Author Topic: removing stat based manuevers  (Read 6129 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
removing stat based manuevers
« on: July 19, 2008, 05:33:34 AM »
Sometimes characters have to manuever using one of their stat bonuses (usually x3) instead of a skill as a bonus to their roll. Since RM is basically a skill-based system and it's built around the concept that with experience and training (levels and ranks) you'll get better and increase your chances of success in doing thing, I don't like very much stat-based manuevers. To me they seem a sort of exception to the norm (like RRs but this is another tale ;)). In addition they're much more difficult to accomplish than normal skill manuevers, since a character will very rarely get a bonus higher than +30.
So I've decided to use skill categories bonuses (without the -15 for no ranks in skill), instead of just stat bonuses, when I cannot come up with a skill for the manuever.
For example:
Feats of Agility: Use Athletic-Gymnastic cat
Consitution: Use Athletic-Endurance
Memory: Either use Self-Control cat or develop a Mnemonic skill (under SC cat)
Reasoning: Science Basic cat
SD: use Self-Control cat
Emphaty: (not very sure, for what kinf of actions you should use Em?)
Intuition: Use Awareness-Senses cat
Presence: Use Influence cat
Quickness: Use Athletic-Gymnastic cat
Strenght: Use Athletic-Brawn cat

What do you think?
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Nejira

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 403
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2008, 05:43:59 AM »
Havn?t got my books with me, but wouldn?t Empathy be actions involved in reading others (detect lies, see if they are hiding something, how do they feel about X, etc)? I don?t know what could replace it though as I don?t got my books here to look in.

Btw, always wondered about Magicians having Empathy as their prime stat. Brings out weird pictures of these touchy-feely mages which blasts their enemies with bolts of lightning;D
"I'd Rather Be a Rising Ape Than a Fallen Angel"

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2008, 06:48:22 AM »
What specific situations do you find these sorts of rolls (be it stat or category based) are required?

I suspect that many could be resolved with a specific skill, with characters without the specific skill given the option to instead making a stat based roll (or a Category -15 roll).

Could you give a couple of examples?
:flame:

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #3 on: July 19, 2008, 07:09:23 AM »
A couple of examples:
- a character is chained to a wall, trying to break the chains by brute force would be a St manuever (made into a Athletic-Brawn man.)
- a character is trying to remember a detail, that would be a Me man (made into a Self Control or a Mnemonics man.)

I agree that these situations doesn't come up very often during play (I put all Stats just for sake of completness), but still I don't like it when it happens.
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #4 on: July 19, 2008, 08:00:46 AM »
I feel the same way about 'exceptions' to the rule, or multiple mechanics that don't fit in with the main skill system and philosophy.

The Athletic Brawn maneuver for breaking the chains seems a very good option (better than a stat roll for sure). Another possibility could be an Adrenal Strength roll to break the chains, or to change Weightlifting into another skill like "Strength Focus" (I haven't settled on a name yet) - a skill that deals with lifting, ramming, dragging, shoving strength maneuvers against inanimate objects.

For trying to remember something, I would use Mnemonics (using SD/PR/ME stats).

As an aside, I have changed around many categories and skills (and applicable stats) for my own games, and one of the changes is that not all skills incur a -15 penalty for having no ranks. eg Mnemonics would not incur a -15 penalty, but Longbow would.
:flame:

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #5 on: July 19, 2008, 11:31:47 AM »
Arioch,
 I do not use skill checks, I only use skills.

MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #6 on: July 19, 2008, 12:04:45 PM »
Arioch,
 I do not use skill checks, I only use skills.

MDC

What skill would you use for the two examples?
:flame:

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #7 on: July 19, 2008, 04:09:52 PM »
 I would use the two that Arioch used in his examples.

 But if I did not have thoes skills in my game I would have to set a default skill to take care of it. I can understand how it might be confusing to players and GM's but if you can set up a chart at the begining of the game it helps.

 Another point here is that IMO I bet that not a lot of players, GM, or traingin packages give the right skills for this use. So IMO with a chart you players knnow what skills they have to take to get the benifits they want. Also IMO I would give all players some ranks in thoes skills at the begining of the game. Or have them roll and depending on the roll give them DP to spend only on thoes skills. Another option would be to assign thoes skills by cultuture and a GM maybe modifing it by talents if he feels it is needed. [I play a fairly low powered game compaired to the talents listed in the RMSS book and Talent Law].

