Stats: real need vs hybrid game model
TAGS: #THINKTHANK #CORERULES
This post comes from the reading of a couple of old posts and is connected with the deep dive about the stats in the game I wrote some time ago: I landed on this post about mental stats some months ago, please forgive me if I don’t remember who addressed me over there and why… The interest I had was because I was trying to figure out whether or not someone has ever discussed about the logic of having some mental features to be role-played instead of ruled within a RPG: in other words, I was curious (and still I am!) to know if my idea to suppress some stats of a character was not original.
Let me add a clarification before any further consideration: it is better if I write again the reason I decided not to use 2 unknown stats in VI·VIII·X (namely Reasoning, an unknown stat of Intellect, and Presence, an unknown stat of Empathy). These two stats represents the ability for a character to perform a reasoning and to have social relationships. While the other stats can be easily role-played within a fictitious world described with words (and some maps and miniatures), both reasoning and social relationships are attributes that are based on words/dialogue and mental capabilities of the player. If you ask a player to role-play a jump of his character, this is not an issue… if you ask to role-play a discussion about astronomy, this is not an issue as well (the player, even if not educated on this subject, simply looks what is the character’s level of knowledge in that field and the rolls). For reasoning and social relationship it could be the same, but then what is the role-play of the player in the game? That is actually the main part of the ‘true’ role-play (meant as namely playing a role)! If the character is facing a dialogue with a NPC in order to gather a piece of information, what is the fun in rolling a die to see if the check succeed? I personally like the idea that for such circumstance, the player has to work out the action by role-playing! This applies also for reasoning: a character who wants to solve a riddle means that the player has to solve it, with his capabilities. The case could actually be worked out with an action resolution check without any problem, but then questions arise:
Why is it necessary to explain the riddle and expect the answer from the player? The game could flow smoothly even in case the riddle is not even explained and the GM says something like: “…there is a writing with a riddle on the door to be opened, please roll to see if your character is able to work it out…”
The riddle is one case, but the problem applies also when there are some events lived by the character that the player should be able to determine in order to go ahead (a good example is an investigative adventure)… the character can have the highest score in reasoning however it is moved by the reasoning of the player (who likely has a lower score)… what happens then? Is it worth explaining all the hints that brings to a solution if the later will be determined by a roll?
These questions show that there is a ‘hybrid’ approach which is not satisfactory (imho): if a game aims to have a full role-play approach then it’d ask a player to play for any kind of social relationship and/or carry out any though by himself (ideally trying to identify himself with his character). If a game leverages on pure game mechanics, then the player is not asked to perform any identification for a ‘live role-play’ and every action is worked out by a rule application (like an action resolution check) and in this case there is no need to build up any detail of the elements of a riddle or an investigation (or any other similar detail) since they’re not needed. In the ‘hybrid’ approach, these details are present but it is not necessary to ask the player the solution (or better, in case he has the solution, that’s fine… and in this case I’d say that the player - and not the character - has gained some XP! …in case he’s not able to find it, a roll works everything out).
I definitely tend to favor the ‘live role-play’ approach rather than the second one. And I don’t like the idea of the hybrid compromise…
Once the rationale of the decision to remove any activity based on reasoning and social relationship from the character’s and move it on the player is clear, I come back to the post I reported at the beginning: I read that post (and the one which is quoted in it) and I found an underlying feeling that there is something that could be done in order to improve a game, in particular thinking to some stats that have not been created with a clear reason (if not for the sake of completeness).
What is relevant is that the hybrid solution of having a stat that doesn’t properly fit with either the game mechanics or the role-play was embedded already in the posts of my predecessors. They both see this under a different point of view but in any case this shows the presence of a need.
With the solution of suppress those ‘useless stats’ (at least from a game mechanic approach), I have already been addressed with a criticism: why do you apply this treatment only to reasoning and presence and not, for instance, to vigor? Well, the way I run RPGs is such that the main two activities I ask the players in terms of role-play are performing social interactions and reasoning … I have never asked a player to demonstrate the strength of his character by bending an iron bar at the table… therefore any physical stat is a mere exercise of imagination and game mechanics are there for this purpose. The two other mental stats, Erudition and Empathy can work in the same way as they are based on a fictitious representation provided by the GM (like I have already written here above, a character can be an expert in alchemy even if the player has no clue about this subject, a roll will determine the outcome of the in-game situation).
I really hope this explanation can dispel any doubts about the rule on the abolition of some stats… this is a difficult task for me and I appreciate it if anyone can let me have a feedback on both the idea and the explanation I provided.