Regardless of how many characteristics are needed to make the respective games work, sometimes the word play can be mind boggling and confusing, often just to end at the same place as those who came before.
Of course, it is not just the actual wording used, but the intent and their application as well.
Let’s look at physical characteristics first.
Strength seems to be pretty much a common denominator unless the all encompassing “Body” is used (The One Ring changed from one to the other in their new edition simply to confuse it seems).
Constitution is often changed to Endurance or rolled into Strength. Very occasionally it gets re-worded into something like Toughness, Grit or Guts, but the intent remains the same.
Dexterity holds strong or is split into Agility and Dexterity, sometimes Poise, Adroitness, Aim, Reflexes etc, but generally minor name changes mean little. Splitting them to define gross and fine motor skills makes sense.
I admit, Dexterity has been my biggest headache and it seems the same with others, The Witcher and Iron Kingdoms RPG’s for example have as many as three characteristics in this space.
Size sometimes becomes a characteristic, sometimes not, but is always a mechanical point of relevance (bigger is bigger after all).
Finally, depending on the systems needs, Appearance may be counted separately from Charisma as a purely physical characteristic, which may result in a change to the roll of Charisma.
Mental.
Intelligence in its many forms may just be that, but if that is the case, then “Mind” is likely cleaner and more flexible. Splitting Intelligence into a logic and instinctive or raw smarts and wisdom pairs makes plenty of sense as we all know people who are bright, but relatively unaware or are wise and sensible but average in intelligence. It also allows for supernatural alignment and animal intelligence.
Education popped up relatively early in Traveller and Call of Cthulhu, so deserves a look, but since then, its role has mostly been covered by skills, or backgrounds etc.
Spiritual.
The grey area that is spiritual or personal, or basically not clearly physical or mental characteristics takes many forms and are often seen as soft or useless stats. Even D&D has had to find uses for the flexibly defined (or vague) Charisma stat.
Power, which is even less clear to me and only used in d100 games stemming back to the earliest, is a bugbear of mine. I just do not like it. It is not a mental or physical descriptor, so it smacks of magical or supernatural alignment, which is fine if that is part of the game, but odd if not.
This brings us to Luck, Fate or Sixth Sense. Should this be an active or passive stat, or a trait, derived value or skill. Many feel this is actually the province of the role-player and their dice, but interpretations vary.
Charisma, one of the original six and probably the single most “role-playing” of all, can be interpreted a few ways, but generally it is seen as a positive projection of personality, appearance or leadership. So what about projected evil or command through intimidation? I have been intrigued over the years how different designers have assigned Charisma to various monsters, many ignoring the reality that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some give them commanding presence, others give them nothing at all with the assumption that bad equals “nothing to like here”.
Traveller also added in Social Standing as a stat, that never really sat well with me as I felt it was even more of a relative stat, not an all encompassing one (The latest Traveller Companion does even address that to some extent adding options like luck as well as or instead of Soc).
The first thing is to set parameters;
Do you want chrs to be part of a set or flexible skill tree.
Do you want chr tests to be instead of skills, with skills only adding the ability, not the mechanic.
Do you want skills to be the primary test criteria, with chrs only as mild or passive mods.
Do you want the primary chrs to lead to secondary or derived chrs.
Do you want chrs that add up to others, break down to more.
Do you even want chrs in their current form or skip them to go to raw abilities themselves.
For my own very long journey to making a role playing game, I have looked at far too many combinations, but just recently, assuming a simple set of six core ones and some derived, combat ones fits my game mechanics, which will use either a combination of 2 chrs or chr and skill, I have finally settled.
The concepts are simple enough on the surface, but harder to implement in practice. I decided that for my uses characteristics should have the following;
Each characteristic should stand on its on feet. there should be no hero or dump stats. Dex or Int tend to be the favoured stats for skills in most games, Str for warriors etc. This can be avoided at several points.
Each should have an exception, an opposite side of the coin that makes balance important. They can be paired as each others yin/yang, meaning it is hard to e exceptional at both.
