[freeroleplay] S cubed

[Troy Truchon]

On 7/12/06, Ricardo Gladwell <president at freeroleplay.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 10:31 -0700, Troy Truchon wrote:
> > I was thinking some more about the idea of a more skill based system
> > and here is what I have. I am calling it S cubed (simple skill system)
> > as a working title.
>
> I can already think of neat little logo with a stylised S with a tiny
> superscript cubed symbol.
>
> >  The basic concept is rather simple, attributes
> > (strength, intellect, dexterity) are just too simple to ever be all
> > that accurate. Even if you could create a clear list of attributes we
> > could argue for months over how best to score them or manage them.
>
> Firstly, I would note here that there is nothing wrong with a skill-only
> system, but I'm not sure why you think skills are any more "accurate"
> than attributes. Attributes can be fuzzy which is why I can understand
> why you might want to avoid them for a realistic game, but skills can be
> equally fuzzy depending on how you categorise them. And believe me, you
> can back-and-forth as long and hard about skills as you do about
> attributes (see the list archive for more details ;)

True. And to be honest I've never seen a skill system I truely liked.
I did love the skill web from Shadowrun though, but such a system
falls apart as you add more skills to the game.

> If you are coming up with good design criteria I would say you should
> probably expand on why you feel attributes don't work and why you think
> skill-only is better. For example, how do you mean "too simple"?

It was one of those "sounded great before I actually put it down" ideas.

> >  In
> > the S cubed system your attributes, called qualities, are derived from
> > the skills you have that relate to them.
>
> Interesting, so qualities are amalgamations of different skills. I think
> the Epic Roleplaying Game does something similar.
>
> > Your character is made from two different types of skills. There are
> > specific skills, for instance how to use a certain weapon or pilot a
> > certain vehicle, and then there are field of knowledge skills, like
> > marksmanship or piloting.
>
> I'm confused here: do you mean broad skills and narrower
> sub-specialisations or 'qualities'

No a specific skill would be a full knowledge of a given handgun, a
field of knowledge skill in handguns would allow you to use any
handgun.

> >  To purchase a specific skill you spend a
> > number of points equal to the level you want the skill raised to. Thus
> > to buy a skill at three you have to pay six skill points (1+2+3=6).
>
> I like the simple, natural exponential-like curve this simple mechanic
> generates.

Borrowed the basic idea from Shadowrun.

> > Each skill has one or two qualities attached to it. To determine the
> > value of your qualities you average all the skills attached to that
> > quality.
>
> Natch, this sounds easy to say but may actually be quite complicated to
> calculate in the middle of play. Do you pre-prepare these calculations
> before play? What happens with characters with a lot of attached skills?
> This could be quite time consuming and error-prone to do. Could you not
> simply state the greatest/least of the attached skills or some, simpler
> mechanism?
>
> Also, what do you mean by the skills attached to a quality? I thought
> that a quality is only attached to one skill. How do you determine which
> skills are attached to a quality? Won't this unfairly benefit characters
> with those qualities that have more attached skills? Also, why are
> qualities both calculated/derived traits *and* bought traits?
>
> >  The exception to this rule are static qualities. A static
> > quality is a quality that cannot change without a very good reason.
> > The strength of a robot, for instance, does not change so long as the
> > robot is properly maintained.
>
> Sorry to sound pedantic, but isn't this sneaking attributes in through
> the back door? How do static qualities differ from attributes?

Yes it was.

Please nobody judge me for this horrendouse brainfart of a system.
Things that sound so groundbreaking at 12am don't sound quite the same
at any other time.

-- 
Troy J. Truchon
Computer Service Technician