31:14 one game I've seen that addressed the "dump stat" problem is Ryuutama. It has a structured adventuring day, and every character has to use each attribute at some point to make one of the required checks. You can't just ignore mechanics that use the stat you dumped.
25:35 I feel like this is pretty common but I also had a giant problem with Int vs Wis. Part of the issue is how D&D explains what they are and how interchangeably they seem to be used. The commonly accepted descriptors seems to be book smarts vs street smarts, but that to me just boils down to the same stat (knowledge/smarts) Its hard to mechanically separate which stat applies to what when they mean the same thing taken by different paths.
The 5e book does a poor job describing them. Other editions have done this better. Maybe this can help elucidate it for you. Int is your ability to recall information you've been exposed to, where as Wis is your ability to problem solve. You can usually figure out which you should use with a question like "Is this something I could reasonably been exposed to before?" or "Is this a question I can figure out the answer if I don't already know?" For example, the question "What does DNA stand for?" would be an Int question, because you probably won't figure it out, but you might already know. "What is x in 3x+2=8?" would be Wis question, because you likely don't already have the answer, but you can figure out what the answer is.
I wouldn't say that Ability scores are outdated. I mean if they were outdated, they should have been out dated 40 years ago, when they were 10 years old. If anything I'd say get rid of the checks (Perception, investigation etc.) it's just bloatware.
32:00 One approach is to add complexity. If you have each attribute, and each attribute modifier have relevant mechanics for each facet (or pillar) of gameplay. If each attribute and modifier affects combat, roleplay, and exploration in a meaningful way then you have fewer players willing to have negative or neutral values in a stat. The caveat is that it makes the game more crunchy which is harder to learn and less appealing to people. The group aspect John brings up is a GREAT point. If you start requiring "group" checks as individual checks at your table, you might see a significant change in the players' approach to attributes.
Differentiating scores and modifiers allows for incremental advances between statistical advancements. A system may want to let players increase things like HP, carry weight, etc without also increasing the odds of success on rolls as often. In bounded accuracy a 5% increase to success chances every time you want another mechanic to improve could potentially get out of hand quickly.
I LOVE the proposed concept for like a mirror scaling where a negative can be a positive in a different way. Very out of the box concept. I was hoping that segment would be more of a pitch on the value of having negative stats even as they work now (just as a negative) because I personally hold the belief that negative stats can tell just as good of a story, if not a more compelling one, than ever increasing positive stats. I am alway preaching to my players to take a dump stat or two for the experience of it.
As John commented early on in this video, the operative word really is “abstraction”. Just like in application development the abstraction layer(s) and obfuscation that you may or may not use, will determine a certain and specific user experience. Now to that end, each person has a type of user experience that is most comfortable and easy for them to operate in. Therefore, the abstraction levels and obfuscation of the functionality of the depth of the rules and mechanics of any given game system will determine its acceptance to any given TTRPG audience and their adoption of the game. ❤. Great Video 😊
I think a dungeon Masters job is to make it make sense like a kanobo does more damage than a great sword in real life with a single swing but maybe it has lower damage stats because it cZn only be swung once vs 3 or 4 times
31:14 one game I've seen that addressed the "dump stat" problem is Ryuutama. It has a structured adventuring day, and every character has to use each attribute at some point to make one of the required checks. You can't just ignore mechanics that use the stat you dumped.
Dig that idea, I'll have to give it a look.
25:35 I feel like this is pretty common but I also had a giant problem with Int vs Wis. Part of the issue is how D&D explains what they are and how interchangeably they seem to be used.
The commonly accepted descriptors seems to be book smarts vs street smarts, but that to me just boils down to the same stat (knowledge/smarts) Its hard to mechanically separate which stat applies to what when they mean the same thing taken by different paths.
The 5e book does a poor job describing them. Other editions have done this better. Maybe this can help elucidate it for you.
Int is your ability to recall information you've been exposed to, where as Wis is your ability to problem solve. You can usually figure out which you should use with a question like "Is this something I could reasonably been exposed to before?" or "Is this a question I can figure out the answer if I don't already know?" For example, the question "What does DNA stand for?" would be an Int question, because you probably won't figure it out, but you might already know. "What is x in 3x+2=8?" would be Wis question, because you likely don't already have the answer, but you can figure out what the answer is.
I wouldn't say that Ability scores are outdated. I mean if they were outdated, they should have been out dated 40 years ago, when they were 10 years old. If anything I'd say get rid of the checks (Perception, investigation etc.) it's just bloatware.
32:00 One approach is to add complexity. If you have each attribute, and each attribute modifier have relevant mechanics for each facet (or pillar) of gameplay. If each attribute and modifier affects combat, roleplay, and exploration in a meaningful way then you have fewer players willing to have negative or neutral values in a stat.
The caveat is that it makes the game more crunchy which is harder to learn and less appealing to people.
The group aspect John brings up is a GREAT point. If you start requiring "group" checks as individual checks at your table, you might see a significant change in the players' approach to attributes.
Differentiating scores and modifiers allows for incremental advances between statistical advancements. A system may want to let players increase things like HP, carry weight, etc without also increasing the odds of success on rolls as often. In bounded accuracy a 5% increase to success chances every time you want another mechanic to improve could potentially get out of hand quickly.
Wrel actually makes the point I was trying to make right after where I paused it to comment lol 16:40
I LOVE the proposed concept for like a mirror scaling where a negative can be a positive in a different way. Very out of the box concept. I was hoping that segment would be more of a pitch on the value of having negative stats even as they work now (just as a negative) because I personally hold the belief that negative stats can tell just as good of a story, if not a more compelling one, than ever increasing positive stats. I am alway preaching to my players to take a dump stat or two for the experience of it.
As John commented early on in this video, the operative word really is “abstraction”. Just like in application development the abstraction layer(s) and obfuscation that you may or may not use, will determine a certain and specific user experience. Now to that end, each person has a type of user experience that is most comfortable and easy for them to operate in. Therefore, the abstraction levels and obfuscation of the functionality of the depth of the rules and mechanics of any given game system will determine its acceptance to any given TTRPG audience and their adoption of the game. ❤. Great Video 😊
This one was a very interesting one, lots of cool ideas and observations!
I think a dungeon Masters job is to make it make sense like a kanobo does more damage than a great sword in real life with a single swing but maybe it has lower damage stats because it cZn only be swung once vs 3 or 4 times
Yes, Wrel - Momento Mori and “Dismal” is quite appropriate and descriptive work for it.
Oh man... John...your system sounds similar to the one I have brewed up as well using two stats!