[S.A.V.A.G.E.] Attribute/Skill redesign

[sacrosanct]

Hello,

It's been a very long time since I posted on the FORGE, so please bear with me.  Some of you may be aware one of my games I've had out, S.A.V.A.G.E. Essentials.  Based on some feedback, I really wanted to find a way to combine your character's skills with their attributes directly, while being a little out-of-the box and maintaining simplicity.  It is much easier to explain with actual graphics of what I call the 'stat-cube', but I will try to explain in text.

My question, is this a mechanic that you think will work well and more importantly, not overdone?



Thing of a 10x10 square of circles.  The square of 100 circles represents your attributes (strength, intelligence, ect). When you start your character, you have six attributes you can choose from, and place on the grid.  Once you place your first attribute, all others must spread out from that or another existing attribute letter in any direction horizontally or vertically.

Let's say, for simplicity, that you choose to put this on your grid:

S E
A
I I I

Try to visualize each letter in a different circle. You place your attributes in a way that allows you to gain skills. Each skills requires a certain attribute set. In the above case, the character knows fortitude (SE), basic heavy firearms (SAI), and moderate first aid (III). You can use the same attribute letter for multiple skills, as long as only the skill requirements are in a consecutive line. I.e., if a skill costs (A,I,I), I could not just add another I to the bottom of SAI without including the S as well, making that skill invalid.

As you adventure, instead of XP points, you get attribute points awarded by the GM based upon which attributes you use the most often. You use these to branch out and get better on the cube. For instance, if you get another A and and another I, you can add that to the SAI skill to raise it to moderate heavy firearm, as that skill requires an SAAII skill set.

This system also brings in some tactical stragedy on the player's part so they can fully maximize how they lay out their skills and still have opportunity to learn more.

[sacrosanct]

Let me be a bit proactive and explain the background.

There are four main attributes:
S= strength
A= agility
I= Intelligence
E= endurance

Each skill will require a certain number of these attributes before learning.  For example, moderate first aid costs 3 intelligence attribute letters, or 3ea 'I's in a single row (as in the example above, on the bottom row).

[Adam Dray]

Maybe a full example would help me understand better. Unfortunately grids get squished by HTML unless you use tables or images or PRE tags. I think I get it though.

I think you're focusing way too much on being different for the sake of being different. What is the value added by the complexity of this system? Remember that some fantastic games use very simple dice techniques, often with a slight twist.

For example, My Life with Master uses opposing dice pools of d4's with two twists. First, 4's are counted as 0's. That means you're only adding 1's, 2's and 3's. This simplifies addition and lets you remove 1 in 4 of the dice you rolled (less dice to add). It's pretty quick. The second twist is that you can get an extra d4 (1-4, not 0-3) or an extra d6 (1-6) or an extra d8 (1-8) into your pool by introducing "Intimacy," "Desperation," or "Sincerity," respectively. Dice pool plus a bonus dice. That's it. And MLwM is a rocking game.

All that aside, I think it's clever but overdone. Do you want the players to spend their time optimizing letter placement on a grid? Is that your design goal? (I doubt it, since any task that is best accomplished by a computer is probably not a good game design.)

[Tobaselly]

how do the skills link on the stat cube? Is each skill on a particular column or row? or do various patterns of attributes allow you to take/qualify for different skills?

[sacrosanct]

All that aside, I think it's clever but overdone. Do you want the players to spend their time optimizing letter placement on a grid? Is that your design goal? (I doubt it, since any task that is best accomplished by a computer is probably not a good game design.)

Actually, that is part of the goal.  I know there is no need to have a grid if all you wanted was a minimum attribute requirement per skill.  One of the intents is to make players think strategy when placing attributes on the grid.  Because you cannot have a successive line of attributes that includes more attribute letters than is required by a skill, you need to think ahead on how you place them.  Poor planning could lead to a very experienced character with lower skills because they didn't leave themselves much room to expand. 

I'm going to try to attach a screen print of the second page of the pdf that hopefully will explain it a bit better.

[Adam Dray]

That clears up my understanding of the rules. Thanks.

My question, is this a mechanic that you think will work well and more importantly, not overdone?

Will it work well? Depends on what you mean by "work." It probably will accomplish your goals: combine skills and attributes directly and focus players on the tactical puzzle of placing letters in a grid.

Is it overdone? I have to say yes, but that's just one man's opinion and this is no place for opinion polls, so let me try to give some deeper insights. The question you have to ask is, can you accomplish your goals in some easier way. You could, for example, use a Skill Tree. Each skill has prerequisites in the form of so many points of Strength or Agility or whatever. Simple, robust, extensible.

If you decide to keep the matrix anyway, here are some suggestions. Consider the other properties of the "word search" paradigm you've adopted. Ever play a word search? Sometimes the letters are backwards, diagonal, or even not in a straight line. You could allow certain kinds of advantages to a skill whose letters are in natural order (left-to-right horizontal or top-to-bottom vertical). You could allow skill use at some disadvantage if the skill's letters are in some non-linear order (as ASEA is on your example matrix).

[sacrosanct]

If you decide to keep the matrix anyway, here are some suggestions. Consider the other properties of the "word search" paradigm you've adopted. Ever play a word search? Sometimes the letters are backwards, diagonal, or even not in a straight line. You could allow certain kinds of advantages to a skill whose letters are in natural order (left-to-right horizontal or top-to-bottom vertical). You could allow skill use at some disadvantage if the skill's letters are in some non-linear order (as ASEA is on your example matrix).

That's an excellent suggestion, one that gives a unique ability over a traditional skill tree.  I've also toyed with the idea of the GM awarding bonus points, which the character could use towards any attribute--like a wild card if you will.

