Greetings!

I'm taking my first shot at putting together a game, and I'm curious to get feedback on some of the concepts I have and the questions they are raising for me. The framework is a standard type RPG with a central combat based mechanic, though I am fiddling with some ideas to aesthetically engineer it to fit my setting/concept.

A core motif in the game concept is the idea of interconnectedness. A character has 9 main stats (3 sets of 3. 3,6 & 9 are a repeating pattern), and 6 derived stats which can not be directly adjusted, but can only change if the ones they are derived from change. As the game progresses, I want any xp that a player earns for their character to directly relate to the stats they used to get them - that is, a player who has their character hack and slash the whole time should not get xp they can arbitrarily apply anywhere they like - such as "intelligence". I want players who want xp to up their character's intelligence to have to roll play exercising their character's intelligence - like getting out of a situation with wit or diplomacy instead of impaling someone. What this would end up doing is stacking up xp in separate silos, and it seems you would likely find yourself with players having the classic problem of a 2-class character - namely slower advancement. Has anyone seen this sort of "use it to improve it" xp system done well?

On another note, I like the standard roll-under stat+modifier setup, but really kind of prefer the "higher is better" idea that would be the more natural way for people to think. Are there any mathematical gotchas in reversing things to a roll-over difficulty rating - stat?

Also, are there any known issues with upping the scale for everything from a typical 3d6 to a 3d20 range? I prefer the increased granularity, but am not sure if things might get wonky with higher numbers like that.

And lastly I like the idea of integrating a graceful "flow" concept into high stakes situations, where any sustained set of actions during a peak narrative time increases chances of the character entering a state like what athletes call "the zone" where things just work and it all becomes a fluid dance... so whatever actions are being taken - they are no longer rolled with a 3d20, but maybe a 4d20 or 5d20 where the worst 1 or 2 are dropped. A best 3 of 4, of 5, whatever. Has anyone else played with this idea of "flow" and used a different mechanic?

Have a look through some of the other threads..the "use-it-to-improve-it" concept has come up a couple of times over the past couple of months.

V

The first two threads that immediately come to mind are...

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=26815.0

or

[email]http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=26742.0[/email]

V

Your post made me think a lot of King Arthur Pendragon... in that game, you have to roll under your Skill, but higher is better, so your skill acts as a limit to how well you can do. You get XP "checks" when you use a skill, and have to roll over it to raise it at the end of the session (one check per skill per session, roll over because as skills get better, their harder to improve).

The "slower advancement" issue could be mitigated by being more liberal with xp in general, and since all the characters will presumably be using the same XP system, the major problem of "2-class" characters shouldn't be a problem, because they won't be advancing slower than anyone else in this game... only when compared to characters with other games.

As far as the "3d20" thing, I imagine your talking about D&D style ability-scores (because you want to use them as opposed to 3d6). Am I right about this?  If so... it shouldn't be a real problem, but that depends on how those stats "interact" with the rest of the system.

I love the idea of "flow" by the way, and used a similar mechanic in some designs of my own. I think the real question is how this works in your game, within your system. So I'd have to know more about how the idea is applied to throw out any advice.