STATS (strength, endurance, intelligence, etc.)

[Frenetic Pony]

So, stats. These are assumedly going to fall into line somewhere around the D&D/Fallout/Etc. archetype of Strength/Endurance/Intelligence and etc.

 

And when playing through Icewind Dale 2 recently, it occurred to me that if the stats are used as they are there, they are quite easy to game.

 

For example, what is the point of a race that takes a "- 2 to strength and +2 to intelligence" and then you are given 16 extra points of stats to implement right at the beginning? There's no point. I end up, in pure mechanical terms, with having the same range of stats available to me. I've same totaly and can get any stats up to the same total that I want to. Heck, first thing I can do is get everything back to 10 across the board.

 

Further, it can be very easy and grossly advantageous to min/max for each class type. I have a wizard? Eighteen intelligence for him, may as well have 18 dexterity and 18 endurance as well, he doesn't need strength or wisdom or charisma really, as he's probably not going to use them. And that's the problem right there, the "easy" part. If it was a challenge then at least it might fun.

 

So this calls several questions, ones that you can answer above and below.

[Sensuki]

I like stats to be fairly concrete once you've created your character, although I didn't mind D&D 3E/4E stat gain. And gear can boost your stats.

 

As for what stat system they use. I have a feeling it might be a mix of D&D and Fallout ?

[Hopper]

I agree.

 

In a lot of recent games different races get different starting attributes (+1/-2 etc.) , which then end up nothing but cosmetic once you reach level X.

I understand this is done to allow for freedom of choice, and so you can be an elfish weight lifting champion or a nimble footed ogre thief.

While technically I support this system of choice, I think some stats should be should be capped at a maximum value for certain races.

E.g. due to his bulky physique an 8 foot high, broad shouldered ogrish character should not be able to max out dexterity, same as a 6 foot lanky elfish character should not be able to max out strength.

 

Plus there should be disadvantages to having absurdly low levels of some stats.

This would lead to a lot of critical misses on checks.

Say you have 18 Strength and 18 endurance and as a trade off 3 Intelligence.

In that case I would love to see things like reduced dialogue options, maybe even inability to read maps etc.

 

However, I think the difficult part is getting the disadvantages just right.

[TrashMan]

Different races having +-1 to max values sound good.

 

Also, stats having an impact on everything and being multi-use.

 

For example, for any warrior both STR and AGI/DEX should be importnat. Archers too. AFter all ,yo uhave to draw that bow. Taht requires strength.

And fighters have to dodge blows and be agile to hit their targets.

 

 

Maybe to hit bonuses would depends on weapons, but not be exclusive on one stat?

 

Some weapons would depend on STR and DEX equally.

Bigger, heavier weapons would depend more on STR

Lighter weapons more on Dex.

 

 

Like

(STR+DEX)/2 for one-handed swords

(2*STR+DEX)/2 for two-handers

(STR+2*DEX)/2 for daggers

 

Obviously not these specific forumals, but you get the idea.

[Hassat Hunter]

Well, the +2 and -2 allow you to exceed minimum/maximum values. I wouldn't call that "useless".

Personally I would like to see all values having some use.

[Jarmo]

Races and classes should have bonuses on stats, but no maximums.

And all stats should be easily gamed. If you just want to whack stuff with a big hammer, you shouldn't need int to raise the skill like fallout, or anything.

Just max on con+str+dex.

 

But if you want to be a smooth talker and charmer, wise beyond your years and a swordsman of note... well that's going to be tough.

[rjshae]

Please, no caps. Point-based with increasing cost at higher levels will take care of the maxima. I don't see a need for (or want) caps; the 3-18 range in D&D just represents the range for the large majority of the population. If a player wants to pour all of their points into a single stat, they should be allowed to do so. People should be able to play whatever type of character they want, even if it is a freakishly strong, clumsy, sickly, blockhead.

[Uomoz]

My 2 cents from my D&d experience:

 

Strength and Constitution are realistically non-independent stats so maybe they should be fused (a single value modified by talents\perks like "fatty" "big boned" etc). Muscular mass gives both strength and constitution, and a character building only constitution while maintaining low strength makes no sense.

 

Dexterity, attack speed and character walking speed should be somewhat related and probably be inversely affected by Mass attribute (STR\CON). I also think this stat shouldn't be related with ranged weapons, it makes no sense. Aim is realistically skill + sometimes strength (think at firing an arrow with a bow) and probably some mental stat related to focus.

 

Intelligence\Wisdom duality have to go, their boundaries were never clear anyway. A social stat is pretty essential (CHA) but other mental attributes need to be reworked.

 

EDIT: More stuff.

