PDA

View Full Version : Stats systems in RPG's



Vitruviansquid
2010-04-08, 02:27 PM
It seems to me that there are two kinds of paradigms that go into designing how RPG characters work when a system wants to quantify how strong/smart/charismatic/etc. characters are.

In one paradigm, such as that used by DnD 4e (never played any other versions, though I'm led to believe it's the same case), the stats attempt to give a comprehensive evaluation of how capable a character is in many fields, but they're not really that different from each other mechanically, in a roll-playing sense. If you have high strength as a fighter, it's practically the same thing as having a high intelligence as a wizard - one arbitrary "primary stat" determines how hard and how accurately your character will hit. Sure, there is some basic aspects of some stats that are not compromised by your class, such as the stats' way of affecting NADs (though partially, since the higher of two stats modify NADs) and the fact that Constitution and Constitution alone gives additional hp and healing surges. But for the most part, these don't seem to matter too much.

Another example of this paradigm is Diablo 2, where there are basically 4 stats, but each class benefits differently from each stat so that you're really "meant to" get some stats and not others with certain classes - Amazons should get high dex because each point of dex benefits them more than for other classes, or Barbarians should get high Vit because each point of Vit benefits them more than for other classes.


The other paradigm exists in Savage Worlds, where each stat does the same thing for each character (it helps that "classes" don't really exist) and each stat attempts to be important so that a complete character might not have to be perfectly rounded out, but will always have weaknesses due to stat deficiencies. There are generally multiple ways to skin a cat with this paradigm, such that players with high Strength could be effective in combat in one way while players with high Smarts could be effective in the same combat situations, just in different ways. In this sense, each statistic is important and any "dump stat" that exists only do because players decide to trade them off. There is no sense, as in 4e, that a Rogue with high dexterity doesn't need any intellect whatsoever for any reason.

Fire Emblem is another RPG with this paradigm. Every character, basically speaking, needs to have some amount of every stat (okay, except for the fact that Magic and Strength are interchangeable >_>). Characters with low Skill will whiff too frequently, characters with low Speed will get double-attacked and be unable to pull off their own double-attacks, and characters with low Strength will simply do too little damage to matter. Of course, there are always cases where you want different stat distributions. If you're going after an Armor/foot Knight, you're going to need a high strength/low speed hitter because he can actually do damage and probably still double-attack the knight while a low strength/low speed character will double-attack the knight for 0 damage. On the other hand, you'd want to attack enemy Myrmidons (or Mercenaries in other games... or just Myrmidons. It's complicated >_>) with high speed/low strength characters because it's a better idea to avoid being double-attacked and not so important to do a lot of damage because they have low defenses to overcome anyways.

If I could make sweeping and not completely justified generalizations of the two paradigms, it seems like the DnD paradigm seems to push players to establish what they want in terms of role-playing (do I want to be the smart guy, the tough guy, or the fast guy?) before moving onto executing it in roll-playing terms (how do I become the best smart guy I could be?). In Savage Worlds, players move from roll-playing to role-playing (would I like to not die quickly? Would I like to hit people hard? Then I'll put points in Vigor and Strength).

In any case, the two paradigms aren't always mutually exclusive. Even in DnD 4e, there's Constitution having the same benefit for all characters (even if Warlocks benefit even more from it). Even in Savage Worlds, a low-strength character could still contribute in combat by using agility and smarts to perform tricks that can have the basic effects of weak attacks. Most systems appear to compromise like the above. Fire Emblem is probably the only RPG stat system I see as not having any compromise with the DnD 4e style paradigm. Of course, Fire Emblem is more of a strategy game than an RPG, so the character role-playing aspect is not even that important (though, of course, you still have most beefy looking characters having high growths in strength/defense and most skinny characters having high growths in speed).

So, then, what kind of stat system would be ideal? What kind of stat system would be ideal for what kind of setting?

TLDR version: If you were to build a system of stats for an RPG, what kind of stats would you include, how would they be distributed? What would be the reason for it?