 I think thoes two ideas will help a lot in any game. And if you get it writen up I deffinatly think that you should submit it to the Guild Companion for publication and help out other players.


 Did that help?
MDC
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #8 on: July 19, 2008, 06:02:29 PM »
I would use the two that Arioch used in his examples.

So you would use the category bonus in lieu of a specific skill then? Did you mean you don't use stat checks but skills instead?

For remembering a detail, would you use mnemonics? And if a character did not have any ranks in mnemonics, would it be a roll at -15?



There is no question that players often want their characters to perform tasks that they have not developed skills in - I don't really see that as a problem. Not all characters can do everything well, even less so at low level.


I alluded above that there are a few ways of dealing with the issue (other than allowing a stat check, or allowing a 'category' roll as detailed by Arioch, as already discussed in this thread):
 
One widely (though not by me) used option is to reduce the number of skills so that a number of skills can be reduced to one. The 'advantage' is that players get 'caught short' less often as they don't have to be as judicious with their DPs.

Another is to tell players to get ranks in as many skills as possible ("if you spend all of your DPs on weapon skills, don't complain when your character is one dimensional")

My list of possible skills is huge (as many as I can think of without duplication), but as many skills do not incur a -15 penalty for not having developed ranks it becomes a list of things a character can do (to some extent), and can develop if they so wish. The result is that stat rolls tend to not be required, and as characters gain levels there is great scope for diversity and specialisation.

In the main, I think the problem is knowing which skill is the appropriate one for any given task. The more creative the players, the more likely an unusual task will crop up. I use the method of letting players first nominate what they want to do, and then nominate which skill they might like to use to achieve it (and to justify this choice). If I don't think the nominated skill is appropriate I will suggest an alternative (players sometimes suggest the skill in which they have the highest bonus, rather than the one most appropriate). Often it is just a case of breaking down the 'grand plan' into it's component parts - there is no skill called "bring down the evil empire" (well, apart from Battleaxe OB!).



 
:flame:

Offline Trond

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #9 on: July 19, 2008, 08:23:48 PM »
This is pretty close to the problem I tried to solve in my discussion on use of stat bonuses, but with a very different solution. In essence, I invented a system of using stat bonuses for pure stat bonus rolls, based on the assumption that a +25 (RM2) bonus should have a very high chance of success and +0 should be intermediate. I invented the term 'stat action' for this kind of thing.

In the past I tried other things, like simply ruling that a character with +10 bonus can do a specific action (like pushing open a heavy door), but lower bonuses cannot. That works fine, but takes away the thrill of a roll of dice ;D

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2008, 04:16:11 AM »
Arioch,
 I do not use skill checks, I only use skills.

MDC

I try to use skills when it's possible, too, but sometimes I really cannot think which skill to use (expecially after a certain hour when we play late in the evening  ;)). So I've ended up using category bonuses.
That's also because using cats you don't have to introduce new skills or change how skills work in the middle of a campaign.

Another point here is that IMO I bet that not a lot of players, GM, or traingin packages give the right skills for this use.

Yes, but probably this is because rules are often not very clear on which skill is used for what, mainly because they're scattered around so many books (SoHK is very useful in this sense).

One widely (though not by me) used option is to reduce the number of skills so that a number of skills can be reduced to one. The 'advantage' is that players get 'caught short' less often as they don't have to be as judicious with their DPs.

Another is to tell players to get ranks in as many skills as possible ("if you spend all of your DPs on weapon skills, don't complain when your character is one dimensional")

I've trimmed down the skill list a little bit (mostly to cut down redundant skills), but I still use most of the skills. The huge number of skills is one of the reasons that make me playing RM!  ;)
So, you could say, why don't I just add a new skill for each stat?
Well, firste because I'm mastering an ongoing campaign, and I don't think that my players would be very happy to learn that new very useful skills just popped out. Second because such skills would either become too powerful (being used for too many actions, usually covered by other skills) or too specific.