 

Subnormal stats should come with sensible penalties. A very poor intellect should lock chunks of dialogue and indirectly exp rewards. Investing highly in a stat should bring rewards but with some form of costs.

 

Mental stats: a division between a "quick thought" Stat and a "slow thought \ memory" Stat should be considered as usually a melee fighter will have quick reflexes\mind Stat (so not necessarily stupid) and an average to poor "reason \ memory" Stat.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Uomoz

[SGray]

even if it is a freakishly strong, clumsy, sickly, blockhead.

Just make it matter to surrounding world.

More stat checks, and not only for "do you have epic [statname] to do smth epic", but to perform ordinary (to char with default stats) things too. Ask for directions with cha 1 - good luck. Run through the forest with dex 1 - not better. (latter - tough to implement properly) The lover the stat - the tougher consequences.

 

As for strongly fixed per race maximums on stats - on my thought not so good idea. But good point about +2/-2 easily compensated, if not min/maxing. There could be another decision: set some default stats per race an give some free points to tune it to your likings. Points could be of two different types: first one - for decreasing default stats & adding to second ones wich you could directly add to your stat value. Number of pre-assigned & free points could vary per race, for ones are more suited to some things others not, ones are flexible, others - not-so. (possible male/female differences according to race too)

 

The idea is to limit not maximums per race, but minimums.(with additional bounces to more strictly predefined, ofc)

Little bit more complicated and tougher to balance than standard system, but that could legit why it's rare to see omniscient ork-weakling, or ugly elf. Humans are again the most adaptable ones, lol.

[Sensuki]

My 2 cents from my D&d experience:

 

Strength and Constitution are realistically non-independent stats so maybe they should be fused (a single value modified by talents\perks like "fatty" "big boned" etc). Muscular mass gives both strength and constitution, and a character building only constitution while maintaining low strength makes no sense.

 

Ehh constitution doesn't necessarily mean you're mega buff, it just means you're really healthy.

[Uomoz]

I understand but they are not unrelated as they are in D&d.

[HumanFlesh+5]

CHARISMA ... please

[general_azure]

I'd like for stats to give you some indication where you're standing with that value. In BG you knew a guy with 16 strength was pretty beefy, in DA you have absolutely no idea what that number actually means.

Guess this works best with fixed stats.

[Jarmo]

 

Intelligence\Wisdom duality have to go, their boundaries were never clear anyway. A social stat is pretty essential (CHA) but other mental attributes need to be reworked.

 

Mental stats: a division between a "quick thought" Stat and a "slow thought \ memory" Stat should be considered as usually a melee fighter will have quick reflexes\mind Stat (so not necessarily stupid) and an average to poor "reason \ memory" Stat.

 

Isn't intelligence/wisdom just what you're asking for?

 

Anyway, the less stats the better. Just focus on a few and make them all important.

 

Except, I'd like size to be a stat.

 

The kind of stat that'd affect melee damage and the chance of being hit, maybe movement speed.

A dwarf with str 18 would do less damage than a big human with the same strength because he'd have less leverage,

the same as how an axe with a long handle does more damage than a one with a short one.

 

But the same dwarf makes for a poorer archery target, due to having less surface area.

 

And I'd allow you to freely adjust the stat with the size slider when making a character.

[Uomoz]

It is intelligence/wisdom if we assume that melee fighters should have high intelligence and pointy-hat wizards high wisdom

 

I like the size stat idea, a lot!

Edited October 12, 2012 by Uomoz

[Tychoxi]

I'm not sure what to vote, but I like stats that are all very important in shaping the options available to your character and that are rather slow in leveling up.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

You could use another option in the second part of the poll. "No character should have a maximum or minimum attribute". That is how I feel about that.

 

Anyways stats should be useful to everyone, obviously some are going to benefit more from one, but all should still be useful to everyone. A good range of attributes(6 to 8 seems appropriate) would also be appreciated. More customization options are always better.

[testerius]

For me that would be cool, if PE has similar characters stats like Fallout (SPECIAL) or example D&D games. I want to see:

- Strenght (warriors, carry items, fighting etc)

- Endurance (warriors-tanks, hp etc)

- Intelligence (mage, skill points, speech etc)

- Agility (faster moving, dodge etc)

- Luck (crits, encounters, items, special encounters etc)

 

I think this would be cool.

[rjshae]

Gah, please, no Luck stat. It's not a real physical or mental attribute.

 

In the traditional D&D ability scores, I like to relate the mental attributes to the physical ones, thus:

• Str <=> Int
  
• Dex <=> Cha
  
• Con <=> Wis
  

Int is pure mental processing power and the ability to carry lots of ideas and memories; Wis is mental, sensory, and neural health; and Cha is adaptability to social circumstances or emotional IQ. Not an ideal mapping, true.

