with the 8 Intelligence solving the complex and convoluted political conspiracy - because the player is smarter than an 8 Intelligence. It's just as difficult if the player is of 8 Intelligence and the character is a 17.

I'm also interested in whether or not to go beyond mere alignment, and have things like honor, integrity, etc.  And have mechanical effects to facilitate these being truly role-played by the player.

I think they are guides for playing your character and should have some mechanical meaning in the game as well.

generally if I play a character 6 INT he should not be a genius, but that doesn't mean he does not think he is. Or maybe he is something of a savant in one area, but generally not that bright.

Quote from: James J SkachIf you want to talk D&D, those traits have specific mechanical consequences.  How can a wizard with an 8 Intelligence learn a difficult, high-level spell?  A Cleric with a low Wisdom is doomed.  How does a Bard with a low Charisma wow the crowd. So, in the case of D&D, these mental/personality abilities aren't just role-playing guidelines, they are part of the mechanics.

You gave the meaningful combinations, where you talk about the prime stat for the specific class. However we all know about the meaningless ones. "Dump" stats.

@Stuart

Is this thread inspired by the same RPG.net thread that this thread over at DSF was? Or just coincidence? BTW my response there provides what I think is the answer to your question. At least for Shadowrun, although I will say similar things apply to other RPG games I play where the system encourages the importance of character knowledge and the like. Or at least the GM does what they have to to play up knowledge skills.

P.S. D&D 3e does have some use for, for example, Int increasing the number of Skills you know. However for the most part it seems, and for good reason IMO, that it and Cha are still seen as very much dump stats for a large number of classes. Wisdom not so much anymore though, incomparison to AD&D at least, because of it's connection to the Will saving throw.

Actually this thread was inspired by development of my RPG, and the GMing advice to give to new players / GMs.

I'd never heard of Dumpshock before (thanks for the link to that discussion), and I generally only go to RPG.Net when someone links to something relevant there.

Quote from: StuartI'd never heard of Dumpshock before.

It is very Shadowrun centric. In truth it's about as close to the offical SR board as exists as any freelancer that's worked on SR in the past 6 or 8 years has an account there, and a number of them are active posters. It goes the other way around too, a number of active posters there in the past have become paid freelancers for SR (IIRC that was JongWK's route). There is even a thread on that board right now posted by 'Synner' that gives tips on submitting for SR freelance work.

Oh, and one of the admins is Adam Jury who is something closer to an employee of Fanpro.

Quote from: blakkieYou gave the meaningful combinations, where you talk about the prime stat for the specific class. However we all know about the meaningless ones. "Dump" stats.
*SNIP*
P.S. D&D 3e does have some use for, for example, Int increasing the number of Skills you know. However for the most part it seems, and for good reason IMO, that it and Cha are still seen as very much dump stats for a large number of classes. Wisdom not so much anymore though, incomparison to AD&D at least, because of it's connection to the Will saving throw.

I swear you're just goading me into it so we can disagree, but I'll bite.

I get your point.  I guess whether or not something is a dump stat depends to a large extent on the type of campaign. For example, there's a thread here talking about GNS, and the example used talked about how the person loved the part of the game that was political intrigue, while he was bored with the orc killing.  All cool, people like different things.

But I could see a campaign, yes even in D&D, that did not focus on orc killing, but on political intrigue.  Would Intelligence or Charisma be a dump stat for that game?  In fact, I could see someone saying "I'll put my 8 in Strength since this is going to be a less combat intensive campaign."  This becomes more difficult to nail down when you expand the scope beyond D&D to more generic systems. The more types of play supported, the less you can point to any one (or two) stat(s) and claim "dump" without the context of the campaign.

This is my Theory.

Quote from: James J SkachI swear you're just goading me into it so we can disagree, but I'll bite.

What, I am goading you by.....apparently making you ignore that middle paragraph that you *snip*ed out? :insane:  Or is it your theory that reading the whole post is a bad idea?