This is pretty close to the problem I tried to solve in my discussion on use of stat bonuses, but with a very different solution. In essence, I invented a system of using stat bonuses for pure stat bonus rolls, based on the assumption that a +25 (RM2) bonus should have a very high chance of success and +0 should be intermediate. I invented the term 'stat action' for this kind of thing.

I remeber your topic and I think that is a good solution, for RM2. But in this case RMFRP/SS have the (IMHO) advantage of categories, which cover a broader area than skills and can be used in situations where no skill could normally be used.  ;)
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Trond

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2008, 08:58:16 AM »
I remeber your topic and I think that is a good solution, for RM2. But in this case RMFRP/SS have the (IMHO) advantage of categories, which cover a broader area than skills and can be used in situations where no skill could normally be used.  ;)

That's the thing: I have never really played RMFRP/SS, although I have the core books somewhere in my parents' house on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean :(. My RM group spread to the ends of the world just as we were going to convert from RM2 to RMSS, and lately I have been using RMC. As far as I remember, I liked many of the new things in RMSS, but it may have been difficult to digest for people who are unfamiliar with earlier versions of RM. (then of course you might ask why am I writing comments on the RMFRP/SS forum?  ;D)


Offline Grinnen Baeritt

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 505
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #12 on: July 20, 2008, 10:31:44 AM »
Sometimes characters have to manuever using one of their stat bonuses (usually x3) instead of a skill as a bonus to their roll. Since RM is basically a skill-based system and it's built around the concept that with experience and training (levels and ranks) you'll get better and increase your chances of success in doing thing, I don't like very much stat-based manuevers. To me they seem a sort of exception to the norm (like RRs but this is another tale ;)). In addition they're much more difficult to accomplish than normal skill manuevers, since a character will very rarely get a bonus higher than +30.
So I've decided to use skill categories bonuses (without the -15 for no ranks in skill), instead of just stat bonuses, when I cannot come up with a skill for the manuever.
For example:
Feats of Agility: Use Athletic-Gymnastic cat
Consitution: Use Athletic-Endurance
Memory: Either use Self-Control cat or develop a Mnemonic skill (under SC cat)
Reasoning: Science Basic cat
SD: use Self-Control cat
Emphaty: (not very sure, for what kinf of actions you should use Em?)
Intuition: Use Awareness-Senses cat
Presence: Use Influence cat
Quickness: Use Athletic-Gymnastic cat
Strenght: Use Athletic-Brawn cat

What do you think?

It's more or less exactly how I do it.

If the player doesn't have a suitable skill then they use the default skill category. I however do penalise those without any ranks in the category.

It is very rare for a character NOT to have ranks in most the basic categories... though ones like Self Control it's not an expensive category or one that would be regularly used.

 


Offline magritte@shaw.ca

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #13 on: July 20, 2008, 12:49:08 PM »
You know reading this thread makes me think that RM2 and RMSS appeal to people with completely different world visions.

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #14 on: July 20, 2008, 01:04:11 PM »
You know reading this thread makes me think that RM2 and RMSS appeal to people with completely different world visions.

Please elaborate - or should this be a different thread?
:flame:

Offline magritte@shaw.ca

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #15 on: July 20, 2008, 02:26:39 PM »
Probably should be a different thread.  It just seems to me that if you have trouble thinking of a skill that relates to a problem, it suggests that it isn't the sort of activity where skill (something you learn through practice and study) is relevant.  Since strength by RM definition is "the ability to use existing muscles to the greatest advantage", what does athletic-braun skill actually mean?

Fundamentally, I'm guessing players who prefer the older system philosophically don't think skills need to cover all conceivable situations.

Sorry to derail the thread, but you asked.

Offline markc

  • Elder Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,697
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #16 on: July 20, 2008, 03:04:26 PM »
Arioch,
 I think instead of the categories you lised I would use a basic athletic games roll for the physical skill situations. I would also use a chart as I said that I as the GM made before the campaign to give the players better info.
 I also go threw and remove some skills so my players know beforhand whats going on. I do agree that it can be tough with all the skills spread out over numerous books to get a complete picture. I have made a spreed sheet with all the skills as well as some other info that I use.

 The reason why I do not use stat checks is a long time ago I remember reading something about RMSS that said thier are no stat rolls in RMSS. IMO that is great be cause just because you have a great stat bonus does not mean you can do most or every occurance in the stat well. Example just because I have a good agility does not mean I can play computer games well or throw ball through a hoop etc.

