Philsys Revisions!

RP-related discussion otherwise not covered in the Character Closet.
User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Aug 26, 2005 3:53 am

Hokay. Combining Agi and Dex. The pros and cons.
If anybody comes up with anything I've missed, I'll edit it into the list.

Pros

<ul><li>Elimination of a lesser-used stat.
<li>The combination of two stats that cover much the same ground to begin with.
<li>Simplification of philsys.
<li>Rogues no longer have to sacrifice combat expertise to focus on their own specialist skills.
<li>Fighters are able to develop skill with missile weapons without sacrificing other combat skills.
<li>As it stands, Dex has no relevance in combat.</ul>

Cons

<li>Loss of options in character creation.
<li>Elimination of one of two non-combat stats
<li>Dex factors into numerous non-combat skills.
<li>As it stands, hand-eye coordination and the like can be dealt with separately from whole-body agility.
<li>Considerable adjustment of existing sheets will be necessary.</ul> <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=kelne>Kelne</A]&nbsp; Image at: 8/26/05 3:54

Uncle Pervy
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Uncle Pervy » Fri Aug 26, 2005 4:36 am

Just being ironic, Bes. <p>---------------------------

ReakoSomner: regardless, I was poor, and in need of diamonds</p>

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: Well:

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:02 am

As for the nomenclature, I submit that the new combined stat be called Speed, and be done with it. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:47 am

To be honest with you, Brian, I think you're using a set of flawed analogies there.

1) Comprehension clearly falls under wisdom, where a roll for comprehension is required. I have had characters pass int checks to find or spot something and then fail wis checks to figure out what the thing is in the past.

2) Endurance, while potentially a valid stat, is a tad unwieldy. And let's face it, if characters are having to roll endurance checks regularly enough to justify it as a separate stat, they're probably doing something wrong.

3) Willpower, imprecisely defined as it is in this instance, I infer to be the ability to make your own decisions, even if this means going against the herd, or the orders of your direct superiors. This strikes me as a roleplaying decision, rather than anything that one can attach numbers to. I'm certainly not going to put myself in the position of telling an RPer that they have to go along with what they've been told because they failed some arbitrary check to think for themselves.

4) I think we can all agree that we don't need or want a stat called 'attractiveness'. I consider charisma to be a very subjective stat. If pushed, I would consider it to be mostly a measure of the first impression a person makes, and how well they build on that impression. Personality is the determining factor here, with appearance modifying this in minor ways as appropriate. As for persuasiveness, how many of us actually make straight checks against charisma to determine this? Generally, the strength of a person's argument features at least peripherally.

Now I'm well aware that you were being facetious in every single one of these examples. I really don't see how the question of separating out Agi and Dex compares to any except possibly that of toughness and endurance.

As far as breaking all roleplaying decisions down into numbers goes, I remind you that the stats we are talking about here are physical ones, with no bearing whatsoever on characters' personalities, thoughts, feelings, decision-making processes, etc. Characters have been played perfectly well in the past with stats of both Agi and Dex, and will continue to be played well irregardless of whether or not they are merged. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Shinigori V2
Wishing she brought a backup turtle.
 
Posts: 7996
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2002 6:13 pm

Re: Well:

Unread postby Shinigori V2 » Fri Aug 26, 2005 5:58 am

Doug overanalyses things. :( <p>
<div style="text-align:center">What's wrong with this ring?!</div></p>

NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Fri Aug 26, 2005 6:20 am

*simply laughs at Brian's joke* <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Aug 26, 2005 6:55 am

As for the other side of the debate, I can understand why Brian is annoyed that strident debate has arisen three months after he initially raised the issue. Looking back through the thread, people seem to have taken it on board, often expressing regret, and then moved on.

Now, it's suddenly become some sort of sticking point, with people dividing into camps over the issue. Dex doesn't seem like a superfluous stat to me, but on reflection it does seem less useful than any of the others. People have said they'd like to see it made more useful, perhaps by way of factoring it into firearms and missile weapons in a more direct way.

But I haven't seen a single concrete suggestion as to what to do with Dex other than make the change or leave it as-is. Well, then, let's hear those suggestions.

Should the accuracy for missile weapons be reworked so that it's dependent on stats, with a bonus or penalty based on the type of weapon?

Should dex be used as a possible substitute for Str in the AT/PA formula?

Or is the question really just between merging it with agi or keeping it as-is? <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Jak Snide » Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:50 am

As it is currently, thrown weapons factor both agility and dexterity into their accuracy, with Agi+Dex*2+X often being the formula rather than Agi+Dex+X. I'm thinking Dex should be factored into all ranged weapons, since someone who's completely malcoordinated won't be able to shoot as straight as someone with precise hand-eye coordination.

As for Dex being factored into AT/PA equations I kinda like this. Reminds me of weapon finesse from D&D, where characters learn to use precision rather than strength to bring their blows home with a suitable weapon. I say we make a list of weapons (such as daggers, rapiers, etc) and allow people to replace Str with Dex in the AT/PA formula when using one of those weapons.

As for the distinction between Agi and Dex I, as expressed before by a good few others, see the two stats as representing different things. I can see how they can be considered tied, but being good with your hands doesn't imply that you can pull off back flips, nor does an Olympic gymnast possess con-man level hand-eye coordination.


