Would this idea work? Has anyone tried it?

[ffilz]

Hmm, it depends on how many subjective calls the GM has to make, and how important they are to the player (of course we really only care about the ones that are important to the player). I agree that we tend to remember things (but we often remember wrong), but also consider that in systems where most resolutions are objective, we don't need to remember (and perhaps all we remember is that our impression of the difficulty based on the objective numbers was validated). If you increase the number of subjective decisions, then more needs to be remembered.

You may find players recording these numbers... At which point I would ask if it really makes sense to try and avoid having an objective number in the first place.

Frank

[Sir Privy Toastrack]

ffilz,
You could be right.  Only playtesting will tell.  I think that all systems have a lot of "yeah, but"s inherent in their style and mechanics.  For instance, its very easy for me to rip D20 apart with a number of "yeah but"s... but the people inclined to play that don't let it bother them ("yeah, but if hit points don't really just represent the ability to withstand physical trauma but the skill to turn aside a blade and other such things, how come a fall from 200' affects an 8th level cleric less than a 1st level fighter with the same CON?").  

A D20 player will likely hate my idea of no stats, as will a Harn player, etc.  My hope and inclination is to say that anyone who would be truly interested in playing a game of my type isn't going to let this potential 'forgetfulness' bother them.  In my mind, I'd rather play a game that wasn't loaded with paperwork, stat obsession, etc, than a game with those things that quantifies everything.  If that makes any sense... which it may not!

[nellist]

I shared what seems to be your goal and if I might summarise what I wanted to achieve. It seemed to me that it was utterly unrealistic for characters to know their odds of succeeding in tasks, and they way they considered options just didn't seem to gel with how real people make decisions. The example I think of is jumping over a chasm or balancing on a beam - where the fear of falling is the thing to overcome, rather than the physical feat. What numbers do is to make everything predictable, even if the only thing predictable are the odds. It seemed to me that there would never be a situation in a game where a beginner character  might say 'yes, lets do it, how hard can it be?" with an expert saying "no, it is not possible, and I should know".

What I decided was that, in some senses, experts often are not actually capable of much more than beginners but that they more accurately know their limitations, know what would fail and therefore avoid trying certain manuevers, etc.

What I wanted to develop was a system where experts knew their skill rating and beginners did not. So a beginner might try a dangerous leap, and fail, while an expert would know he would not be able to make the jump and would not attempt it. A "Master" would know the exact result of any action before it was attempted, a beginner might try it and achieve the same result as the Master but only by luck.

My solution was to give characters a 'tolerance' on their ability, representing how much the variance might be between 'actual' and 'real' ability level. I did not come up with an elegant game-mechanic for this, nor did I play test it, so I have no idea if this is in any way useful, but I guess what I am really saying is that your aim (if it is what I think it to be) is shared by at least one gamer.

On the character as a narrative description idea, which is to my mind, a slightly different concept to what I am referring to above, I like it in principle but think it very dependant on the setting of the game, it might work well for a PBeM where everyone has plenty of time to consider, but would be terrible for Face to Face dungeon crawl. It might be good for the MGF convention scenarios where all the characters are essentially the same (soldiers in the same unit, undergraduate sages)  except for their special abilities.

Keith Nellist

[contracycle]

What I wanted to develop was a system where experts knew their skill rating and beginners did not. So a beginner might try a dangerous leap, and fail, while an expert would know he would not be able to make the jump and would not attempt it. A "Master" would know the exact result of any action before it was attempted, a beginner might try it and achieve the same result as the Master but only by luck.

One methodology might be to have task difficulty numbers themselves concealed by tasks.  When confronted by a task, the first thing to do (assuming you have the time) is to carry out a task to assess the difficulty of the task you really want to perform.

If the difficulty of the "difficulty identification" task is set at or about the same level of the intended task itself, more experienced performers would be more able to discern task difficulties and thereby be more aware of what they can and cannot do.

[inky]

One methodology might be to have task difficulty numbers themselves concealed by tasks.  When confronted by a task, the first thing to do (assuming you have the time) is to carry out a task to assess the difficulty of the task you really want to perform.

If the difficulty of the "difficulty identification" task is set at or about the same level of the intended task itself, more experienced performers would be more able to discern task difficulties and thereby be more aware of what they can and cannot do.