Each should be able to mesh with any other logically as needed by test/circumstance. Any possible derived chr needed can be made from the base. Want strength, combine Prow and Resil, but these are also flexible in interpretation. Skills may even be aligned to different chrs by task.
No chr should have open ended potential (like size), that breaks the testing procedure. All chrs should conceivably be shared by any sentient being.
Each chr can be interpreted logically but flexibly to suit character concept, not railroad the player into pre-conceptions just to make the chr value work. Charisma is an old favourite here. This one is critical, because the chrs in a game do define our pre-conceptions. The addition of one can mean a shift of persieved role for another, like Str and Con instead of just Strength allows you to visialise two distinct types of physical might, but if there is only a single term, the player has an open court to play, but with less guidance.
They should not be static. We are not set in stone in real life, so why should our characters be.
Physical
Prowess.
This is overall athletic ability and fitness. It combines muscle conditioning, agility and flexibility, but not fine motor skills or inherent toughness (see below). High Prowess can be indicative of a well rounded physique, sinewy build or average type and just hard work. It may decrease with ageing, but can also be increased with effort.
Dexterity.
This old friend covers fine motor skills, aim, reflexes, and finesse displayed in physical movement. Dexterity is less down to fitness so is harder to increase, but is also slower to decline. A few months of couch surfing may really hurt your Prowess, but you Dex would likely be the same, maybe even better if you game a lot!
From these we can differentiate the physical reality that is a snake from a spider, a powerful and athletic type, cursed with sausgae fingers or a wheel chair bound card shark.
Personal/Spiritual
Resilience.
This one is one of two cross-over characteristics and concentrates on inner strength, be it physical, mental or a combination, as they are hard to separate in reality. Added to Prowess or Reason, it can be a measure of a more mental or physical resistance, but on its own it covers grit, focus, determination and will. Resilience may well get gradually better in the middle years, tailing off somewhat later in life, but can hold strong if mental fortitude is dominant.
Presence.
This is the other mixed Chr. It is a measure of projected strength of character or personality, be it in the form of charm, impressiveness, intimidation, sheer size, oddness, command or appearance. Interpretation of what makes someone “fill the room” is varied, as is the role of Presence. How presence is developed with skills and abiiites will determine the over-arching personality that evolves and as the character ages, this will become more defined. Old age will inevitably show a physical decline in Presence, but the stronger it gets, the longer it will last.
Character takes many forms. Strength of will may be hidden behind quiet and brooding, outgoing personality may disguise personal frailty. These two are especially good at handling the “vagueness” of magical and psychic abilities.
Mental
Reason.
Measuring logic, memory, cool headedness, retention and sensory perception. This is in the box thinking, left hemisphere style. Reason will generally increase until age possibly starts to chip away at it. Schooling can increase it along with the knowledge and skills that come with it and the wisdom that comes with experience is likely to add to it.
Intuition.
This is the instinctive, creative side of intelligence and the opposite of above. It governs awareness, empathy, insight, the ability to think outside of the box and if relevant, sixth sense. Intuition tends to be defined early on. Experience may increase it and it is possible to learn how to read a situation, but if it is innately lacking, it is hard to teach. Often increasing Intuition is an act of re-finding inherent abilities or learning to trust lost instincts.
*
The derived chrs are a homage to the brilliant stat as damage points system from original Traveller, but more abstracted rather than literal. These will be determined using several chrs and some other factors like Size etc.
Not yet fully settled down yet, they will be something like;
Initiative (Int, Dex and Prow), being general combat awareness and speed determining who goes first (and most). I am looking at a staggered init system, so faster characters (while they remain so) will get more actions overall in a linear sequence of phases. This can be reduced by physical damage, circumstances or environmental factors.
Strength (Prow, Resil and Size), for swinging stuff and stuff and for how long. Blood loss, fatigue or physical damage will reduce this, so it is basically physical hit points.
