physical/social/mental

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by wml at 2005-07-09 11:56:50
Converted from Phorums BB System

Personally, I prefer to group attributes by what broad method of problem solving they are associated with. For example, overcoming a problem through physical force or skill, talking one's way out a problem, or thinking one's way out. This means attributes like appearence are "social" and not mixed physical/mental, and attributes like charisma fullfil entirely different roles from, say, intelegence.

Then, when designing a game system, decide how much you want to emphasize the three different paths of problem solving. If the game is primarily hack and slash, social and mental attributes become irrelevent, and should either be dropped entirely or merely used as parts of the magic system. On the other hand, if a game is seeking to balance all three methods, games that put undue emphasis on physical attributes may be inappropriately designed.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Sergio Mascarenhas at 2005-07-10 20:49:30
Converted from Phorums BB System

It's a good approach you have there Wml, true. There are many ways to break up attributes. My approach has been based on more traditional concepts. In a sense we could map it into the classical body/mind/soul tripartite model. On the other hand, most of contemporary research on the human functions, be it in philosophy or human sciences, completely dropped the ball for 'soul' and tends to look in a unified way to the body/mind divide.
I just went for the approach that gives me the largest mileage, the one that is easier to explain and that fits better the games I looked at. Yet, at the end of the exercise I may not be that far from what you propose.

Sergio

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by heratyk at 2005-07-14 16:51:25
Converted from Phorums BB System

Besides the traditional social attributes of charisma, appearance, and various derivations thereof, some very important but often overlooked ones are socioeconomic status/class/rank, and reputation/honor/virtue.

Many games take place in feudal societies where social status might very likely be the most important attribute you have. Even in more egalitarian settings, it has a big impact on how others react to you, your wealth & equipment, and your access to restricted people/places/information. While status is often largely inborn, social mobility adds an interesting dimension for character goals & rewards. Space 1889 included social level as one of its 6 character traits.

Reputation is more dependent on character activities than most other attributes, but definitely has an impact on interpersonal dealings. An attribute-like scale can be a good alternative to chunkier systems like D&D alignment, or individual advantages/disadvantages/merits/flaws. It's also an easier way to track & reward good behavior by the PCs.

Again, it depends on how much you want to emphasize social interaction versus combat and exploration.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Sergio Mascarenhas at 2005-07-17 19:49:10
Converted from Phorums BB System

Heratyk, the things you mention are very important indeed but I prefer to follow the standard approach where they are not handled as personal attributes. I wanted to give a good emphasis to social interaction. Attributes like charisma, communication or similar ones will play a role in this. Purelly social definition (rank, class, etc.) are the equivalent of weapons. Not part of the core description of the character but indispensable in action.

Sergio