Barf Forth Apocalyptica
powered by the apocalypse => Dungeon World => Topic started by: Michael Pfaff on May 05, 2011, 10:59:22 AM
-
I understand why the classic "3-18" stats are included; it's a nod to the original D&D design.
But, for more efficient design, I'm wondering if maybe they should just be reduced to "Assign these scores to the stats of your choice: +2, +2, +1, +1, =0, and -1."
Outside of the random dice rolling benefit, and the parallel to D&D, I'm seeing nothing but good coming from dropping the 3-18 "raw score".
If anything, you can get rid of all that text about "raw score" vs. "modifiers" which I've found can be confusing for new players who play D&D and are trying to grok scores vs. modifiers.
Am I a minority in this sense?
Mike
-
the only real reason i can see for keeping them is with increasing scores at level 3 6 and 9. currently you add 2 to a stat of your choice but this would not always up your modifier.
currently if you had a start starting at 8(-1) at level 3 you could add 2 to up it to 10(+0) and at 6 you could up it to 12(+1) but at 9 you could only get it to 14(+1) effectively doing nothing.
all the raw stats do it somewhat dictate which of your stats you can raise to a higher modifier and which ones are going to stay lower.
*im not saying this is better or worse than just having mods and upping a mod by 1 for those levels, just pointing out the differences between the two setups*
-
Would it be easier to just say: +1 to stat, instead of +1 to two "raw" stats, which increases the modifier of one of those?
-
for the sake of details, the instructions on adding stats are add 2 to one stat, we have taken this to mean you cannot add 1 to two stats. and while it might be considered easier to one have modifiers and just increase a modifier by one it would not be a direct conversion as the raw stats are do not increase the modifier by 1 for every jump in two to the raw stat. (+1 is 12 to 15 for example. if you had a stat at 12 it would take two increases to get it to +2. i dont know if this is purposeful or not but it does exist in the current system.)
*again i am not saying one way is better than the other, just pointing out the differences between the two*
-
for the sake of details, the instructions on adding stats are add 2 to one stat, we have taken this to mean you cannot add 1 to two stats. and while it might be considered easier to one have modifiers and just increase a modifier by one it would not be a direct conversion as the raw stats are do not increase the modifier by 1 for every jump in two to the raw stat. (+1 is 12 to 15 for example. if you had a stat at 12 it would take two increases to get it to +2. i dont know if this is purposeful or not but it does exist in the current system.)
*again i am not saying one way is better than the other, just pointing out the differences between the two*
Definitely. Good points.
-
I could see using the require tag to require certain stats be high enough to use an item, the added range would help.
-
I could see using the require tag to require certain stats be high enough to use an item, the added range would help.
Like, Giant's Axe - Str 15 required...?
-
Exactly.
-
I would agree. If you need minimums to use certain items/equipment make it based off the bonus. I don't see a compelling reason to keep them.
-
Keep them for the same reason you keep "Dungeon World" and "Hit Points" and "Saving Throw": They're an homage to the source material, and they don't really hurt anything.
-
Keep them for the same reason you keep "Dungeon World" and "Hit Points" and "Saving Throw": They're an homage to the source material, and they don't really hurt anything.
You still keep Str, Dex, etc... You just drop the "raw" which has been discussed being dropped from D&D for ages.
Also, it can be confusing for new players. Differentiating "RAW" from modifier.
Str+2 is just as compelling and a throwback to D&D as Str 15 (+2), imo. And, like S&S said, if you want the requires tag, it could go: "Giant's Axe, requires Str+2".
I don't think it's a big deal either way. I'm used to D&D, so I can overlook it. But, I dig how AW goes with straight +s.
Also, there was a complaint recently about new players not knowing what Classes needed what Stats. Does RAW and modifier muddy that? And, should DW do stat spreads like AW does? I don't know. Something to think about.
-
Despite, the possibility of using the finer grained ranges of scores, I'd be happy with just the pluses. You could always have a note that says what raw scores translate to what pluses for those that want to roll up characters.