 I can see the advantage of players nominating the skill to use for an action and IMO that can be very good. Also a GM has to make a judgment call on each skill in each occurance about what the difficulty would be. Example can biology be used instead of first aid to stop bleeding? or other such actions. For the Bio skill stoping bleeding may be a hard maneuver and for first aid it would be and easy maneuver. The other way to do this would be to say that all maneuvers to stop bleeding are easy but you a sliding modifier for what skill is used of -100 to 0.

 MDC 
Bacon Law: A book so good all PC's need to be recreated.
Rule #0: A GM has the right to change any rule in a book to fit their game.
Role Play not Roll Play.
Use a System to tell the story do not let the system play you.

Offline Trond

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 32
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #17 on: July 20, 2008, 03:17:08 PM »
I actually think this thread has been very illuminating.
My conclusions so far are something like this: the next version of RM should either focus on being a complete set of rules for using skills in ALL situations (either skill categories or pure skills), OR it should have fewer skills, but introduce some way of rolling against stats that works better than just using your stat bonus and rolling to reach values above 100.

The more purely skill-based version of things may actually be easier in some ways, since RM has already been developed pretty much as a skill-based system (however, it would make my wonderful stat-action tables redundant :-[). The skills should then cover basic moving maneuvers and, yes Arioch, Empathy-based skills (trust me, they can be useful for figuring out what's on people's mind, or together with Presence, to seduce someone).

Offline Arioch

  • Navigator
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,903
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Blood & Souls for Arioch!
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #18 on: July 20, 2008, 03:44:02 PM »
Sorry to derail the thread, but you asked.

No problem, seems compatible with the topic to me.  ;)

It just seems to me that if you have trouble thinking of a skill that relates to a problem, it suggests that it isn't the sort of activity where skill (something you learn through practice and study) is relevant.  Since strength by RM definition is "the ability to use existing muscles to the greatest advantage", what does athletic-braun skill actually mean?

Fundamentally, I'm guessing players who prefer the older system philosophically don't think skills need to cover all conceivable situations.

IMHO that's a problem of "coherence" within the system. I prefer having a system where you use more or less the same mechanic for everything. Normally in RM you use just one mechanic: 1d100+skill bonus -penalties.
There are just two exceptions: RRs and Stat Maneuvers.
I strongly dislike RRs but I cannot remove them without adding new skills and changing a lot of things, so I've left them as they are and hope that in a future version of RM we'll see a good alternative to them.
OTOH Stat Manuevers are easy to replace. As you said skills don't need to cover all conceivable situations, but skill categories are IMHO broad enough to cover all of them.
I suppose a magician might, he admitted, but a gentleman never could.

Offline Langthorne

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 399
  • OIC Points +0/-0
  • Interrogator: "Do you know who we are?!"
Re: removing stat based manuevers
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2008, 08:24:48 AM »
Sorry to derail the thread, but you asked.

Lively discussion and differing views are always welcome.

what does athletic-braun skill actually mean?

We are certainly not discussing a perfect system, but I think it has many good aspects. I like the idea of organising skills into categories as an extension of the similar skill concept, but unfortunately, the categories don't always work that way (skills in Athletic Brawn are pretty similar, but skills in Tech Trade General often seem to have only their 'not fitting in elsewhere' as a similarity). The other problem is the possibility of developing ranks in the category, as opposed to developing skills which then give a bonus to the category.


strength by RM definition is "the ability to use existing muscles to the greatest advantage"


I think that the logical conclusion of that statement is that there should be no skills that relate to strength at all as the stat already gives "the greatest advantage" (possibly no skills at all if the other stats are defined in a similar way). Maybe just a mechanic for improving stats over time.

Fundamentally, I'm guessing players who prefer the older system philosophically don't think skills need to cover all conceivable situations.

I suspect we all agree that different people have different capacities for performing different tasks. And, in the case of most tasks, it is possible to improve one's ability to perform a task. The question is how do we simulate those conditions?

Maybe we have a differing view on a kind of "Nature Vs Nurture" debate - if a skill option is not available, characters can't develop and improve on the said skill (nurture), and so must rely on their natural (untrained) ability (nature).

:flame: