Seperation anxiety.

[Seth M. Drebitko]

Well, folks I figure this would be the forum to go to, you see I want to get rid of stats in my game. I am running off a more narrative system I use phrases instead of skills, I now use stones instead of dice, but I think I am ready for the next step. I want to try and run my game without the use of stats but cannot figure out how I would determine how much damage people can take before dying without them. If any one could help that would be awesome.

[TonyLB]

Does your game actually need to figure out how much damage people can take before dying?

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

What part to Stats currently play in your game when it comes to dealing and sustaining damage?

Peace,

-Troy

[Seth M. Drebitko]

Yup that would have been a smart thing to add. The only thing stat pools (a number of white stones equal to rank) do is you may switch one white stone (positive), with one black (negative). Each stat starts the game with all white stones when you take damage to any stat (usually only physical, mental, and personality may be damaged through magic perhaps) you take a number of stones out equal to the amount of damage you took, starting with white stones.
So that's about it I am hoping to find a way to cut that stats out if its not all that possible then I can leave them. The play test group does not mind having the stats I just thought it would be nice to be able to remove them for those who don't like using stats such as myself.

[TonyLB]

Okay, let me ask my question another way.  Has anyone in your playtest group had a character die on them?  Come close?  What did it do for/to the game experience?

[Seth M. Drebitko]

Well, I had a character come one stone from being dead, it did not have much effect on the group they had him fall back behind every one and kept on like nothing happened. I just keep finding that players put to much emphasis on their characters stats even after I gave them more of a back seat role than the more narrative aspect of things.
sorry about not understanding the question the first time.

[contracycle]

In my experience, you don't need a damage system to determine when someone dies.  We all know, roughly speaking, what sort of injuries will kill a human being.  For most purposes, what the damage counter in a system does is manage the penalties to action associated with non-lethal injury.  But, I have run systemless games in which all injuries were merely descriptions, and this perfectly well - arguably better as irt requires the actual injury be held in mind, and thus the imaginary space, rather than defaulting to the governance of system to insert the injury into play.

[Seth M. Drebitko]

I suppose that could work, I will have to try it out nextmonday at the play test group. I will keep you updated on how it works if any one else has ideas I am open to them.

[Seth M. Drebitko]

I suppose that could work, I will have to try it out nextmonday at the play test group. I will keep you updated on how it works if any one else has ideas I am open to them.

[Troy_Costisick]

Heya,

Picking up on what Contracylce said... I don't think your system has enough penalties for taking damage.  If a character "almost died" and they continued on like nothing happened, they I might suggest your system is not engaging them like it should.  

Let me ask this.  Do your stats affect the characters in ways beyond just the ability to sustain damage?  In other words, does taking away stones affect their effectiveness in other areas?  

Oh, and also how hard is it to get the stones back?

Peace,

-Troy

[Seth M. Drebitko]

During play a character is able to once per round switch a white stone from their stat pool with a black on from their draw showing that extra effort was put forth. The draw back to taking damage is that you lose white stones first which means you can't give as much effort. You recover a stone back to your pool at a rate of 1 per hour in game, which comes back as a black stone, every haklf an hour you turn a black stone into a white stone.

[Callan S.]

Well, I had a character come one stone from being dead, it did not have much effect on the group they had him fall back behind every one and kept on like nothing happened. I just keep finding that players put to much emphasis on their characters stats even after I gave them more of a back seat role than the more narrative aspect of things.
sorry about not understanding the question the first time.

I sense gamism. So they like to manage their stats? Like talking about them between each other, and who would be best at a task?

The 'carry on like nothing happened' is classic gamism. Rotate the PC to a defended spot and say nothing more about it, as saying anything more would indicate you wished to be challenged further on the matter.

The question is, if your players like something entirely different to what you like, what are you going to do?

[Seth M. Drebitko]

I guess your right it is just play style not really a game mechanic lacking. I will let the game continue on as the gm I feel that the players should be alowed to have a good time the way they like to.

[Callan S.]

True, but in your position your pretty pivotal to what type of fun their having. If your not in the mindset where your evaluating their tactics and giving feedback (eg "Whoa! I wouldn't have thought of that!", etc) then you wont really be gaming as a group.

[Seth M. Drebitko]

Then I will have to get in the mind set lol...flips through d&d books...ah I can feel the min maxing soaking backinto me already. I used to game that way, and actualy what got me to stop was that Iwas in a profesional play deal, and for some reason after that I was moreinto the role playing.