Totally Guy
2010-04-08, 03:07 PM
In Burning Wheel it seems that every stat is useful for fighting.

Will is the social mental stat. If that's too low you are putty in the hands of anyone intimidating, plus if you are surprised or scared or in pain you hesitate for longer.
Perception is the academic mental stat. Low perception adversely affects your Reflexes meaning you get fewer actions per round. (Reflexes is an average of Perception, Agility and Speed)
Agility is important as martial skills are all learnt by using agility. Plus it's part of Reflexes.
Speed is really important as you need to compete with an opponent to stand at the desired distance for your weapon. Plus it's part of Reflexes.
Power affects your damage and your total Mortal Wound value.
Fort is constitution. It also affects your Mortal Wound value but it also determines where your lesser wound values are.

Plus when you are damaged all your stats drop at the same time. So if you take a Light Wound all stats temporarily go down by 1. If any hit zero you go down. So you dumped Will? Down you go. :p

It makes optimising interesting because it's not so simple as "Int does nothing for me, I'll spend no points on it". They're not all vanilla either, the way that character generation works means that you make choices to determine how many points you get to spend in the first place.

Magic Myrmidon
2010-04-08, 05:30 PM
I'm just posting to say that it's excellent that you referenced Fire Emblem. >.>

Zeta Kai
2010-04-08, 05:36 PM
I've been working on my own RPG system for about a year or so, heavily based on the number 12 (guess which die gets used exclusively?). The attribute scores are:

Agility
Appearance
Charm
Courage
Faith
Intellect
Magic
Precision
Speed
Stamina
Strength
Wisdom

It's a point-buy system (which the option to randomly roll each, or take an array), & each talent is tied to 2 attributes: a primary & a secondary. It may seem like a lot of attributes, but they cover everything.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-08, 06:16 PM
I like the GURPS option where there are a few "main" stats that all effect lots of things, and then a bunch of secondary stats that are usually derived from the main stats, but can be changed as well. It's a point-buy system, so it works.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-08, 09:42 PM
If I were to choose one paradigm for dealing with stats as superior, I would probably say it's the second paradigm (that of Savage Worlds, Fire Emblem, and Burning Wheel). Why? Because you end up with more stats that matter in the grand scheme of things, which means there are more differences between each character and one can go in more different directions with their characters.

I submit that any given DnD 4e character only has 3 or, at max, 4 stats that are important. There's the main stat used to determine damage and accuracy for the character's main attack, a secondary stat used sometimes to determine the power of "rider" effects, the third stat that rounds out the character's NAD defenses, and VERY RARELY, and fourth stat in CON. I'm not sure I know any class that is expected to use more than four stats (even then, with the marginal effect of CON, it's hard for me to justify it as a valid "fourth stat." Likewise, the "third stat" to round out NADs can be ignored more often than not).

In Savage Worlds, there are 5 attributes, and sometimes it's acceptable to only have 4 by foregoing Strength and using something else as your method of attack. In Fire Emblem, there are 7 stats (HP, strength/magic, defense, skill, speed, luck, res), each of which are indispensable and impact a fight in a major way. Even if you ignored luck as a valid stat, it's still a relatively complicated game at 6 important stats per character. Factor in the other semi-stats, like a character's rank at each weapon and their selection of weapons available (for surely they matter in a fight), and one finds that Fire Emblem manages to have an incredibly complicated system of stats for a game *just* about fighting.

If we were to place the four games I've talked about above on a scale from least to most complex, one would say that DnD 4e is on the left-most side of least complex while Fire Emblem is on the right-most side of most complex. But at the same time, more complex is not always better.

I mean, if we would say that Complex is ALWAYS better, we'd have to admit that FATAL is the best RPG out there. >_>

So let's take a look at how each stat in DnD 4e and Fire Emblem does things:

In DnD 4e, the main stat always does double duty of controlling damage AND controlling accuracy. I've never met an attack that said something like "Stat A vs. Defense... [W] + Stat B damage." It is invariably "Stat A vs. Defense... Some number + Stat A damage." Usually, the effects of an attack is calculated based on your main stat and SOMETIMES, a secondary stat.

