Battle of the Attributes

[Infinite Possibilities]

So how many have started to create a "Unified" document from the three core D6 documents already?

I have. It's pretty easy about 98% of the three documents are exactly the same so far, though I expect that to change as I go along.

I just reached the attributes section and I just have to laugh at myself. I am taking this whole thing way too seriously. ;-)

Adventure has Reflexes and Coordination. Fantasy has Agility and Coordination. Agility is the exact same as Reflex. Space rolled both stats into one, Agility.

Reflexes is general body agility, Coordination is fine motor control and hand-eye. But do they really need to be separate? I know I may want mechanical or technical as its own attribute, so if I keep them as two, I have just added another stat to the mix. Not a big deal really, but means I will have to revisit the character creation parts and modify for an extra stat.

In the end, since I play a lot of Supers games, its important to be able to distinguish between jackie chan/jet lee characters and james bond type characters.

So I keep Agility and Coordination.

All three have either physique or strength, which are all exactly the same stat. I like strength better as physique makes it sound like I am staring in the mirror all the time.

Next is Mechanical, only found in Space. Do I really need a stat that is about using machines? Probably not. As much as I love Star Wars mechanical skills probably work better under different attributes. But will stick it at the bottom of the list just to make sure I don't change my mind.

Next we have two knowledge's and an intellect. They are all the same thing. Call me a snob, but I like the sound of Intellect better than Knowledge. Besides Knowledge implies memory more than learning, and the Attribute represents both. So Intellect for the win!

Next is Perception and Acumen, with Space being the odd duck out. Both are the same, and I think Acumen is a better word, so will go with that.

Last decision is an interesting one as each book had a different word for basically the same thing:

Perception: Your character’s awareness of himself and things around him, including the ability to interact with others.

Presence: Measure of emotional strength, physical attractiveness, and personality.

Charisma: A gauge of emotional strength, physical attractiveness, and personality.

I think we can dump the attractiveness part. Its a fun concept but I don't know how much I need it in my games. ;-)

Presence wins on this one. It's a much better word, and I think better describes what this attribute is.

Sadly I think Technical and Mechanical are just going to have to be dropped. I love star wars, but they are just specializations of the other attributes.

That leaves as our final Attributes:

Attributes

Each character has seven attributes, which measure basic physical and mental abilities that are common to every living creature (and some nonliving things), no matter what universe or dimension they exist in.

Agility: A measure of how physically articulate your character is, including his balance, limberness, quickness, and fullbody motor abilities.

Coordination: Measure of hand-eye coordination and fine motor abilities.

Strength: Measure of your character’s physical power and ability to resist damage.

Intellect: A measure of strength of memory and ability to learn.

Acumen: Your character’s mental quickness, creativity, and attention to detail.

Presence: Your character's awareness of himself and things around him, including the character's emotional strength, personality and ability to interact with others.

Extranormal: Measure of a character’s extraordinary abilities, which could include psionics, magic, miracles, metaphysics or other extranormal talents. It is often listed by its type, rather than by the term “Extranormal.” Most characters begin with a score of 0D, since people with such abilities are extremely rare. Those who have an Extranormal attribute must decide how it's manifested. Characters almost never have more than one Extranormal attribute.

For those that are doing something similar, how do my choices compare with yours?

Darrem

[Grimace]

Different than mine in some regards, but then I didn't try to stick with the options given in the 3 core books. I used a broader range of games to come up with a listing of attributes that I would use. And I also stuck with the "quasi-limit" of 6 attributes.

Mind you, I did this for my unified set of attributes/skills. While I believe people will use a unified set, I also realize that people will want to use attributes that better fit the flavor of the setting they're playing in. Thus, there will be attributes that won't be compatible/convertible to anything in the 3 core books, but at the same time, those setting won't be meant to be played in direct compatibility with those books, so it won't be a big deal.

If you look in the D6 Discussion forum you should be able to find the threads we've had there where we talked about those ideas.

Your ideas have merit, but they are neither right nor wrong. I think the "nice" thing about OpenD6 will be that people will be able to choose what they use as a "unified" attribute/skill system. Then it will be up to each individual person to decide what is best for them.

[Infinite Possibilities]

I completely agree. Right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder, and what you need the system to do.

I think in the end I will go back to my stand-by on Attributes.

12 attributes.

Power, agility and fortitude for Physical, Mental, Spiritual and 'Extranormal' (whatever that is for the setting).

More attributes than I normally like, but they fit in a small compact grid, and they are easy enough to keep track of.

But first I want to get the three books compressed into one document so that I can have a base to start changing things from.

Darren

[asmkm22]

These are the attributes I'm using in my system.

Lion
Hawk
Snake
Bear
Elk
Dragon
Phoenix
Wolf

[Lee Torres]

What do those govern? On the face of it, it sounds very similar to the attributes John Wick used for "Houses of the Blooded" - although I don't think he used Dragon or Phoenix.

He used Bear, Elk, Falcon, Fox, Serpent, and Wolf, as follows...

Bear’s Strength - physical risks
Elk’s Cunning - Season Actions
Falcon’s Courage - determination
Fox’s Beauty - Romance
Serpent’s Wisdom - knowledge
Wolf's Prowess - Duels

[Kalzazz]

I use

Strength, Dexterity, Perception, Knowledge, Mechanical, Technical

Also, Arcane, Divine, Psionics, Ki as the four extranormal stats I use (so far)

And then the three Force things, which, uhmm, are somewhere between stats and skills, but I wind up referring to them as stats since well, they use stat dice to start with them

[asmkm22]

Never heard of that one, but I'll definitely check it out.

Most of those animals have some meaning, grouped, in Chinese culture. As for mine, it's roughly as follows:

Lion Social
Hawk Skilled
Snake Subtle
Bear Offensive
Elk Defensive
Dragon Natural
Phoenix Supernatural
Wolf Athletics

Each is linked more towards a grouping of skills rather than an absolute physical characteristic. More abstract than normal, but it works for the setting I'm working on.

[Lee Torres]

Interesting! Looking forward to seeing more of that. Good breakdown of areas into "totems" almost. Very cool!

[petespahn]

Twelve attributes is a bit much for my tastes, but there's certainly nothing wrong with it.

Someone in another threaded had posted about using skill groupings instead of raw attributes as was done with Mechanical and I kind of like that idea, but for Stormrift I think I'm going to stick with the basics.

[Lee Torres]

The most attributes I ever recall being comfortable with in a game was from the old techno-thriller RPG "Millennium's End" which had ten:

Intelligence
Sensibility
Agility
Coordination
Constitution
Strength
Personality
Appearance
Bravado
Willpower

Most of these are just a typical five attribute spread drilled down to more detail. Intelligence and Common Sense could be the same attribute easily enough, but the distinction is okay too. I do remember liking that "Bravado" was an attribute; I could see in a D6 game having conflict between someone on the team with 1D in Bravado versus the one with 4D in it. Also it would allow a grittier setting if the players needed a successful Bravado check to go actively into harms way, which could work well for some settings. When the tendency of the majority of the population is to flee a firefight, it takes something extra to run toward it instead.

[mbentley]

Personally I think D6 Adventure has the best set of attributes for me. With that set of attributes I can see running fantasy, modern or scifi with little trouble. About the only thing I might need to do is add some skills for different settings, but other wise I think the D6 Attributes are really nice.

[Lee Torres]

Here's a concept I pitched in the D6 Social Group; I'm throwing it out here for anyone that hasn't seen it there already. The current D6 Adventure attributes (which I agree with MBentley is perhaps the best "All-Round" set, able to handle most settings equally well) is:

D6 Adventure

Reflexes:

Coordination:

Physique:

Presence:

Knowledge:

Perception:

Extranormal:

Make Mechanical and Technical derived attributes based on Knowledge - if Knowledge is 3D, then Mechanical and Technical are 3D as well - now we get to the juggling bit - the pips or dice can shift from that base, one being decreased if the other is increased - have a Knowledge of 3D, you can have both T & M at 3D, or T at 4D and M at 2D, or... well, you get the idea.