-
im going to redirect you to my above posts.
the stats vs the bonuses matters a great deal with the ability to raise stats. having the stats and not just the bonus keeps the bonuses down and prevents anyone for getting too many high stats too quickly.
lets see if i can pull this out of my memory...
you start with 17 16 15 12 10 and 8, right? thats +2 +2 +1 +1 +0 -1
the major difference between having just bonuses and stats comes out here. to get that 12(+1) to a +2 bonus you need to spend two stat increases on it. to get that 10(+0) to a +2 you need to spend three.
basically giving you stats instead of just bonuses makes the player choose three "good stats" and three "bad stats" when they start that will define their character throughout the game.
as far as confusing new players. if you take some time to read the character sheets you should know what stat that class will need. all of the moves special to any class say on them what stat to roll.
-
Ben,
You could just as easily change to progression on stats and go with only the + and -. Personally I like that much better and would eliminate them in a game I ran. I don't see a need for them other than nostalgia...
-
you start with 17 16 15 12 10 and 8, right? thats +2 +2 +1 +1 +0 -1
the major difference between having just bonuses and stats comes out here. to get that 12(+1) to a +2 bonus you need to spend two stat increases on it. to get that 10(+0) to a +2 you need to spend three.
This is handled in AW by giving certain +s to certain stats for each playbook. I don't think this is a super compelling reason to keep the RAW scores, but it's definitely something.
Ninja'd. :)
-
Totally as an interesting aside and while I'd hate to add in an additional stat, what if each level you got a point of stat X. Raising a stat from -3 to -2 costs 3 points of X, -2 to -1 costs 2 points of X, -1 to 0, and 0 to +1 each cost 1 point of X. Raising a stat from +1 to +2 costs 2 points of X and raising a stat from +2 to +3 costs 3 points of X. This way, its hard to raise your low stats and hard to raise your high stats...
-
that just seems to make things more complicated....
anyway, the difference between DW and AW in regards to stat progression. you nailed it on the head mr. pfaff, in AW each job is very regulated in what it can and cannot do. it has fewer moves and a fairly limited advancement progression in regards to upping your stats. DW gives the player a lot more freedom to do what they choose, something i personally like. in exchange for this, you need to define you character to some degree when you create it. the way this seems to be done, not counting bards starting moves, is by which stats you choose to be good at. if you just go by the bonus, it would take you three stat increases to go from -1 to +2, while with the stats it will take you four. the stats are there to slow down the progression of the characters.
the advancement system on AW and DW also differ to a significant amount. there are no advances in DW like there are in AW. you get a move every level, period. in addition to this every 3rd level you get to up a stat by two. in AW you need to specifically pick to up a stat and forgo any other advantage you could have gained.
-
They are there for the similarity to the base material. Adam and I have discussed the same thing at length. For this particular game, given it's position and audience, there are some sacred ideas that we don't want to mess with.
That said, I do want to make the score more useful. The fact that the rules used to say "okay, you won't use your base score anymore" is a bad sign. If we're going to keep them, we should make them interesting. I wonder how we can do that...
-
The raw scores are certainly nice in that if two people want the same playbook, one can up the ante by offering to roll their stats, leaving the other to either let it go or ante further by offering to roll their stats in order. Is there something you can tie directly to raw scores? Perhaps a move that uses the difference between people's raw scores as a modifier or an item that gives a bonus to a raw stat?
-
The problem with comparing raw scores too often is that it's overly fiddly and (I think) messes with the flow of the game. The Requires tag is a good start, maybe even tying Load to Strength, not the Str mod.
-
It's both a nod to our roots and a mechanical standpoint - losing a single point from a stat is less impactful than losing a whole +1. This way, we allow for monsters with stat-draining moves, slow-increase stats (by way of magic or levelling) and, as was pointed out in this thread, using the stats as a requirement or trigger for other conditions.
-
It's both a nod to our roots and a mechanical standpoint - losing a single point from a stat is less impactful than losing a whole +1. This way, we allow for monsters with stat-draining moves, slow-increase stats (by way of magic or levelling) and, as was pointed out in this thread, using the stats as a requirement or trigger for other conditions.
Stat draining is actually a really good point.
-
When I'm writing special moves I'll often put consequences in terms of either raw stat loss or penalties on rolls (or gains). It's good to have some variety.