In comparison, in Fire Emblem, attacking something is based on four stats, as opposed to DnD's 1-2. You get strength to count for damage, skill to determine accuracy, speed to determine whether or not you double-attack, and then luck to slightly boost your accuracy and affect critical chance.

While we might call DnD 4e simplistic and Spartan, we could also accuse Fire Emblem of being overly complicated. In a very basic way of looking at most RPG combat, there are only three dimensions (not counting movement speed, which is held constant in most games):

Attack: how long it takes for you to kill something
Defense: how long it takes stuff to kill you
Special: Rider effects, status effects, positioning effects, and all that miscellany

This is a very basic system, but it encapsulates everything that exists in DnD 4e (granted, movement speed is modified depending on race and armor sometimes) as well as Fire Emblem. Now, why should I split the simple principle of how long it takes one dude to kill another into four separate stats? Even if there are multiple ways to skin a cat, in the end, all we're trying to do is... skin a cat. Another way to think of it is to ask yourself, is the luck stat in Fire Emblem even really necessary? Does it even deserve to exist when all it's really doing is redundant to your skill and speed stats?

So not only should every stat do something, every stat should do something interesting. There should be a reason you pick one stat instead of another because they should all end up with a different effect.

Let me make an example of Fire Emblem's weapon triangle.

In Fire Emblem, there's a rock-paper-scissors mechanic where swords beat axes, axes beat lances, and lances beat swords. Let us say that picking a stat to excel in is the same as picking one of the weapons to be good at.

But what's the point of choosing a specific weapon when you always get the same result? One weapon beats you, one weapon ties against you, and one weapon loses to you. Each weapon is different, but each one has the same effect.

However, the choice of which weapon you have is made interesting because each weapon also *implies* something else. Let's say that the whole category of swords includes not just the normal swords of ascending quality: iron, steel, and silver, but also a sword that produces a special effect: the Killing Edge that boosts critical chance. On the other hand, axes include not just the normal axes: iron, steel, and silver, but also a special axe that produces a special effect: the Handaxe that can be thrown as a ranged weapon as well as being used as a melee weapon.

Suddenly, the choice is no longer arbitrary, but is significant. Are you kind of guy who likes to take risks? Go with Swords and the Killing Edge so you can gamble on a critical hit when it's worth the risk. Are you the kind of guy who hates to take risks? Go with Axes and never be caught by archers with your pants down again. (FYI, In the real Fire Emblem, you don't get usually get to choose which weapon class your characters will have >_>)

So, I guess my point in this exploration is that a stats system does it job not only when it is complex, but when it is complex and yet meaningful. Embedded in a stats system should be multiple ways of "skinning the cat," but each different way should have different implications so that players have an actual choice to make. To that end, I propose the following for a game that follows some of the basic assumptions of DnD (Let's not assume that in every RPG, you kill people by reducing their hitpoints and positioning matters.)

Strength - Stat that determines the damage a character deals with each hit

Accuracy - Stat that determines the accuracy of attacks

Special - Stat that determines the power and likelihood of secondary effects of attacks.

Fortitude - Subtracts damage inflicted by individual attacks.

Constitution - Stat that determines the hp pool of a character.

Resilience - Stat that prevents status effects, offensive secondary effects and "saves against" ongoing effects.

Evasion - Stat that reduces your chances of being hit.

Of course, the problem with this stats system is that is only concerned with combat. It makes no room to express all of the dimensions of a character physically, mentally, and spiritually as DnD 4e does (okay, more realistically, attempts). Thus, the stat system is very unworkable for the purpose of making an interesting game to roleplay in.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-08, 10:03 PM
Strength - Stat that determines the damage a character deals with each hit

Accuracy - Stat that determines the accuracy of attacks

Special - Stat that determines the power and likelihood of secondary effects of attacks.

Fortitude - Subtracts damage inflicted by individual attacks.

Constitution - Stat that determines the hp pool of a character.

Resilience - Stat that prevents status effects, offensive secondary effects and "saves against" ongoing effects.

Evasion - Stat that reduces your chances of being hit.

Looks ok, but with this many stats, I would strongly advise having some as secondary stats, as not all stats are created equal. I also loathe a 'special' stat. Define it somehow. I know this is hard as we need to know the context of the game, but don't keep the stat as just 'special'. That tells people absolutely nothing.

Zeta Kai
2010-04-08, 10:24 PM
Looks ok, but with this many stats, I would strongly advise having some as secondary stats, as not all stats are created equal. I also loathe a 'special' stat. Define it somehow. I know this is hard as we need to know the context of the game, but don't keep the stat as just 'special'. That tells people absolutely nothing.

Ah, just call it a Luck stat. It can do the same thing, but with a name that people can infer the meaning of more easily.

I also like the SPECIAL system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPECIAL_%28role-playing_system%29) from the Fallout series. It's an acronym representing the 7 attributes in the system: Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility, & Luck. It a fun, balanced system, & it's based on the GURPS system.

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-09, 12:18 AM
I would strongly advise having some as secondary stats, as not all stats are created equal.

Explain. :smallconfused:

Caphi
2010-04-09, 12:32 AM
Two things.

There's technically a third option somewhere between D&D4 "you have your attack stat and your defense stat" and "everyone needs everything". It's the stat where all the stats actually do completely different things, but different character types get different mileage out of each thing done by stats. Fire Emblem is a great example of this, because while everyone can benefit from everything, there are serious differences in the impact of each one on each character. Armor Knights and Myrmidons have no use for each other's Defense and Evade, each using one of the two almost exclusively, and Axe Fighters and Pegasi do damage in different ways (one by sheer attack, the other by getting doubles). And while an Armor Knight with high defense and evade is definitely better, you aren't going to give an evasion item to one. (Movement boots, on the other hand...)

Second thing: NAD? I think the D is for defense, but...

Vitruviansquid
2010-04-09, 12:36 AM
I was always aware it meant "non-AC Defense" and used it in that manner. :smallconfused:

In any case,


It's the stat where all the stats actually do completely different things, but different character types get different mileage out of each thing done by stats

This is only partially correct. Classes in Fire Emblem count for three things: movement speed, weapon access and special vulnerabilities (foot knights vs. hammers, pegasus knights vs. bows, etc). When a myrmidon gets another point of strength, it's the exact same effect as when a fighter gets another point of strength. There is no rule I'm aware of that says something like "each point in strength a fighter gets counts double for its effectiveness compared to other characters." In this sense, a myrmidon with 10 strength will hit just as hard as a fighter with 10 strength and a myrmidon with 10 speed will evade just as much as a fighter with 10 speed.

EXCEPT, and this is where you are correct, different classes use different weapons and each weapon has an implied compatibility with different stat distributions. The reason you like fighters with high strength is that axes have high Wt and thus demand high strength to be wielded.

But to move away from Fire Emblem, what you are talking about does exist in many RPG's. Take, for example, Diablo 2. You have 4 stats - Strength, Dexterity, Vitality, and Energy. None of these stats have a direct effect on the game, except in the case of Strength and Dexterity minimums to wear certain armor and weapons. Each of these stats do, however, affect another, derived stat.

Strength affects damage
Dexterity affects hit rating and defense rating
Vitality affects hp
Energy affects mana

The degree to which each stat affects their derived stat is, however, different for every class. A Barbarian in Diablo 2 will get more hp per Vitality than a Necromancer would. This skews the stat distribution for the different classes, as you would want more of a stat that helps a lot than a stat that does not. However, most characters need to put at least some points into each stat in order to be effective. For instance, even though Sorceresses derive little benefit for each point they put in Vitality, it is simply unworkable to play a Sorceress to high levels without putting some points into it.