Edited October 13, 2012 by rjshae

[TrashMan]

Please, no caps. Point-based with increasing cost at higher levels will take care of the maxima. I don't see a need for (or want) caps; the 3-18 range in D&D just represents the range for the large majority of the population. If a player wants to pour all of their points into a single stat, they should be allowed to do so. People should be able to play whatever type of character they want, even if it is a freakishly strong, clumsy, sickly, blockhead.

 

 

No.

People have a limit to how string they cna be. No matter how much you train or how much "experience" oyu gain you'll never be as strong as Superman.

Caps are just that - reaching the limit of the human body.

 

 

Races and classes should have bonuses on stats, but no maximums.

 

No.

Clases should have no bonuses at allRaces shoudl have maximums. Otherwise, there's no real physical difference between races.

[the.only.ara54]

I'm not saying that this is suitable for PE, but Arcanum had a very interesting approach to stats, in my opinion. It might be too complicated (= too much stats), but you tell me.

 

You basically have 4 big characteristics:

• Power;
  
• Skill;
  
• Resistance;
  
• Appearance;
  

each of them having a Physical & a Mental counterpart.

 

 

In the end, this gives 8 stats:

• Power: Strength (Physical) & Intelligence (Mental);
  
• Skill: Dexterity (Physical) & Perception (Mental);
  
• Resistance: Constitution (Physical) & Willpower (Mental);
  
• Appearance: Beauty (Physical) & Charisma (Mental).
  

I've found this very well-thought, and actually very accurate.

Edited October 13, 2012 by the.only.ara54

[ogrezilla]

please just don't make intelligence the main mage combat stat and a very significant conversation stat. If a fighter has to sacrifice some combat ability to improve his conversation skills, a mage should have to do the same. I like the idea of intelligence and charisma both having different effects on conversations. So I'd like to see the combat part of intelligence made into its own stat. Soul or Magic Power or whatever they want to call it.

Edited October 13, 2012 by ogrezilla

[JediMB]

please just don't make intelligence the main mage combat stat and a very significant conversation stat. If a fighter has to sacrifice some combat ability to improve his conversation skills, a mage should have to do the same. I like the idea of intelligence and charisma both having different effects on conversations. So I'd like to see the combat part of intelligence made into its own stat. Soul or Magic Power or whatever they want to call it.

 

Why not just accept that Wizards tend to be smarter (or more knowledgeable) than Fighters? They've spent their time studying while the Fighters have honed their bodies and physical fighting skills, after all. And besides, I bet you won't even notice the effect of your Figher's average Intelligence unless you've already played another character with more points in the stat.

 

But, hey, maybe there'll be a nice set of Fighter combat skills that makes high-Intelligence build viable. That'd definitely be cool.

[ogrezilla]

please just don't make intelligence the main mage combat stat and a very significant conversation stat. If a fighter has to sacrifice some combat ability to improve his conversation skills, a mage should have to do the same. I like the idea of intelligence and charisma both having different effects on conversations. So I'd like to see the combat part of intelligence made into its own stat. Soul or Magic Power or whatever they want to call it.

 

Why not just accept that Wizards tend to be smarter (or more knowledgeable) than Fighters? They've spent their time studying while the Fighters have honed their bodies and physical fighting skills, after all. And besides, I bet you won't even notice the effect of your Figher's average Intelligence unless you've already played another character with more points in the stat.

 

But, hey, maybe there'll be a nice set of Fighter combat skills that makes high-Intelligence build viable. That'd definitely be cool.

so give wizards a minimum intelligence requirement. I don't think studying spells and whatnot would make them more intelligent. It would make them know more but that's knowledge, not intelligence.

 

Its not the biggest deal in the world. Just my personal preference. I just don't like that when I want to play "smart" through a game, its always best to be a mage. Let intelligence still be good for mages even, just not the only stat they really care about for combat. Let it give them more spell slots or something, I don't know.

Edited October 14, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Larkaloke]

I believe all stats should have at least some possible utility to everyone, although not necessarily something that everyone would want to use equally much. I don't, however, believe that they should all be extremely useful or essential to everyone -- I don't think it should be completely crippling to have a low strength or a low wisdom, for example. I also prefer that stats be mostly fixed after character creation.

 

Different species having different maximums to their stats is something I like, although not all that large of a difference (+1, maybe +2, assuming a 3-18 distribution). I voted for classes requiring minimum stats as something of a reflex, but after thinking it through, I suppose I don't care as much about that. If somebody wants to play a very physically weak or sickly fighter or a clumsy thief, I suppose that's not really a problem. Could be interesting, if not very effective.