It seems like most of the time people can get some idea of the difficulty,  but they don't want to roll most of the time. I think it'd probably be easier to just assume some average roll for the difficulty identification, so you end up with something like
 - if the task difficulty is at their skill level or below, they get the number
 - if it's five or less above their skill, they find out it's five or less above
   their skill
 - if it's higher than that, they find out it's higher than that

Newbies who are relying mostly on raw talent and not much on skill are going to get a "that's really hard!" description for most tasks, even ones they can probably perform just due to talent, so they won't be nearly as good at estimating as veterans.

[Sir Privy Toastrack]

Let me see if I can better illustrate the type of system I'm thinking of. I'll compare a the same character using D20 stats and this theoretical "no stats" system. I'll use the Harn setting (since it's my favorite). These are both abbreviated (the skills lists are not complete, just a sample).

The character is a Tulwyn barbarian tribesman from the Athul wilderness.

D20 stats:
ABILITIES
STR 15
INT 9
WIS 12
DEX 13
CON 15
CHA 8

SKILLS
Balance +3
Climb +6
Craft (fletching) +3
Craft (stonecraft) +2
Craft (leatherworking) +4
Handle Animal +3
Heal +3
Hide +6
Intimidate +5
Knowledge (Salt Route geography) +4
Move Silently +3
Survival +7
Swim +5


NO STATS SYSTEM:

ABILITIES
STR: has lean, hard muscles accustomed to climbing and hard working. Considered one of the stronger members of his tribe. Less 'explosively' powerful than he is tireless in his ability to test the endurance of his strength (holding heavy weight for long periods of time, muscles don't tire easily)
INT: less knowledgeable than civilized men, but able to grasp basic concepts of other cultures (can recognize Kaldorian script versus Sildarin script, etc).
WIS: has strong instincts with the natural world and the tactics of rival tribes. Has little grasp of the military and social morays of places like Kaldor or Tharda and therfore has little of what may be termed wisdom in dealing with such peoples. Very perceptive in reading his tribesmen's feelings and truthfulness; none at all with foreign cultures. Extremely perceptive and aware of changes in his native environ; can notice the absence or presence of certain native animals and can 'feel' changes in the earth. Unlikely to notice anything out of the ordinary with foreign travelers (for instance, would not notice if a Kaldoran knight was lacking a family crest on his surcoat).
DEX: lithe and sure footed on rough terrain and in trees. Good hand=eye coordination when throwing familiar objects such as spears, rocks and knives. Less adept at navigating unfamiliar terrain such as sand, scrub and ice.
CON: Tough as nails, especially in cold weather. Not as good in extreme heat and/or humidity (of which he has little experience). Very resistant to pain. Tends to catch ill during the spring and autumn, when he is subject to allergic reactions from changes in the air.
CHA: not what a civilized person would call friendly or cultured. Gruff, short with words and suspicious in nature. He is, however, considered fairly handsome by native standards and possesses a confidence that inspires his tribe members.

SKILLS:
Balance - used to climbing trees and has some experience balancing along limbs when preparing ambushes. Used to navigating wet rocks as well (often has to cross streams or rivers).

Climb - climbs deciduous and coniferous trees often. Understands what limbs are strong and which are likely to break. Has some experience with climbing rocks and cliffs, although nothing sheer (like a castle wall).

Craft (fletching) - sometimes fletches arrows for his tribe and has done so on occasion in the wilderness when need arose. Not a craftsman by any stretch, he can make an adequate - if unremarkable -arrow.

Craft (stonecraft) Has some ability with carving stone into arrow or spear heads. Has no experience with shaping stone to make much else.

Craft (leatherworking) Can make his own leather clothing from the hide of deer and other wild animals. Has no experience with cattle but this would present little proble, except perhaps with initial skinning and tanning.

Handle Animal - has some experience with handling horses (having ambushed many Thardic riders and stolen thier horses), no experience with cattle, swine, foul or other traditional civilized beasts. Feels more comfortable with wild animals, which he often 'handles' in the roughest manner (before killing and skinning them).

Heal – has knowledge of the traditional healing techniques of his tribe, including herbs, salves and the like. Can bind a wound and stop most (non-lethal) bleeding. No knowledge beyond basic 'first aid', and certainly has little understanding of disease, illness, or infection.