Archmage144
 

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Aug 26, 2005 9:32 am

I don't have time for a full-out post right now before I go to class, but something to note:

Just because your sheet says you have a +5 DEX (in the new system) doesn't mean your character has to be able to perform uneven bar acrobatics or repair Enchufan toasters. If there's something your character can't do well, because, say, he's missing a finger, but the rest of his body is fine, it's not going to warrant a huge DEX penalty--only the hand will be affected, at most. And in the case of Shini's one-armed man, he might still be damned speedy and have ridiculous motor control with the other arm.

In GURPS, you have one stat, DX, that governs both sets of things--but your skills are what really dictate what you can do, and disadvantages like "One Arm" and "Missing Digit" are very specific--they don't lower your DX, they lower your DX for tasks performed with the hand. Or, in the case of one arm, you can't do anything with your missing limb, mostly because it isn't there.

What I'm trying to say is that only having one stat does not cause Philsys to "lose" anything. With all of the bizarre special exceptions people have been willing to make on their sheets (not spending all of their stat points or skill points at character creation comes to mind, as well as other strange [Innate] abilities that reflect some strange quirk, talent, or drawback that could never be reflected numerically as far as stats go), I'm surprised people are clinging to the idea that they need two numbers to represent various things that aren't necessarily represented any better by having two numbers in the first place.

Also, keep in mind that I was being highly facetious with my last post, but the "semantic" differences that Kelne pointed out (which, by the way, made me laugh, a lot--Kelne gets points) are just as semantic as those between DEX and AGI, which even have the exact same definition in the dictionary, seeing as how AGI refers to "see dexterity."

This isn't something that's worth factioning or a drawn out argument. This is something that's good overall for Philsys and doesn't really sacrifice anything at all. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:05 pm

Much as I hate to say it, dictionary definitions are not necessarily the be-all and end-all of an argument. Take a look at the definition for intuition, for instance.

The act or faculty of knowing or sensing without the use of rational processes; immediate cognition. See Synonyms at reason.
Knowledge gained by the use of this faculty; a perceptive insight.
A sense of something not evident or deducible; an impression.

A good chunk of the time, we use the intuition stat to represent perception, or the sharpness of a person's senses. Not exactly the textbook definition, but it works, and I've heard no complaints, or even questioning of this use.

Likewise, everyone seems to have understood the distinction between dexterity and agility, even though the dictionary tells us that it does not actually exist. This may be true, but in the absense of a word specifically meaning nimbleness with the fingers, dexterity seems to serve.

Also, while a high combined stat doesn't necessarily mean that a character can do gymnastics and repair toasters with equal facility, it does mean that they have the physical capability to do both given a modicum of training. Not necessarily the case.

Perhaps the best example I have here is Larak, my one and only dwarf character. He has an agi of -1, and a dex of 4. After all, while dwarves aren't noted for their fast reflexes or being quick on their feet, they are generally accomplished craftsmen, and very good with their hands. I'm not sure how I'd reconcile Larak under a combined dex stat. Probably, I'd just pick a middle-ground and accept that it wasn't a realistic portrayal either way. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Capntastic
Aa, cracked glass!
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:09 pm

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Capntastic » Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:19 pm

I'm not totally against the combination, so long as a reasonable conversion is worked out.

I put forth that once PS2.0 is complete, conversions can be done by re-making the character sheet under PS2.0 and rolling back to their old level. This way, one could reset their skills, amongst other things. Help get a clearer and more streamlined version of the same sheet. It couldn't take more than 15 minutes. This is the only sort of conversion process I can see that would be able to address all of the changes from the two versions without becoming completely wacky.


NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:25 pm

I put forth that that is a bad idea, if only just for the rerolling. Those of use who have higher-level characters would be risking a lot by rerolling, after all.

I'd suggest a form of conversion that does not involve anything so risky as to involve rerolling for stats that we've already rolled for once to obtain. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:50 pm

I don't think reworking stats is a particularly difficult issue. Just take however many points you've put into Dex, subtract 3, and reallocate the points as you like (Or take a point off here and there if appropriate). If sta or one of the mental stats is adjusted, just add or subtract 5 from HP or MP as appropriate.

Skill points allocation are likely fine as they are without meddling. Inconvenient to change from the first level on, and not likely to alter much anyway. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Archmage144 » Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:11 am

Clinging desperately to your old Philsys sheets as the status quo is a little like clawing violently to escape the pull of quicksand--it's hopeless, because no matter what, if things are going to work out, eventually, people are just going to have go to with the flow, because fighting it is just going to result in someone drowning. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

Uncle Pervy
 

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby Uncle Pervy » Sat Aug 27, 2005 4:12 am

You know, I am wondering.

Right now, PS seems to have two sets of stats for every major division.

Body (Stamina and Strength)
Mind (Wisdom and Intuition)
Speed (Dexterity and Agility)
Personality (Courage and Charisma)

And there is Magical aptitude, which is all by it's lonesome.

If we are eliminating the speed set, why not eliminate all the sets? It would simplify things that much more. As I think on it, this is why merging Dex and Agi doesn't sit right with me. <p>---------------------------

ReakoSomner: regardless, I was poor, and in need of diamonds</p>Edited by: Uncle Pervy&nbsp; Image at: 8/27/05 4:13

User avatar
PriamNevhausten
Holy Order of the Crimson Ballpoint
 
Posts: 2854
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:10 pm

Re: And now, in the interests of fairness...

