Alright, better late than never. This ist he BARBAREN! Attribute Thread. In this playtest report, Ron suggested that the Attribtes existence is forfeit. Ben said as much when he visited me in Hamburg a few weeks ago. First, a little information. Then, some arguments.

The Attributes
Attributes are Strength, Agility, Stamina, Wits, and Virility. Players divide points between these at character creation. The Attributes don’t change much during the course of play. They are used for task resolution outside combat and wooing. You take a number of d6 equal to your rating (1-5) and roll them. A result of 4-6 is a success, one success is normally sufficient, but for especially challenging tasks, two or more can be requested. Ben said all rolls they made in the playtest came up successes anyway, so why bother. What’s more, you could use other stats (see below) for task resolution, one way or another.

Another use for Attributes is resisting damage. You make a soak roll (with Stamina in combat, with Wits in wooing). Ben said they left that out after the first couple rolls anyway.

The other stats
The other stats are for fighting and wooing. First, we have: Combat, Momentum, and Elegance for fighting, Attractiveness, Touch and Charm for wooing. Combat and Attractiveness are the big pools, derived from several Attributes combined, that are used up for attack/defence/ bloodshed/advance/rejection/ distance. Momentum, Elegance, Touch and Charm are the small pools used for special moves, derived from a single attribute each.

Ron and Ben suggest that these stats are sufficient and should be the ones to get determined directly, not derived from some AD&D leftover attribute scores.

Also, there are Aggro (formerly known as Aggressiveness) and Horny. These are points used for raising the combat/wooing stats or as a ressource in combat/wooing. Aggro is gained through wooing women and having sex. Horny is gained through fighting and killing.

Advocatus Diaboli
Though I’m not decided on the matter, I will speak in favor of the Attributes here, to see how valid my decision to include them proves.

Single Checks are boring, but Resisted/Extended Checks rock!
Here’s some cool applications of Attribute-based rolls from my own playtests.

• There is a climbing contest. You need 10 successes on Strength to reach the top, but if, in one roll, you don’t get at least two successes, you fall. The damage you take depends on how far you were up already.
• You are outnumbered and choose to run. Roll Stamina against those in pursuit. You are 2 successes in advance. If one of them makes good those two successes on one of you, he catches up. If you increase it to 5 successes, you lose them.
• You are running at the enemy, he is running at you, both shouting, with weapons raised. Who gains Initiative? Let’s roll Virility to check who’s got the bigger guts.
• You are dodging across the open courtyard. You need 5 Agility successes to get to the archway. Each roll you must make means that the Shuarian archers can take a shot at you.
• You can try and coast down the glacier on your shield if you like, but it requires two sucesses, and if you fail, you’ll fall into a crevasse and break a leg (a deep wound in rules terms). If you make it, though, you’ll catch up on your enemy before he reaches the bottom.

You don’t roll the Attributes just for show
As I state in the write-up, fierce Barbarians automatically succeed at mundane tasks. No roll, no reference to the Attributes, no harm done.

Derived Stats are cool
The deriving of combat/wooing stats from the Attributes is equally well suited for two types of player:

• Player 1: “Cool. If I reduce Strength and Agility by 1 each and take Stamina 5, that’ll give me 2 less Combat, but I’ll be able to soak more damage so I can gain Initiative by not parrying.”
• Player 2: “Forget it. I want to be tall and strong, and I want to be real virile. Can you calculate my Combat score for me?”

I mean, Combat and Attractiveness are rather abstract values, but Strength—everybody can relate to that! So the Attributes form the picture in your mind, and the derived stats are for the tactical stuff.

The soak bit opens up more options for combat
So if you have a high Stamina, you might take a blow to gain Initiative more easily. If you have a low Stamina, you’ll probably have more Combat and especially more Momentum and Elegance which you can use. Which tactic proves more successful?

So far. What do you say?

- Frank

Hi Frank,

Suggestion: Combat, Attractiveness, and the other "derived" scores the primary ones.

Then have "strong," "agile," and so on be options for the traits (situational bonuses). This method provides every possible imaginative and inspirational benefit for saying "Oh, my guy is strong" without any of the downside of the current system.

The only person who'll be disappointed is the guy who wants to be tactical with his numbers during character creation. I suggest that if you imagine this guy, he will only be satisfied with the game if it has three layers of derivation, not just two, and multiple lists of weapons which can be tactically chosen among as well. If you keep trying to satisfy him in your imagination, that's where you'll end up.

Instead, actually play the game and see whether the layered attributes that you currently have actually enhance people's enjoyment of the game.

Very bluntly, during our GenCon experience, all the effort that went into figuring out the numbers, at the table, destroyed the ability of two people (Tom and Ben) to set up their characters for use in actual play. The game has a nice mechanism for what I call "positioning," which are indicators of who the character knows and what sorts of conflicts they might face. But by the time we got there, too much time had been spent on the layering math, and so people were all focused on that kind of thinking ... and our positioning was weak, which led directly to a weak session in terms of characters' goals and interactions, despite Julie's and Ben's very strong efforts as GM(s).

Best,
Ron

Frank wrote:

• There is a climbing contest. You need 10 successes on Strength to reach the top, but if, in one roll, you don’t get at least two successes, you fall. The damage you take depends on how far you were up already.
• You are outnumbered and choose to run. Roll Stamina against those in pursuit. You are 2 successes in advance. If one of them makes good those two successes on one of you, he catches up. If you increase it to 5 successes, you lose them.
• You are running at the enemy, he is running at you, both shouting, with weapons raised. Who gains Initiative? Let’s roll Virility to check who’s got the bigger guts.
• You are dodging across the open courtyard. You need 5 Agility successes to get to the archway. Each roll you must make means that the Shuarian archers can take a shot at you.
• You can try and coast down the glacier on your shield if you like, but it requires two sucesses, and if you fail, you’ll fall into a crevasse and break a leg (a deep wound in rules terms). If you make it, though, you’ll catch up on your enemy before he reaches the bottom.

I was actually thinking about dropping the soaking part completely, in favor of a "special move" that allows to ignore a number of, say, 2 damage successes. This will obviously cost momentum.

Ron, your suggestion is simple and well. One could just simply use 3d6 for Task Resolution outside combat/wooing, and add 1d6 for a Specialty, 2d6 for a Specialty!. This approach would call for a disadvantage-style Specialty, too, which would substract 1d6 or 2d6.

There is one problem remaining: I NEED a stat called Virility. There is no way past this.

- Frank

Use Virility points to build the character then.

Could you rename Combat or Momentum Virility?