It ties them to Knowledge, which I think is good, and then allows you to move them around a bit. If the game you're playing doesn't need these derived attributes, then ignore them... have Mech and Tech as "sub-attributes" of Knowledge. Then Mech and Tech are essentially a "mini dice pool" that can be shifted at character creation, and are static thereafter.

Technical and Mechanical would be Secondary or Derived Attributes, based on (in the above list) Knowledge- if the character had 3D in Knowledge, they'd automatically have 3D in Mechanical and Technical - if they wanted to have someone of average intelligence that was good with machines, shift 1D from Knowledge to Mechanical, raising Mech to 4D and lowering KNO to 2D - someone bright and technically adept could pull from the 3D in Mech to split between the other two - so drop Mech to 1D, raise both KNO and TECH to 4D... Just like a subsidiary pool of the total attribute set, but all based on the KNO attribute to start.

Anyway, the impact is that Mechanical and Technical are still around, but not Core Attributes. Games using them would have 6 core attributes and 2 derived attributes. You'd still work with, say, 18D for attributes, and the amount of dice going to knowledge gets tripled (so if you put 4D in Knowledge, you have MEC and TEC at 4D as well), then becomes the mini dice pool mentioned above...

So the revised attribute layout would look like this:

Reflexes:

Coordination:

Physique:

Presence:

Knowledge:


Mechanical

Technical

Perception:

Extranormal:


Control

Sense

Alter


Just an example on Extranormal... for the Old Guard with their lightsabers! :D

[mbentley]

Interesting idea Lee. However a random thought I had was making Mech and Tech derived from Know and Perception. Add the two attributes, divide by 2 and then spread them in Mech and Tech as you wish. Since in my opinion Mechanical and Technical expertise can come from both knowledge and the ability to notice things.

[Lee Torres]

Dangit, Mike, now I'm gonna have to post more stuff from the group out here in the open. Really good feedback! I'll add that in - Perception should definitely be a factor. It does make it a bit more complex on the character sheet, but I think there must be a way to present it simply.

[mbentley]

Quite happy to help. :D Like I said it was just a random thought that came into my head when reading your thoughts. Almost didn't post it because I can sometimes be a bit shy about sharing my ideas.

[Lee Torres]

No need to be shy, Mike!

So with the new feedback, the attributes might be presented as:

Reflexes:

Coordination:

Physique:

Perception:

Knowledge:

PER + KNO / 2 = Technology Comprehension Pool (working title)


Mechanical

Technical


Presence:

Extranormal:

[Lee Torres]

Actually it struck me that there's no need really to divide the attribute by two, just add them together and then the aggregate total becomes the dice pool to divide between MEC and TEC - so someone with 2D in Perception and 4D in Knowledge has 6D to divide between Mechanical and Technical. Might help to ease the dread of anyone looking at the character creation and thinking "Okay, I've got 3D+2 and 2D+1, so then divide by two and... wait, how do I divide that by two!?!" - so with the example above, it's 3D+2 plus 2D+1 or 6D, divided between the Mechanical and Technical attributes, and limited only by any Attribute Maximums the rules use (one building on the Star Wars/Metabarons example might cap a human attribute at 4D, while one built from Space, Fantasy, or Adventure might cap at 5D...

Reflexes:

Coordination:

Physique:

Perception:

Knowledge:

PER + KNO = Technological Aptitude Pool (another working title! Somebody stop me!)


Mechanical

Technical

Presence:

Extranormal:

The one thing that keeps tripping me up in the original tweak is that (for me at least) the easiest way to calculate the average of a bunch of die codes is to break them down into pips, so a 2D+2 die code is 8 pips, and a 3D is 9 pips - my concern is, then you take those two, add 'em up (17 pips) and divide by two (8 pips, remainder 1) - and it's that remainder that's the sticking point. Because then we get to rounding; do we round up, round down, or base that on the setting - gritty - round down, heroic - round up? In short, it starts to get complex.