jseah
2010-04-09, 12:49 AM
I mean, if we would say that Complex is ALWAYS better, we'd have to admit that FATAL is the best RPG out there. >_>
You have no idea. The current half-done homebrew magic system I'm sitting on makes FATAL look easy as pie. When your complexity cut-off is powers and roots, you know something is going to go wrong. >.>
Some of the formulae have to be calculated in a specific sequence of steps since doing it in reverse means you have to do strange stuff like finding the solutions of a quadratic equation.
It takes me (the designer) half an hour to stat out a simple fireball spell. Still haven't gotten all the crinks in it sorted out. *eyetwitch*

Then again it was meant more as a writing guide and a simulationist's wish-fulfillment (in a decidedly non-sim universe =P) than an actually playable system.

*******************

The stat system for that game has quadratically scaling stats.
(not my idea. I just tried to simplify the rules into a formula and it turned out to scale quadratically with level)

It makes for interesting dynamics, where the stat system bears out a cinematic/herioc style of play. A few levels means you're practically untouchable from those lower level mooks. Enemies of 10 levels difference are nothing more than roadkill.
Good if you like shows like Hero I guess.

That said, it has 15 stats, growth, offense, defense, critical and misc. for each strength, magic and speed(which is also stamina, don't ask)

Kylarra
2010-04-09, 12:54 AM
Keep in mind that it's a lot easier to be complicated when you have a computer built into your game system doing all the calculations for you. By necessity, tabletop games will generally be more simplistic or tend to the more simplistic modifiers for a given action simply to expedite the process, compared to what is possible in electronic games where you have the computer crunching the numbers for you.

Altair_the_Vexed
2010-04-09, 06:24 AM
I like simplicity - for example, microlite 20 (a stripped down d20 system) has just three stats: Strength, Dexterity, Mind.
I think I can get by with just those.

By keeping the number of stats low, we're not losing RP, we're increasing it. You have to decide how to play your high Mind score - are you quick witted, persuasive, strong willed, or what? Your choice, much less dictated by the score than if you have three or more stats for the same set of abilities.

Indon
2010-04-09, 08:43 AM
In DnD 4e, the main stat always does double duty of controlling damage AND controlling accuracy. I've never met an attack that said something like "Stat A vs. Defense... [W] + Stat B damage." It is invariably "Stat A vs. Defense... Some number + Stat A damage." Usually, the effects of an attack is calculated based on your main stat and SOMETIMES, a secondary stat.
Well, some attacks have the 'rider' secondary effect as damage, so it's Stat A vs. Defense, [W] + Stats A and B.

Anyway, I think there's way more than just one consideration for a stat system.

I feel that stat systems are ways to model the reality you're conveying in the game, and many of the design decisions that affect models affect the design of stat systems.


I like simplicity - for example, microlite 20 (a stripped down d20 system) has just three stats: Strength, Dexterity, Mind.
I think I can get by with just those.

By keeping the number of stats low, we're not losing RP, we're increasing it. You have to decide how to play your high Mind score - are you quick witted, persuasive, strong willed, or what? Your choice, much less dictated by the score than if you have three or more stats for the same set of abilities.

Altair here notes what I think to be an important consideration - granularity. How 'tightly', as it were, do you want the narrative world of your game expressed in your game's mechanics?

As Altair notes, having a looser stat system can provide a lot of narrative freedom, which could be what you're looking for. But freedom can come at the cost of direction, so with this approach you risk players who can't find much character inspiration from the system - it's good for people who come to your table with ideas, but maybe not so good for people who come to your table looking for ideas.

Conversely, you can have a tighter stat system, with more stats and more clearly defined stats. This approach provides less freedom, but more direction, which would appeal to different players.

One thought is that you could have an 'expandable' stat system - a stat system with a few basic stats that, if you desire higher stat system granularity, you can easily houserule into a more detailed stat system - or vice versa, houseruling into a simpler stat system. I think that would provide maximum versatility for a DM looking to make a game for any given group... at least for that one design consideration.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 08:48 AM
Want a complex system check out the Heros system.

Core book alone reads like a ****ing legal text.