Unread postby PriamNevhausten » Sat Aug 27, 2005 4:31 am

How about we all just play L5R? Oh yeah. <p><span style="font-size:xx-small;">"It's in the air, in the headlines in the newspapers, in the blurry images on television. It is a secret you have yet to grasp, although the first syllable has been spoken in a dream you cannot quite recall." --Unknown Armies</span></p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Aug 27, 2005 5:59 am

Okay. Let's review where we stand.

As it stands, dex is an overly specialised stat with little utility to anyone other than rogues. This is generally agreed to be a bad thing.

Under the revision, dex and agi will be merged, forming a single stat used for checks in both areas, and relevant to combat. The elimination of dex as a stat in its own right is held to be a bad thing by something over half the people active in the thread, including myself.

So. As I see it, neither is an acceptable alternative.

In the absense of other options, I expect the merger to go ahead, since it is the marginally better alternative, and because it has the support of Brian, who has been the driving force behind the revision. This still does not make it a good thing.

Let's start opening up alternatives to debate, shall we? I'll outline what I've picked up so far momentarily. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Aug 27, 2005 7:21 am

Okay. Obviously, this isn't going to be a middle-ground, since there's no middle-ground between getting rid of something and not getting rid of it. So it looks like I'm now firmly in the camp for keeping dex and agi separate. With that stated, I'll outline my thoughts.

It has been stated that dex should factor into skill with missile weapons, as it already does with throwing weapons. Also, that dex should be a more combat-useful option for rogues, and so should factor into AT/PA.

I don't think dex should factor into damage, as this seems more the province of strength. Let precise strike techs and the like factor it in if anyone feels they need it.

--------------

First up, missile weaponry. Throwing weapons, it seems, have an accuracy of Agi+Dex*2 + modifiers, unless they're particularly cumbersome, in which case it's just Agi+Dex.

Str+Dex*2 seems a good basis for bows and other muscle-driven weapons, while firearms and such would be Int+Dex*2. Add or subtract accuracy depending on specific weaponry and, of course, skill.

Pistols and shotguns would have +0 accuracy, bows, rifles and the like +2, and sniper or enchanted weapons +4. Although that's just a rough outline based on my own best guess for more-or-less preserving present accuracy assuming a dex of 3.

--------------

Moving on to the AT/PA side of things. A person may choose to substitute dex for str when using light weaponry such as knives, foils, rapiers, sabres and the like. In fact, any weapon without a str requirement for wielding it is a viable option here.

As rogues tend to wield light weapons to begin with, this certainly increases their combat ability.

--------------

Those seem to be the big two areas here. If anyone feels I've missed something, or failed to address concerns, feel free to speak up. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Sat Aug 27, 2005 11:13 am

I've got nothing to add beyond wondering if there are types of bows/crossbows that'd also get a ACC bonud and putting my own opinion right in line with the above post.


Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Sat Aug 27, 2005 1:09 pm

Examining the ideas presented here:

•Factor DEX into AT/PA. OK, that's possible, but it doesn't seem logical. If the primary reason for keeping the two stats separate is the fact that fine motor coordination is not the same as full-body coordination, then it should be pretty clear that fine motor coordination does nothing to help you dodge a blow or swing a sword. Having nimble fingers does not give you an increased ability to dodge. The GURPS advantage "Fine Motor Coordination" outlines this idea pretty well--it's a very inexpensive ability that gives you +1/level on all fine motor skills. This gives you a bonus to painting or fixing an engine, but not to swinging a sword or avoiding a blow.
•Use DEX in techs for precise attacks. This has been done before. Strictly speaking, it can be done again, in the revised system--my new sheet for James is a good example. Why should a rogue character have to pay tech points every attack just to approach the attack accuracy of a character who chose STR and AGI over DEX?
•Use DEX in AT/PA, but only for certain light weapons. This is reasonable. The problem with it that I can see is that that revision still does not make DEX and AGI equally valuable, because a tricky, fast rougue who uses his points on DEX will be sacrificing initiative bonuses (AGI), even if he's still getting AT/PA bonuses. While lots of skills can utilize DEX, the character is still getting an overall better benefit if he only has one stat to worry about.

On the subject of "stats to worry about," we've discussed this before, and the basic idea is that character "archetypes" each need different stats. Generally:

•Fighters need COU, STR, AGI, STA, and maybe INT or WIS if they want skill points.
•Mages need INT, WIS, MAG, COU (mostly to resist enemy spells and potentially raise their AT/PA for defense), and STA doesn't hurt, either.
•Rogues need COU, AGI, DEX, INT, and WIS, because they need to keep their skill points per level high. They might also benefit from STA (increased TP).

Oddly enough, RPGWW's character list, from my experiences, has fewer rogues than any other archetype, but that's not really my point. In order to be effective, a rogue-type really does need to invest in an extra stat. The fighter can get away with 4 if he doesn't need a lot of skills (Choark is a good example). The mage can get away with 4 if he doesn't mind being a little fragile and not having a large TP reserve. The rogue absolutely needs 5 if he's going to do his job properly, and with STA now contributing to TP and tech combinations being a definite requirement for the rogue to hold his own, that fringe statistic is a bit more valuable than before.

Before anyone attempts to refute the idea that a rogue might need WIS, keep in mind that without a few points in WIS, a rogue is only going to be able to improve three of his skills (by one point, at that) every level. For a character that is likely to have a lot of skills, this is a serious drawback. COU, I feel, is necessary for all characters--which is intentional, though I have seen people play very interesting characters without it--but the assumption being made is that the player wants to create a character that is at least somewhat combat-capable. If you want to create a character that's a terrible fighter, that's easy, but not everyone wants to do that. As a result, the system should allow for players to create characters that will be combat-useful and have other skills (flexible non-combat magic, "rogue" skills, knowledge skills, etc) as well to contribute to a party.

On the subject of missile weapons, I can't say I actually see them get used much. Clearly, DEX factors heavily into missile weapon accuracy--but obviously, the drawbacks of focusing on DEX (such as decreased AT/PA and initiative) are not worth the increased missile accuracy in most cases.

Pervy, it seems, is trying to out-ludicrous me at my own game, especially since he earlier stated that he'd rather have the fourteen-stat system I facetiously proposed earlier, but the idea of four-stat Philsys (plus MAG) actually appeals to me in some way. However, four-stat Philsys would really require a total overhaul of the rules and formulae that have been laid out, a complete rebalancing, and a massive character sheet conversion that would basically involve starting over and re-doing every character created, likely somewhat differently from before. It's a very interesting idea, but seeing how much resistance there evidently is to one relatively minor change, I don't foresee GURPS-Philsys being a viable option at this time. A very interesting suggestion, however.

While we can hypothetically "do a lot more to make DEX useful," nothing will make it "more useful" than simply merging the two stats together into one, single, unified stat. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Kai
Fighting the Iron Law of Oligarchy Since 2006
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: Indianapolis

*sigh* Someone has to say this.

Unread postby Kai » Sat Aug 27, 2005 1:18 pm

I am going to take issue with the timing of this discussion. The fact is there are already sheets with the revisions included. The fact is that people are already playing these characters. If I were going to present a problem with the revisions, I would have done so when it would have actually been productive, when these revisions were still highly speculative. But that's just me. I do crazy stuff like that.

I'm not saying that your opinions are unwelcome. I for one am enjoying the debate a whole hell of a lot, but it should have happened months ago. There is such a thing as missing your chance. Please, for the love of The Whatever high up on The Thing, try to bring up your issues at a time when it will not cause the maximum chaos and pain-in-the-assery.
<p>-------------------------
"It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But the half-wit remains a half-wit and the emperor remains an emperor." -- Sandman "The Kindly Ones" </p>

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

And now, over to the other side!

Unread postby Besyanteo » Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:25 pm

OK:

A few things. First, I was not aware that people were already using characters with these changes in them. I've yet to see a sheet built that way, but then I've also yet to go lookin. If that's the case, well, it would be significantly harder to convert BACK to 9 stats than to go forward to 8, purely in my own opinion.

All the changes, in either direction, sound good really. I likes all the ideas here, in large. But now I'm hearing about people, on both sides of the fence, are starting to actually become angry/frustrated about this. Which means it's time for the debate to be cut off.

We're essentially talking about either streamlining PhilSys, or trying to make it more realistic. And I do love the idea of a realistic system, but as ahs been stated, we could spend years and years attempting just that and never acheive what we're after. Meanwhile making things simpler and more straightforward, in this particular case, would be a fairly simple matter. Even in Zero's special exception, 6Dex+6Agi=12 Dex, is made simple again by the point reduction after the stat merge, bringing the stat back down to 9, and making Ned a fairly bad ass ninja AND plushie maker.

Anyway, it's a fairly longwinded way of going about it, but I'm gonna have to say that, since these changes ARE already in use, I think that the previously established Merge should go forward. We can't really bow to realism too much in RP: It's at the same time too restrictive, and too extensive.

A good example would be fall damage... Right now, if you fall 50 feet, chances are you're not getting back up. To be more realistic, you need to start calculating your characters acceleration towards the ground based on both the force of G(which we assume on Gaera is earthlike, but could redifined, and even vary if we have more than one moon as I recall hearing about once), versus his wind resistance based on his/her mass and clothing and such, to determine how fast he's going at the moment of impact, versus how much impact damage their flesh can withstand based on the composition of your character's body, which varies by race. So, we go from having a chat, to performing:
Momentum = ([Character's weight*area] * [Force of Gravity+/-influence of the moon/s]); Then, we have to determine your terminal velocity: or, the point at which your character's body provides enough wind resistance that you no logner accelerate. I don't even remmeebr the forumla for this one. Now: multiply the Momentum by two to get the force at which your body hit the ground, assuming you didn't hit a moving object, which opens up a whole new set of equations, and finally: arbitrarily translate the force of the impact into HP damage.

Or, we could say you died when you fell 50 feet, were nearly killed from 40 feet, and so on up or down.

Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=besyanteo@rpgww60462>Besyanteo</A]&nbsp; Image at: 8/27/05 15:27

User avatar
FF Fanatic 80
Driver of the OOC Bus
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 7:11 pm
Location: New England

Re: And now, over to the other side!

Unread postby FF Fanatic 80 » Sat Aug 27, 2005 3:38 pm

Not sure what difference yet another opinion will make. BUT! Would rather say it than be quiet and regret it later.

Some of this may also rehash stuff Bes said, which I agree with for the most part.

I can see reasons for both arguments. The whole Dex = Fine control, Agi = Movement/Nimbleness, I understand how some would want to keep these under seperate stats, to better reflect a person's skills in the two areas.

But, I still think Brian makes a good point for combining them. Philsys is supposed to be a faily basic and straight-forward system for character power in an RP setting. So we don't spend 5 minutes waiting for the GM to calculate stuff for damage/etc. each round.

So far the two options for 'fixing' dex have been:

1) Combine them into one stat
2) Make more things rely on Dex.

The problem with #2 is, you're going to add even more complexity into the system doing that. Even if it's just adding Dex to another stat, it's yet another thing a GM will have to keep track of in addition to everything else in Philsys. There's also the problem that, with more things relying on Dex, it's going to spread a character's points thin even more, when they're close to that point as is with the other stats.

So for simplicity's sake, I don't see a problem with combining Dex and Agi.

As far as concern for characters who are agile, yet not adept at picking locks, or characters who can finely craft a sword, yet move slower than a ton of bricks. A lot of this could be reflected in the character's skills, and probably should be anyway. If your character has 'WeaponCrafting, BladeShovel - 15', even with low dex, I think it's pretty safe to assume he's good with his hands when it comes to crafting weapons. If your character has 'Endurance - 8' and high dex, it's probably safe to assume they're good at running long distances without losing their breath.

That's about all I can think of to contribute at the moment.


User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:05 pm

Ashley: I quite agree that this debate should have taken place three months back. However, the reason it's comng up now is precisely because people are starting to make the conversion. Peoples' attention has been drawn to exactly what the conversion entails, whereas previously, the agi/dex merger may have slipped under the radar. I know that when I heard that I was being given 18 points and 8 stats to play with when creating Cerene, I was surprised.

There is a feeling that people need to raise their concerns now or never. Which, if you think aout it, is true. And who around here is really going to settle for never?

By my count, there are four characters in active use with the changes in place. At level 1, switching them back really poses no appreciable difficulty, and certainly no one's suggesting that character sheets be changed either way in mid-campaign.

Should the debate have happened three months ago? Absolutely. Should it therefore be quashed? No.

Of course, by this point, feelings are starting to run high. Rampant use of sarcasm by both sides hasn't helped here. Pervy, Brian, I'm looking at you as I say this.

It's gotten to the point where I'm making separate posts to comment on the debate itself and to put forward my actual ideas. Never a good sign. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Blackwind Isao
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 3:23 am
Location: Satan's Armpit

Re: Well:

Unread postby Blackwind Isao » Sat Aug 27, 2005 8:24 pm

Kelne: There are five characters listed on the site that use the AGI/DEX merge not four.

- Blackwind.


User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:22 pm

Isao: May we refrain from quibbling about a potential typo, or better yet a miscount from examining several dozen sheets and missing one? His point remains that there are very few sheets that have been made with the merged stat. I'm still for merging, but it seems like a much less urgent issue suddenly.

ALSO ALSO: I hate to say it, but if people are really going to continue to argue over this point, civilly or otherwise (mostly civilly, so far) maybe we need to put things to a vote?

Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=besyanteo@rpgww60462>Besyanteo</A]&nbsp; Image at: 8/27/05 21:23

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Aug 27, 2005 9:39 pm

And now, to address Brian's points.

Dex factoring into AT/PA is in fact logical, if you consider it to represent use of feinting and other precision motions with a weapon to confuse an adversary as to your true intentions, or indeed to get through their defenses. In a fencing match, for instance, speed and dexterity are key, while physical strength plays almost no part.

I didn't suggest techs be used to accomplish improved accuracy from higher dex. I suggested that if someone wanted to increase damage due to high dex, they'd need a tech to do so. Which still strikes me as quite reasonable. Looking at James's sheet, I see that you have indeed done both.

Actually, if dex is factored into missile accuracy, I think it is as useful as agi. I know my own rogue-type character favoured throwing knives at people over front-line combat. And he could have used that PA boost.

As far as important stats go, I agree with you by and large. I think that wis is an important stat for any character who wants to build non-combat skills (or indeed keep multiple combat skills high). Yes, fighters can scrape by without it in theory, but only if they want their only real talent as they level to be 'hit enemy with sword' (Again, Cho is a good example here, except for the sword part). I'd also pick int as an important stat for fighters, as it factors into skill points, perceptiveness, and AT/PA.

In fact, I think it's mages who have the easy choices there. Their 'combat' stats tie into skill points as well, and most try to make sure that there's a good meatshield between them and those nasty people with swords (though a bit of a boost to PA never hurt anyone).

As far as a lack of rogues goes, I agree with you there, and have my own thoughts on that subject. They're not really relevant to the topic at hand, but I think that either of our solutions could easily fix the problem from a mechanics standpoint, while not actually encouraging people to play rogues. Something for another post another day.

On to missile weapons. Three of my characters use them. Five if you count the character effectively lost to the D&D system and the dwarf who throws dynamite at people. That's a fairly substantial proportion of the characters I've statted up. I can think of several others who use missile weapons either as a primary weapon or as a backup. Chandler, Jaeko, Kamos, Alonso, Petlamino, Zemekis... Not a dominant option, but certainly a viable one.

As a note, I think that regardless of whether or not the merger goes ahead, the accuracy system would be better if based around dex.

As for your last point, of course merging the two stats together makes dex more useful than keeping them separate does. The same could be said for any merger you cared to name. After all, you now get the benefits of both stats in one convenient package. And aside from magic- or negotiation-based skills, there are an awful lot that incorporate, agi, dex, or both.

I won't go so far as to say that a combined dex stat would eclipse the usefulness of any other single stat, but it certainly seems to me to be considerably more useful than str or sta. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:35 am

A belated response to Jak:

Certainly there would be types of weapons with greater or lesser accuracy bonuses. I just haven't gotten into that kind of detail as yet. I do envision most accuracy bonuses falling between +0 and +4, with higher bonuses being reserved for extremely rare kit, and penalties (say -2) reserved for the powerful but terribly inaccurate stuff (handcannons, for instance). <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:44 am

Just a thought on types mentioned previously, but one of the main appeals of PS for me is that archetypes aren't part of what defines your character. The abilities and skills that they have do, rather than the label of "fighter." I do agree that many characters fall into archetypes, but it is possible to create characters who don't fit them and, sometimes, aren't geared towards combat at all.

Also, with regards to rogue types having a harder time getting comparable combat utility to fighter types, shouldn't that be the case? The training of a traditional rogue lies in many non-combat skills, with violence being a last resort. A rogue type in a one on one fight with a fighter type will probably, and should probably, lose if he doesn't use his guile and cunning to even the playing field.

Edit: In reply to Kelne, what sort of ACC bonuses and penalties would you apply to the various bows and crossbows?

Edited by: Jak Snide&nbsp; Image at: 8/28/05 2:45

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sun Aug 28, 2005 4:53 am

Hm. Of course, in reality there's probably very little to separate the accuracy of the various different types of bows. Or indeed early firearms. Choices between them come down to ease of use, ability to fire on the move or from horseback, power and reload time. And of course how easy they are to make in the first place.

The more I think about it, the more inclined I am to simply leave bow and crossbow accuracy at +2. At least for the five basic types on the equipment page. The shortbow and the hand crossbow might get +3, and the heavy crossbow +1.

Additionally, while you need strength to cock a crossbow, strength has nothing to do with its accuracy. So crossbow accuracy would be based on the same formula as firearms, that is int+dex*2. The upshot is that while crossbows are more powerful, they effectively require three stats to use well, and simply cannot be rapid-fired.

So that seems to even out quite nicely.

Hand crossbows and shortbows remain effective weapons for low strength people who're willing to invest the skill points, as well as being usable from horseback. Not that we typically have mounted combatants, but the option's there at least.

The major gap in the equipment list that I can see is the recurve bow. All the advantages of the shortbow, plus better hitting power than anything but the heavy crossbow, but with a high strength requirement and very difficult to make. Very much an expert's weapon. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
FF Fanatic 80
Driver of the OOC Bus
 
Posts: 1865
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 7:11 pm
Location: New England

Helpful? Maybe!

Unread postby FF Fanatic 80 » Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:50 pm

Here's a comprehensive list of things each stat effects
*BEFORE* skills come into play. If I've left anything out just point it out.
Dunno which point of view it will help/hinder but figured it might illustrate what stats get used for what.

Courage
The ability to hold oneself in check in stressful situations
1/2 your initiative (shared with AGI)
1/4 your AT/PA (shared with AGI/INT/STR)
1/2 Your defense vs. ranged attacks (shared with AGI)
(1/2) * 2 Your resist chance vs. Magic (shared with INT)
*Addendum* 1/2 the size bonus/deficiency for Gun attacks (shared with AGI)
*Addendum* 1/2 your base TP (shared with STA)

Wisdom
The amount of raw, bookish knowledge a character has.
1/2 your starting skillpoints (shared with INT)
Multiplied by 3 when making knowledge checks.
1/4 of your starting MP (shared with INT and MAG)
Affects how many skillpoints you get per level.
1/3 the "To Hit" roll for all 'normal' magic attacks. (shared with INT and MAG)
*Addendum* 1/3 your chance to scribe a scroll. (Shared with INT)

Intuition
Character's ability to think and reason.
1/2 your starting skillpoints (shared with WIS)
1/4 your starting MP (shared with WIS and MAG)
1/4 your AT/PA (shared with COU/AGI/STR)
1/2 Amount of MP you get on level up. (shared with MAG)
1/2 Your resist chance vs. Magic (shard with COU)
*Addendum* 2/3 your chance to scribe scrolls. (shared with WIS)
1/3 the "To Hit" roll for all 'normal' magic attacks. (shared with WIS and MAG)

Charisma
This indicates not only physical beauty, but also the ability to win others over through guile and charm.
No 'direct' relation to combat.
Affects how NPC's/Foes react to you.

Agility
The ability to move quickly.
1/2 your Initiative (shared with COU)
1/4 your AT/PA (shared with STR/COU/INT)
1/2 your defense vs. ranged attacks (shared with COU)
*Addendum* 1/2 the size bonus/deficiency for Gun attacks (shared with COU)

Dexterity
The ability to manipulate objects with refined motor skill.
No 'direct' relation to combat.

Strength
Raw muscle power.
Bonus added to damage with melee weapons, varies per weapon.
1/4 your AT/PA (shared with COU/INT/AGI)

Stamina
The ability to take punishment.
Used to calculate your starting HP.
Affects how much HP you get per level.
Affects how long it takes you to recover if knocked unconcious.
*Addendum* How many rounds a character can hold their breath.
*Addendum* 1/2 your base TP (shared with COU).
*Addendum* Affects how much TP you get per level.

Magic
How 'in touch' you are with the astral plane.
1/2 your starting MP (shared with WIS and INT)
1/2 amount of MP you get on level up. (shared with INT)
1/3 the "To Hit" roll for all 'normal' magic attacks. (shared with INT and WIS)

Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=archmage144>Archmage144</A]&nbsp; Image at: 8/28/05 13:56

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Helpful? Maybe!

Unread postby Jak Snide » Mon Aug 29, 2005 1:03 am

Intuition was also linked to perception. Or at least that's my understanding of it.


FlamingDeth
Moderator
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:54 am

Re: Helpful? Maybe!

Unread postby FlamingDeth » Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:47 am

Not much time at the moment, but consider this:

The Philsys 1 rules aren't going to magically dissappear if/when Philsys 2 gets written up. If you don't like Philsys 2, no one is holding a gun to your head forcing you to use that ruleset. <p>
<hr width="50%"><center><span style="font-family:comic sans ms; font-size:x-large;">AVAST!</span></center></p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Mon Aug 29, 2005 3:59 am

Alright, one updated missile weapon list in light of the proposed changes. Throwing weapons have been tweaked slightly, and other weapons overhauled.

As a note, the hand crossbow is now a lighter, less accurate but easy to use weapon.

Since most weapons don't use exactly the same kind of ammunition anyway, weapon damages are now individual rather than based on ammunition. Special ammunition may still provide bonus damage or effects as appropriate.

I will eventually get around to giving firearms the same treatment, but not for a little while yet.

On an unrelated note, I'd like to see the 'additional effects' (burn, freeze, stun etc) for spells of particular elements scrapped. Most GMs forget or ignore these anyway, and almost nobody includes them on their sheets. They seem to slow things down needlessly for little benefit. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:27 am

Personally, I will have to disagree on those values, if we were to go with that idea in the first place, and not the DEX/AGI merge, which I support. While a simple inverse power-accuracy relationship may make sense from a "game" perspective, it doesn't make much sense otherwise.

With any kind of bow, or any kind of crossbow, your ammo's going to generally be the same, as opposed to gun ammo and how each is different. And what do you know? Crossbows lack anything even remotely similar to recoil for the most part! However, with larger ammunition at lower velocities, differences arise. Accuracy with crossbows isn't exactly based on how heavy the crossbow itself is, but instead on the amount of force put into the bolt, and the amount of time the force is applied. This would easily equate to hand crossbows having the low end, and heavy crossbows to actually be quite nice as far as ACC goes. Standard crossbows are still middle of the road.

Now, guns, on the other hand, have a much higher velocity to their ammo, so the difference in force based on weapon type alone is negligible. However, there are now a few different factors. Primarily, the size to power ratio, the barrel length, and the bore of the gun. This would still lead to handcannons being utter suck as far as ACC goes due to a massive amount of kick, though since the Valthi makes are two-handed, they might get less of a penalty due to the inherent stability. Pistols would still get suck in general, though certain modifications (barrel extension, rifled bore) would make the bullet fly straighter, and could increase the accuracy. Shotguns would also have issues due to the increased kick on a shotgun shell or slug as opposed to any given bullet type, and the smoothbore nature of the gun. However, their size would absorb a decent bit more shock than a Doman handcannon. And personally, by this measure, I'd think that rifles would be at the top of the list due to a combination of all the factors. Valthi Heavy Rifles would likely be in the shotgun range as far as penalties go, though you have the issue of a quite annoying STR req.

Now, admittedly, I'm not a bow fan, but last I remember hearing, those things require quite a bit of training for you to actually be even decent with. I really wouldn't give bows too high of a bonus. Even then, I'd base it in the same frame as crossbows: more force = straighter shot.

And yes, I realize it was shown a certain way in the standard weapons list. With smaller weapons, you already get concealability. High accuracy as a result from small size or whatever is...bah.

Anyway, all this is even ASSUMING we go with Kelne's method as opposed to the AGI/DEX merge. Though it should be a good guideline for ACC on projectile weapons anyway. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3606
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:47 pm

Well, Doug, you certainly make a good case for going with my original instinct of a flat +2 accuracy bonus for the different weapons, rather than attempting to replicate the present accuracy system to an extent. You'll note that I'd already decided that hand crossbows having a high accuracy made zero sense and reduced the bonus to +0 as a consequence.

I actually agree with you on many of your other points as well. Crossbows and rifles are much easier to just point and shoot than a bow. However, crossbow accuracy, at least, peaks early on, while accuracy with a bow continues to improve as the user gains in skill. Since there's no easy way to represent this, and I don't want to penalise characters for choosing one over the other anyway, I've simply opted to declare their accuracy to be equal.

WW1 era rifles, of course, are a different matter. They're easy to use, and accurate over long distances with a minimum of training. But there's also no strength requirement for using them. A Valthi marksman need only focus on dex and int for accuracy, while a bowman needs str and dex (a less common combination), and a crossbow user needs all three. I think that gives rifles a good enough edge.

You’ll also note that I was looking at a top accuracy of +4, giving no weapon a truly insurmountable accuracy advantage. This means that pistols, while still less accurate, are now a viable choice as compared to rifles.

Of course, the real abstraction is the one which always seems to fall by the wayside. All of the above weapons are designed for long-range use. More often than not, philsys combat occurs at rather close distances. In reality, that close, no one with a single-shot weapon is going to get a chance to reload before their foe is inside their effective reach. They get one shot, and have to make it count. This is why rifles have historically come with bayonets.

How do we get around this problem? We don't. We ignore it entirely, in favour of a more cinematic form of combat, where everyone uses whichever fighting style they feel best suits them, and it's assumed that missile weapon users have time and space to reload.

As far as the reason behind this particular update goes (aside from making dex more useful), accuracy is presently the only combat mechanic that isn't based in some way on characters' stats. Instead, it is essentially based on a set of fixed and, in some ways, arbitrary numbers. I said that I'd like to see this change implemented regardless of whether the merger goes ahead, and I meant it. I think it would help make a combined dex stat overly powerful, but it's still better than just leaving things as they are.

Let's see, what have I missed? Ah yes, the different types of arrows. Having done a bit of basic archery myself, I can tell you that arrows do in fact come in different lengths and weights for different bows. Arrows might be standardised to an extent for convenience, but longbows and shortbows do use different sized arrows. Hand crossbows certainly take smaller bolts than larger versions.

In any case, even if all bows use identical arrows, the damage they inflict has far more to do with the properties of the bow than those of the arrows, which was the point I was trying to get across. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 8:36 pm

If no one objects too heavily, I'd like to step away from the subject that is being debated at current and try to provide a sense of perspective regarding the whole thing.

Philsys, if it is a system that is going to continue to be used, is going to need a great deal of radical changes. There are a number of things that still bug me about the way the system works. Ranged combat still doesn't feel right to me, even with the proposed changes. Guns in particular don't feel right. The whole mechanic of how ranged attacks are dodged feels cheesy. Unarmed attack damage formulae have never been completely resolved satisfactorily. Tech costs and standards are still arbitrary and extremely difficult for the average person to decide without GM assistance--there's simply too much guesswork involved. Delayed actions as described in the addendum have been addressed. Harder, more standardized rules about what sorts of penalties should be applied (for being critically wounded, for example) might be helpful.

This is only a short list of things worth mentioning and in need of adjustment, definition, or revision. I was having a conversation with Idran today, partly because I was intending to vent a few frustrations, and wound up coming to a realization that not everyone sees Philsys the same way I do. I mean something very specific when I say this--essentially, not everyone realizes that Philsys is essentially a system in beta.

Idran1701: This is a fairly major point, though, I'd say. How often does an RP system have a stat entirely dropped in a new version?
Arch mage144: When the system is effectively in beta?
Idran1701: ...It is?
Arch mage144: ...yes?
Idran1701: I was actually unaware of this.
Arch mage144: I have never thought of Philsys as finished. I have always thought of it as being a beta version of the system at best.
Idran1701: I've always been the opposite. Especially since this is being called Philsys v2. >_>
Arch mage144: Note that I never called it that.
Arch mage144: I have also told people not to call it that.

Because this is not "Philsys 2.0." If you ask me, we're barely at version 1.0, and we've been playtesting a beta version for the past three years or so. Back when it started being used, a lot of rapid changes were made to the system. New rules were devised, adjustments were made, and no one really had any complaints (then again, at that point, I was more or less the only PS GM anyway). Now, with the relatively long time span since the last round of changes, people have come to see Philsys as "finished," or if nothing else, "functionally usable." While it is functionally usable, it is nowhere near complete. While I'm not trying to create a commerical RP system here (I don't have time, for one thing), my goal has always been to get closer and closer to that sort of ideal. So to me, it's perfectly acceptable to rip the system apart, change things, rework details, throw out entire stats, reconsider large details.

I don't know if this fact/conversation snippet is going to change the way anyone thinks about Philsys, but I figured it might be worth mentioning, because if Idran didn't know that that was my perspective on the whole situation, it is entirely possible that he is not alone. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:09 pm

It's easy to think the system is concrete and complete when only minor changes are made for three years. It's not Brian's, or anyone else's fault really: It's a daunting task to try to mess with an entire RP system, and change things so that not only you, but everyone is satisfied with them.

And when it sits with it's rules unquestioned for so long, people assume it's some kind of official, concrete thing. It's like trying to lift an anchor out of the water while swimming in it: It's possible, (I've done this before), but there's a hell of alot of resistance.

Anyway: I myself until recently thought PS was a finished, working thing, well past it's test stages. Looking at the changes that HAVE been made over time, versus what those things were when Phil made PS, I'd encourage mroe changes.

That said: Regardless of people's ideas on Dex, what about other gripes/ideas for the system? I'd make some suggestions myself, but I'm being pulled away now.

Maybe someone might think about a mroe standardized list of skills, with a submission process to go through GMs, so we can remove some of the duplicates?

Also: Chi skills. There's two or three skills for it as I've seen, none of which require MAG to perform magic-like abilities, and each skill has a different stat set up. What the hell? (you can find them in the example skill list) Does anyone else think this is a little, uh, messed up?


Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:43 pm

Alternately, there is a possibility that I have been considering--no one cares, and it isn't worth the effort to tinker with the system further, because the people that are still using it are evidently perfectly satisfied with it the way it is, and everyone else has moved on and either doesn't RP or uses another system instead. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Mon Aug 29, 2005 10:06 pm

Personally, I'd like to see it change and evolve. That's just me, though. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

PreviousNext

Return to OOC RP Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


Yalogank