Will (Pre and Resil), which is Courage really and speaks for itself, but is rarely taken into account, especially for PC’s. A tough one to add, but the reality is, once action is joined, how anyone will react is an unknown, so a tough one not to add. It is assumed PC’s will make brave types, but is every hero always a rock under pressure? Failing Will tests or reducing it even, may take several forms from uncontrolled flight to hesitation, but it drives a story any way it goes.
These can be reduced, sometimes recovered and are effected differently by different damage types. As damage is short or long term, the actual effect on core characteristics will be varied, but the effective result is applied directly to the stats above when taken.
Something I really find odd in most RPG’s is a lack of diminishing ability through damage or fatigue. D&D is the standard offender, allowing a character full capabilities until they are abruptly incapacitated. WTF!? Life does not work like that. What about shock, limb damage, fatigue, or fear?
I have used several examples in my explorations to help in settling these down.
Spock vs Kirk.
Spock is highly intelligent, but lacks empathy. He is also very strong, reasonably dextrous (through physical discipline and clear thinking), very resilient in a robotic way, but exhibits a restrained personality. Through the series and movies, Spock learned to tap into his half-human Intuition and even gain some small sense of humour.
Kirk on the other hand is better rounded, lets his instincts rule his intellect if needed, is highly resilient but also flexible and projects top tier leadership skills. Where he outshines Spock is in balance, human stubbornness and versatility.
Darth Vader vs the Galaxy.
Darth Vader commands a room-even from another room. He does not however have any real Charisma in the likeable sense, so a strictly positive measure is pointless. Twisting Charisma to fit is also illogical as most skills related to it are charm or persuasion based, which often means a separate set of skills better aligned to the opposite end of the spectrum. This can work, but with a less defining chr.
Timber Wolf vs Android.
One is high on instinctive intelligence and self preserving awareness, the other rules the world of linear thinking, with little capacity for fear, empathy or indecision. Neither can do the others job without evolutionary tampering or advanced systems.
The Dragon vs The Slayer.
If size and strength alone are measures or power, a Dragon is simply too much for most. Is it possible to give the lowly Slayer an edge?. If the Slayer has small size and agility as an advantage in some circumstances, is smarter and less ego/impulse controlled, is quicker and more patient, then yes, the Slayer can triumph. A blinded, disorientated or rattled Dragon is less of a threat as well.
The Lone Hero vs The Gang of Miscreants.
What makes a hero a hero? Being right should be enough, but Hollywood aside, balance is the key. The gang of thugs would likely have the smart, but obsessed and out of control boss, the huge but dumb and slow muscle, the quick and sly guy and the tough, characterless right hand. The Hero of the tale though will be more disciplined or intuitive than the smart guy, more flexible than the tough guy, faster than the big guy and tougher than the fast one, but most of all will have courage of their convictions and courage.
How are they used?
In my system as it stands, the basic test procedure is as follows;
A test is a number of d6 rolled against either a pair of chrs, or a chr and skill (or rarely 2 skills). These will range from 1-10 for normal levels with a weighted average for chrs and escalating cost for skills.
Depending on difficulty 2 to 6+ d6 will be rolled with 3d6 being a standard challenge vs about 10 as the average test value. Under or equal to the test value is a pass, over is a fail. All 6’s is always a fail, but not necessarily a fumble as a safety net.
Doubles, triples and quadruples of 1’s and 6’s will grant increasingly dramatic effects, regardless of the pass/fail dynamic, which means it is possible to fail a tough test, but still impress or gain advantage with a feat of brilliance or the opposite is true of course.
A mundane, 2d6 test can have a double pass/fail, meaning a soft critical success like added damage or reduced time or a mild fumble, but as the difficulty increases, so does the effect of multiple die critical. For example, a success with 4x 1’s could result in an insta-kill of a massive creature by a single character, but if it fails as badly (3x 6), the characters sword snaps uselessly on its hide-end scene.
This also allows the character to raise the odds of a test to try to gain some needed advantage, be it more likelihood of a double or even a triple or better. This means highly skilled characters can push their luck.
A simple system but nuanced.