Hide – knows the Athul wilderness extremely well and can use this understanding to good effect when hiding there. No experience hiding in civilized regions, such as manors, towns, cities, etc. Has a better feel for using the cover of trees, bushes, and other natural camouflage than in hiding in the shadows of buildings, etc.

Intimidate - very scary fellow to travelers and even rival tribesmen (although less so). Can strike fear into his enemies with his savage demeanor and unruly appearance. Fellow tribesmen consider him a leader who commands respect and some intimidation.


Knowledge (Salt Route geography) He has extensive experience with the geography of the salt route from the Ramala Gap to just west of Pesino. He has never traveled beyond these points and therefore has only second hand insight into these areas.

Move Silently- is skilled and experienced at stealth in leafy forests, especially in the hilly oak forests of Athul. Has snuk up on many an unsuspecting traveler on the salt route. Has less experience in mountainous terrain and none at all in tundra and desert.

Survival - has spent countless nights alone in the Athul wilderness in all seasons and in all types of weather. Knows how to find or build shelter, hunt animals, fish, and find water. Was once forced to fend for himself for two weeks in the Athul mountains during a harsh winter. Has never seen the sea and has no knowledge of surviving off it.

Swim - Has swam the southern tip of Lake Benath and has some experience in swimming the rivers of Athul. Can float on his back for rest and can 'crawl'. Has good understanding of currents and how to swim with/against them. Has never swam in the sea and would be unused to its swells and tides.

[John Uckele]

Very popular thread...

Anywhoo, I love doing hidden values with characters. I usually roll everything in my D&D games (which means that I'm not playing with typical 'D&D gamers') as to ambiguate the stats of NPCs. It might be very interesting to actually make someone's character for them. My Players could likely trust them to correctly interpret and build their character (especially since I help them build their characters already).

Maybe I'll try it on the next game I run.

[Sir Privy Toastrack]

Very popular thread...

Anywhoo, I love doing hidden values with characters. I usually roll everything in my D&D games (which means that I'm not playing with typical 'D&D gamers') as to ambiguate the stats of NPCs. It might be very interesting to actually make someone's character for them. My Players could likely trust them to correctly interpret and build their character (especially since I help them build their characters already).

Maybe I'll try it on the next game I run.

You're definitely my style of player/GM.  I'm glad someone is playing D&D with this approach!

[zephyr_cirrus]

One problem that I see in your system is that it does not account for character advancement as well as other systems, and character advancement is a major element of most RPGs.  If a character does not really know how good/bad they are at something, how do they know what to improve?  
For example, using your home video example, how would that crappy cinematographer (I hope that's the right word for that profession, but I honestly don't know) know that they needed to improve if they didn't know they were horrible?

[Sir Privy Toastrack]

One problem that I see in your system is that it does not account for character advancement as well as other systems, and character advancement is a major element of most RPGs.  If a character does not really know how good/bad they are at something, how do they know what to improve?  
For example, using your home video example, how would that crappy cinematographer (I hope that's the right word for that profession, but I honestly don't know) know that they needed to improve if they didn't know they were horrible?

A great question.  As you suggested, the video guy probably wouldn't know he needed to improve (most hobbyists in the video field don't really have an understanding of what makes a good videographer better than him.).  That's part of life, IMO. I remember when I thought I could direct better than Ridley Scott and didn't need improvement.  You might guess I was wrong. As the PC tries more and more, he will become all too aware that he wasn't all that good before.
As for the game, it would be accounted for in adding to the list of your experience.  When attempting to do something, the GM might say, "okay, roll a 15 or better" and the player then mentions he had this same challenege level previously (and succeeded), and believes he should thus have a better shot.  Its not iron clad, I grant you, but entierly dependent o player/GM trust and roleplaying.  It might not work -- right now its just an idea.

[nellist]

I've just got to say that I love the descriptive version of the character. I can see problems, but it is much more interesting for me, and even gives more of a feel for how certain abilities come into their own.

Keith Nellist

[Sir Privy Toastrack]

I've just got to say that I love the descriptive version of the character. I can see problems, but it is much more interesting for me, and even gives more of a feel for how certain abilities come into their own.

Keith Nellist

Well, at least someone likes it!  That makes two (me and you)!