In some cases that complexity yields rewards - for instance, if a character has a knowledge of 5D (15 pips) but only 1D+1 (4 pips) in Perception, then the averaging will hit them for their low attribute (19 pips / 2 = 9 remainder 1) so they'll end up with 3D or 3D+1 (depending on rounding) as the base for MEC and TEC, which can then be re-allocated. I definitely do like that (although the adding the two together method in the first paragraph would give the character a dice pool of 6D+1 to divide between MEC and TEC, so it's six of one, a half dozen of the other).

Most D6 players can do that kind of thing in their sleep, but I fear that someone brand new to D6 might not see the elegance underlying all the mechanics if their crunch-threshold gets bumped in one minor part of character generation, and I've seen discussions online where complaints arise from just such minutiae... But either one works. But my gut tells me that including averaging dice codes in character generation seems too complex for too little reward...

[asmkm22]

I'm pretty sure OpenD6 could completely eliminate 'pips' and have no real negative effect on the rest of the game. It sure would simplify things...

[Lee Torres]

I'm pretty sure OpenD6 could completely eliminate 'pips' and have no real negative effect on the rest of the game. It sure would simplify things...

Somebody could certainly release such a thing under Open D6, but I think that a lot of the uniqueness of the D6 System is that slight increase in granularity. I see it as more a feature than a bug that the die probabilities are smoothed out somewhat, instead of jumping from 2D6 (average 7) to 3D6 (average 10.5, IIRC), the pips keep the probability a little smoother. It's actually one of the things I prefer about D6 over something like World of Darkness, even if it presents a few more options at character creation... In looking over character builds for my D6 Space PbP, I got a great deal of satisfaction seeing how some of my players worked the die codes to their best advantage. For me, I'll never give them up. But I'd certainly take a look at a project without them (being a big advocate of D6 Legend as well...) :cool:

[asmkm22]

There has always been quite a bit of overlapping between Mechanical and Technical, and a number of Technical skills could easily be worked into Knowledge/Intelligence.

Extranormal is another attribute I've never liked. I usually put those skills into other attributes like Perception/Acumen/Knowledge.

[Lee Torres]

I'm attempting to create a list that would meet the needs of the D6 community, including those that started out in the late eighties with Star Wars. Most of the feedback on the topic is that they like those attributes, so my effort was based on their inclusion, but not keeping them in the six core attributes. One could, with Open D6, completely redefine every attribute and create all new skills, and still have it considered D6, but I'm trying to build on what exists now, in order to create a unified set going forward. If only as another of ten thousand different options, one that might allow a player to use all published D6 materials to date (well, except for Men In Black that had eight attributes, unique to itself) without too much labor in the conversion...

[Lee Torres]

There has always been quite a bit of overlapping between Mechanical and Technical, and a number of Technical skills could easily be worked into Knowledge/Intelligence.

Extranormal is another attribute I've never liked. I usually put those skills into other attributes like Perception/Acumen/Knowledge.

You'd put psionics or magic or The Force (or some sort of "Matrix" power stat, in that setting) under Perception/Acumen/Knowledge? What would be the reasoning behind that decision, if you don't mind sharing?

I could see knowledge of them being in those attributes, but what about the power to wield them?

[petespahn]

PER + KNO / 2 = Technology Comprehension Pool[/B] (working title)


This seems like it's complicating things. I too like the base attributes given in D6 Adventure.

Why don't you handle the above using an Advantage, say Mechanically Inclined, which allows you to use your Perception instead of Knowledge? Keeps the complexity to a minimum.

Also, pips are integral IMO, especially during character advancement. You're able to increase something every session instead of having to wait. I wouldn't define die codes as pips during chargen, though.

Extranormal/Metaphysics/Force should be its own attribute since not everyone has access to it.

[Lee Torres]

This seems like it's complicating things. I too like the base attributes given in D6 Adventure.

