Design Discussion: House Rules

[Raellus]

Has anyone ever seen an RPG system that uses different types of intelligence as a base attribute or for skill resolution?

I've often thought that intelligence as an attribute in RPG's is problematic. An intelligent player can RP an unintelligent character, but it doesn't really work the other way around (same with Charisma), does it? I digress.

Anyway, discussing the way that T2k v4 handles languages got me thinking about how RPG's often approach and use INT as an attribute and how it's not very realistic (in that it's overly simplistic). There's a theory of multiple intelligences (8 or 9, depending on who you ask) that makes some sense. I think it could a more realistic, accurate way of using it in a rules set.

I'd like to see a system where players have to allocate a set number of INT points between the 8 or 9 types of INT. Individual skills (which could be learned) would then receive boosts based on what kind of INT they primarily require to perform and what the PC's rank is in each.

For example, one type of INT is Visual-Spatial (how good someone is in maneuvering through space and visualizing things). This could be applied to navigation (map reading), forward observing, driving, parachuting, boating, diving, maybe engineering and architecture, and other skills.

Linguistic-Verbal INT could be applied to learning and speaking foreign languages, writing, diplomacy, and communications.

Logical-Mathematic INT could be applied to accounting, cryptography, engineering, architecture, anything requiring mathematical calculations, and/or number sense really.

Bodily-Kinesthetic INT would be crucial for athletes, dancers, hand-to-hand combat, throwing- almost anything with a major physical requirement (driving), really.

Musical INT- singing, playing instruments, recognizing tunes

Interpersonal INT- persuasion, diplomacy, leadership, acting, deception

Intrapersonal INT- not sure how this one might be applicable to conventional RPG skills, actually. Dealing with stress, trauma- coolness under fire, maybe? Is this Wisdom, by another name?

Naturalistic INT- horticulture, animal handling, hunting and foraging, herbal medicines, tracking, weather forecasting

Pedagogical INT- teaching, training,

I guess it wouldn't cover everything (which would apply to the Intrusion skill, for example), and there is some overlap. Maybe some skill resolutions would use the average score of two types of INT, or one of the types of INT and another attribute (for example, grapping would use both Bodily-Kinesthetic INT and physical STR).

In a game like T2k, some would definitely be more useful than others (Bodily-Kinesthetic v Musical, for example). Some, like Intrapersonal INT, would replace tried-and-mostly-true attributes like Charisma.

I'm just kind of thinking out loud here. I'm interested in your thoughts on this concept and, of course, any house rules that you've found work for you when running T2k.

-

[Tegyrius]

To a certain extent, Eclipse Phase does this. As a transhumanist game strongly influenced by the Altered Carbon novels, one of its conceits is that your psyche can be loaded into multiple bodies over the course of play. Character creation generally treats body as equipment, so physical attributes are somewhat abstracted in favor of attributes representing your ability to use your current physical form to maximum capacity. The first edition list (I don't have my second edition copy handy):

Originally Posted by Eclipse Phase 1e, p. 123

• Cognition (COG) is your aptitude for problem solving, logical analysis, and understanding. It also includes memory and recall.

• Coordination (COO) is your skill at integrating the actions of different parts of your morph
to produce smooth, successful movements. It includes manual dexterity, fine motor control,
nimbleness, and balance.

• Intuition (INT) is your skill at following your gut instincts and evaluating on the fly. It includes
physical awareness, cleverness, and cunning.

• Reflexes (REF) is your skill at acting quickly. This encompasses your reaction time, your gut-level
response, and your ability to think fast.

• Savvy (SAV) is your mental adaptability, social intuition, and proficiency for interacting
with others. It includes social awareness and manipulation.

• Somatics (SOM) is your skill at pushing your morph to the best of its physical ability, including
the fundamental utilization of the morph’s strength, endurance, and sustained positioning and motion.

• Willpower (WIL) is your skill for self-control, your ability to command your own destiny.

I believe some of the later Shadowrun editions tried to split the 1e-3e Intelligence attribute into multiple attributes, but Shadowrun is one of those properties where I do have very strong edition-related opinions, so my personal SR collection stops with 3e.

- C.

[3catcircus]

One could go the Mythus/Dangerous Journeys route... 18 attributes, if I recall.

[Stackmouse]

During one lecture on pedagogy I was attending to I was contemplating on using the Bloom's taxanomy as a basis for a task resolution system. In this system the attribute list was following the three domains of the taxonomy (the cognitive domain (knowledge/intuition-based attibutes), the affective domain (emotion-based attributes) and the psychomotor domain (action-based attributes).

Unfortunately the series of lectures ended before I was able to finish the system

[unipus]

I think the standard 6-attribute system has a lot of flaws and has mostly persevered through sheer inertia.

Numerically ranking intelligence and charisma are both troublesome, in their own way. Roleplaying a character with very different aspects from the player can be interesting, but for the most part players prefer to actually come up with solutions to puzzles, traps, mysteries and plans, for instance, rather than roll dice and be handed the solution.

I come from a school -- hard-learned over time from too much time and effort spent doing the opposite -- of less is more. My own system I've been working on has only four base stats (I considered using three, as Stackmouse said) and replaces Intelligence with Insight. This is not just a renaming exercise; your character can be as smart or dumb as you want; I don't care, just roleplay it. But if you need to test for something related to your capacity to understand things specific to the game setting and themes, then Insight is where we look.

Likewise, Charisma is out. In its place is Persona, which is more of a measure of your ability to influence, motivate, and your overall force of will. How that works out isn't limited to charisma in the traditional sense and you're free to present your character however you want.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by unipus

Numerically ranking intelligence and charisma are both troublesome, in their own way. Roleplaying a character with very different aspects from the player can be interesting, but for the most part players prefer to actually come up with solutions to puzzles, traps, mysteries and plans, for instance, rather than roll dice and be handed the solution.

I come from a school -- hard-learned over time from too much time and effort spent doing the opposite -- of less is more. My own system I've been working on has only four base stats (I considered using three, as Stackmouse said) and replaces Intelligence with Insight. This is not just a renaming exercise; your character can be as smart or dumb as you want; I don't care, just roleplay it. But if you need to test for something related to your capacity to understand things specific to the game setting and themes, then Insight is where we look.

Likewise, Charisma is out. In its place is Persona, which is more of a measure of your ability to influence, motivate, and your overall force of will. How that works out isn't limited to charisma in the traditional sense and you're free to present your character however you want.

I like both of those approaches.

What do y'all think about the Cascade Skill system in v2.2. I think I like it. It makes sense, intuitively at least.

I don't want to hijack the v4 rules thread so I'll continue the approaches to handling language skills (speaking/listening v. writing/reading) discussion here. I think cascading the the two sets of language skills is probably the way to go. Writing and speaking are different skills, but not completely different, and fluency in one is a naturally boost to developing competency in the other.

-

[Targan]

Originally Posted by 3catcircus

One could go the Mythus/Dangerous Journeys route... 18 attributes, if I recall.

12 in Harnmaster/Gunmaster, plus additional derived pseudo-stats.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Has anyone ever seen an RPG system that uses different types of intelligence as a base attribute or for skill resolution?

I've often thought that intelligence as an attribute in RPG's is problematic. An intelligent player can RP an unintelligent character, but it doesn't really work the other way around (same with Charisma), does it? I digress.

Anyway, discussing the way that T2k v4 handles languages got me thinking about how RPG's often approach and use INT as an attribute and how it's not very realistic (in that it's overly simplistic). There's a theory of multiple intelligences (8 or 9, depending on who you ask) that makes some sense. I think it could a more realistic, accurate way of using it in a rules set.

I'd like to see a system where players have to allocate a set number of INT points between the 8 or 9 types of INT. Individual skills (which could be learned) would then receive boosts based on what kind of INT they primarily require to perform and what the PC's rank is in each.

For example, one type of INT is Visual-Spatial (how good someone is in maneuvering through space and visualizing things). This could be applied to navigation (map reading), forward observing, driving, parachuting, boating, diving, maybe engineering and architecture, and other skills.

Linguistic-Verbal INT could be applied to learning and speaking foreign languages, writing, diplomacy, and communications.

Logical-Mathematic INT could be applied to accounting, cryptography, engineering, architecture, anything requiring mathematical calculations, and/or number sense really.

Bodily-Kinesthetic INT would be crucial for athletes, dancers, hand-to-hand combat, throwing- almost anything with a major physical requirement (driving), really.

Musical INT- singing, playing instruments, recognizing tunes

Interpersonal INT- persuasion, diplomacy, leadership, acting, deception

Intrapersonal INT- not sure how this one might be applicable to conventional RPG skills, actually. Dealing with stress, trauma- coolness under fire, maybe? Is this Wisdom, by another name?

Naturalistic INT- horticulture, animal handling, hunting and foraging, herbal medicines, tracking, weather forecasting

Pedagogical INT- teaching, training,

I guess it wouldn't cover everything (which would apply to the Intrusion skill, for example), and there is some overlap. Maybe some skill resolutions would use the average score of two types of INT, or one of the types of INT and another attribute (for example, grapping would use both Bodily-Kinesthetic INT and physical STR).

In a game like T2k, some would definitely be more useful than others (Bodily-Kinesthetic v Musical, for example). Some, like Intrapersonal INT, would replace tried-and-mostly-true attributes like Charisma.

I'm just kind of thinking out loud here. I'm interested in your thoughts on this concept and, of course, any house rules that you've found work for you when running T2k.

-

This takes you down the same "rabbit hole" that AD&D 2e went down with their Complete [Insert Class here] Books. Too much crunch for too little reward.

The issue I see in RAW 2.2 is with the WAY GDW used Attributes by tieing a SINGLE Attribute to a given Skill. This creates confusion on occassion like having STR for mechanics (a technical skill more appropriate to EDU). This is why I removed linked Attributes from Skills in favor of having the GM "build" a TASK PROFILE by specifying one OR MORE Attributes (properly averaged and rounded DOWN) in conjunction with a Skill. The GAMEMASTER decides what Attributes are involved in a Task. In RAW, the linking was twofold. First it gave the GM a quick guide to Skill use and secondly, the Attribute was used as a "limiter" on Skill LEVEL increases during Character creation. I was not satisfied with EITHER use and that's why I now use EXPERIENCE POINTS instead of skill levels during Character creation.

As for the Attributes; I use 8 of them. Four PHYSICAL Attributes and four MENTAL ones. My Attributes are;

Agility: A measure of hand-eye coordination and physical speed.
Constitution: A measure of fitness and endurance.
Stature: A measure of size and bulk. Used mostly for determining IF you can fit through a hole and how much BULK (I give all items a Bulk rating, not just weapons) you can carry.
Strength: A measure of lifting power and physical strength.
Charisma: A measure of your "empathy" towards other creatures as well as a measure of your ability to influence or sway other's opinions.
Education: The measure of your "LEARNED INTELLIGENCE" and acquired knowledge such as formulas, and proceedurals.
Intelligence: A measure of your "creative thinking/reasoning" skils and your advanced problem solving skills. How adaptive you are.
Willpower: Introduced as a skill in Dark Conspiracy, I made it an Attribute because of how important what it represents is to the human brain. Willpower represents both your "mental strength" against adversity AND your patience in dealing with frustration in various situations like repeated failures of a test or experiment. I gives you the resolve to push on when everything is against you.

The way I use Attributes is to combine one or more of them with a Skill or set of skills to create a TASK. I then set a Difficulty for that Task. It is very easy to combine multiple Attributes to create one half of RAW'S "ASSET." Just average the scores. I always round DOWN because I want Attributes to be the lesser of an ASSET'S score. I do this because I believe training (Skill Level) should trump "natural talent" (Attributes). This also allows the combining of different Attributes for different Skill uses. As an example...
I use STR, CON, and AGL averaged for the CLIMBING skill. You NEED all three to be a successful climber. However, WHAT IF that climber needed to rig some "makeshift" climbing gear? Why would I continue to use PHYSICAL Attributes for a Skill check to make improvised climbing gear? I WOULDN'T. I would use INT (for his inventiveness in making the gear), EDU (for his understanding of how each piece of gear works), and his WILL (for patience in overcoming obstacles to the fabrication). I'd combine these three Attributes with his Climbing skill to create the Task. So you see, by combining different Attributes, you can create a truly detailed task with only a few listed Atrributes to work with.