I am leaning on keeping the grid, as opposed to just keeping track of stats, because it offers more of a visual reference.  I try to keep the number of static lists and/or tables on a character sheet to a minimum, as I've seen too many character sheets look more like an excel spreadsheet than anything else.  Yes, this grid takes up space.  No, the probability of filling every circle isn't plausible.  I also know that this is not even remotely appealing towards someone who wants to 'level up' without having to think about it.  These are things I understand, but I was looking at a fresh approach.  I know there are technical ways of doing it better, but innovation comes from experimentation.  I would hope that something like this would be appealing towards those folks who plan things out to make their characters the best.  I hate to use the term 'min/maxers', as I'm not a big fan of those, but someone who can pre-plan where and how they want to place his or her attributes could potentially have a character much more skilled over their peers.

Either way, I certainly appreciate the feedback from everyone.

[sacrosanct]

Oh, I forgot to mention the way I really wanted to do this.  Instead of letters, I wanted to use colors representing each attribute.  That way, I could have something where if you got 3 or 4 colors in a row, it would grant additional bonuses.

The biggest problem?  How many people carry four different colored pencils or markers with them to a gaming session?

[Selene Tan]

I am leaning on keeping the grid, as opposed to just keeping track of stats, because it offers more of a visual reference.  I try to keep the number of static lists and/or tables on a character sheet to a minimum, as I've seen too many character sheets look more like an excel spreadsheet than anything else.

I'm actually not sure the grid as it stands makes a good reference. Right now, there are no markers to tell which lines of letters correspond to which skills. As the grid grows more dense, it will become harder to tell which skills are which. Some sort of color-coding will probably help, but if you have too many skills, you'll run out of easily-available colors.

[nsruf]

Have you tested this system by generating a complete PC? You could end up with some undesirable properties owing to the abstract nature of the rules. In particular, I would ask:

How many skills are there in the game, and how many different combinations of abilities? Are you sure it is possible to build a well-rounded, competent character under the limitations imposed by your rules and the size of the grid?

Is there maybe an optimal combination of assigning letters, i.e. the choice apparently offered to the players is just an illusion?

If you have the time, could you post an example of chargen? I think that would help us better understand your rules.

[sacrosanct]

How many skills are there in the game, and how many different combinations of abilities? Are you sure it is possible to build a well-rounded, competent character under the limitations imposed by your rules and the size of the grid?

I will admit that testing has brought one effect that I'm not pleased with.  I.e., players are using aquired attribute points to quickly "power up" a skill before learning or advancing other skills.  What's happing is it isn't taking long for a character to be extremely good with a particular type of weapon, and be mediocre in all other areas.  The only way I can see around this is to put a cap in place.  For instance, before learning advanced heavy firearms, they must have at least three other skills at adept level.  Something like that.  Currently there are about 50 skills, which are pretty similar to what you would find in most modern rpgs.

[Selene Tan]

I will admit that testing has brought one effect that I'm not pleased with.  I.e., players are using aquired attribute points to quickly "power up" a skill before learning or advancing other skills.  What's happing is it isn't taking long for a character to be extremely good with a particular type of weapon, and be mediocre in all other areas.  The only way I can see around this is to put a cap in place.  For instance, before learning advanced heavy firearms, they must have at least three other skills at adept level.  Something like that.  Currently there are about 50 skills, which are pretty similar to what you would find in most modern rpgs.

That gives me an idea which may or may not be what you want. Basically, characters start out with a small grid, say 3x3 or 5x5 or something. At certain points (maybe they have to save up attributes and trade them in or something), they can choose to add a row or a column to one of the sides of the grid. Depending on how difficult it is to add a row or column, you'll get a more or less even spread of skill levels.

[nsruf]

I will admit that testing has brought one effect that I'm not pleased with.  I.e., players are using aquired attribute points to quickly "power up" a skill before learning or advancing other skills.  What's happing is it isn't taking long for a character to be extremely good with a particular type of weapon, and be mediocre in all other areas.  The only way I can see around this is to put a cap in place.  For instance, before learning advanced heavy firearms, they must have at least three other skills at adept level.  Something like that.  Currently there are about 50 skills, which are pretty similar to what you would find in most modern rpgs.

Is this even a problem? If part of the fun is trying to create an effective character, a trade-off between versatility (competent at many skills) and focus (really good at few skills) presents an interesting choice. Of course, that leaves you with the problem of having to balance the two approaches. E.g., if you are worried that a one-trick PC is too effective in certain situations, reduce the relative effectivenes of high skill levels.

[Brian Newman]

By the way, hi again, Rod!

I wonder if this is just too many different layers of stuff.
What if you kept the 10x10 grid, with spaces big enough to write skill names in.
Make each side of the grid correspond to one of the four stats.
Plunk down a character's starting point somewhere, leaning toward one or two of the sides depending on their specialty.
They will then expand their knowledge out from that location.
Hand out your "stat letter" rewards as normal.
When a player wants to purchase a skill, they must pay the cost in "stat letter improvements" that they've collected.
They then move one box from their "knowledge amoeba" in the direction of the stat or stats they just expended improvements on and write the new skill in that box.
You could then give skill costs a discount if the amoeba is already substantially expanding in that direction, reflecting the increased knowledge and ability in that area making it easier to learn new things in that area.

I can't really draw a picture of this right now, but is it making any sense?

[Brian Newman]

You could even have some skills with prerequisites: you must be at least within X spaces of Edge Y to place this skill.  That forces the player to develop other skills in that direction first.