[M:COTEC]- Attribute silliness

[RobMuadib]

Hi All

Yes, I am still working on my game. Work gets done by leaps and
bounds, snail like leaps and bounds, endangered snail-like leaps and
bounds. more on work in another post. In terms of stuff I am actually
getting done I done something with my attributes for the game and am
kind of the fence on whether or not it works. First, you can find a PDF of
the system so far
here.

Now, it is between this uber-detailed system with an easy out (primary
attributes) and my 3(4) primary attribute and 3 sub-attributes system,
which looks like this.
Body: Reflexes, Strength, Health
Mind: Intelligence, Willpower, Ego
Spirit: Empathy Presence Psyche.
Power (X?)

So currently I am thinking of leaving attributes they way are and pleasing
myself for version 1.0 of the game, but as I said I am on the cusp. Maybe
some advice or plain 'ol what where you thinking's from the peanut
gallery would help. Also what do you people think of the cost system,
does it seem allright. It was the fixed square progression for cost, or a
simple flat cost improvement. say 10 points for primary attributes and 2
points per point for secondary attributes. The fixed square progression
just seemed to fit the semi-exponential basis of the traits (Based on 10 to
a factor of 10 log progression) Plus a bell curved resolution mechanic with
major points of difference for first 5 points. Linear increase in effect too.


Also, does anyone have any ideas on how to better implement or codify
the Power attribute use in the game. I see it as a floater, so Power could
be magical power one world, Psionic in another, Character's could have
both a magic and psionic power attribute under the power attribute, it
depends. Also I was considering have power cost at the Primary attribute
range. Though I could see power having 3 secondary attributes depending
on what you are trying to recreate. I.e. psionic strength, psionic skill, and
psionic resistance. or some such.


sorry for the scatteredness of this post, I stayed up all night and have had
too much coffee. Speaking of too much coffee, hopefully Mike will post on
this thread. (my workshop is the midst of a seperation).



Best

[Mike Holmes]

Having a geometric progression of cost for stats on an exponenetial curve seems strange to me. I mean, the assumption behind an exponential curve is that there are diminishing returns to gaining more of something...if not, then you'd want to make it linear. If there are diminishing returns, then aren't the costs linear? That is, why a two curve conversion for cost, and not just one?

Mike