Why don't you handle the above using an Advantage, say Mechanically Inclined, which allows you to use your Perception instead of Knowledge? Keeps the complexity to a minimum.

Also, pips are integral IMO, especially during character advancement. You're able to increase something every session instead of having to wait. I wouldn't define die codes as pips during chargen, though.

Extranormal/Metaphysics/Force should be its own attribute since not everyone has access to it.

I think I fixed the "Technology Pool" in the next post down. Maybe. :D YMMV, of course...

[Lee Torres]

I wouldn't define die codes as pips during chargen, though.

Quite agree - I wouldn't say "Allocate 54 pips between the 6 attributes" when 18D is so much simpler - I would, however, let the reader know that each die can be broken down into 3 pips so that they can "finesse" their character builds a bit, with examples.

[mbentley]

Quite agree - I wouldn't say "Allocate 54 pips between the 6 attributes" when 18D is so much simpler - I would, however, let the reader know that each die can be broken down into 3 pips so that they can "finesse" their character builds a bit, with examples.

I would agree with this. It is nice to be able to have just that little bit extra ability in an attribute or skill.

[petespahn]

I think I fixed the "Technology Pool" in the next post down. Maybe. :D YMMV, of course...

Hi Lee, Yes, I saw that, and I should have quoted that. I'm just not sure it's necessary to change. I don't think I understand what problems you are trying to fix with this tweak, probably because I can't see the bigger picture you're looking at.

Plus I think 6 stats for D6 has a nice symmetry that I'm just reluctant to mess with. :)

[petespahn]

Quite agree - I wouldn't say "Allocate 54 pips between the 6 attributes" when 18D is so much simpler - I would, however, let the reader know that each die can be broken down into 3 pips so that they can "finesse" their character builds a bit, with examples.

Yes, definitely.

[Lee Torres]

Hi Lee, Yes, I saw that, and I should have quoted that. I'm just not sure it's necessary to change. I don't think I understand what problems you are trying to fix with this tweak, probably because I can't see the bigger picture you're looking at.

Plus I think 6 stats for D6 has a nice symmetry that I'm just reluctant to mess with. :)


Ah, I got it! Okay - I'm considering a six core attribute set, with things like Mechanical and Technical (and Control, Sense, and Alter, for that matter) being sort of "folded up" unless needed. So a character sheet for a sci-fi game might display them, where an Iron Age fantasy setting would not, so they're a set of derived attributes, like movement is in some D6 variants. So in a "Conan" D6, you wouldn't have them on the character sheet, but someone doing a fantasy setting where the PCs are agents for an organization where Leonardo DaVinci plays the role of "Q" from the James Bond movies, you'd probably need them for when one of the players crashed the ornithopter and the rest of them needed to know how to put it back together. But they wouldn't be part of the six core attributes, just generated from them.

[Lee Torres]

Of course, as asmkm22 pointed out, they could just be eliminated, and those skills moved into Knowledge or Perception, but I know there's a core of the old D6 grognards that would like to see them in the brave new world of Open D6, so I was trying to find a way to do all of it, but to get the stuff that's not needed in all settings out of the way when it's not in use. I'd consider the same thing for the Extranormal attribute if the setting had no supernatural-type things in it...

[petespahn]

Of course, as asmkm22 pointed out, they could just be eliminated, and those skills moved into Knowledge or Perception, but I know there's a core of the old D6 grognards that would like to see them in the brave new world of Open D6, so I was trying to find a way to do all of it, but to get the stuff that's not needed in all settings out of the way when it's not in use. I'd consider the same thing for the Extranormal attribute if the setting had no supernatural-type things in it...

Okay, I see. I guess I'm looking at it from the Stormrift angle. I'll be using Knowledge, but there will be plenty of mechanical and technical skills needed. I'll also be using metaphysics/extranormal for psionics. So, I'll need most of them, but I haven't really got cracking on system specifics yet. Now that the OGL has been applied to the core books and offered for free, I'm planning to get to it!

[asmkm22]

You'd put psionics or magic or The Force (or some sort of "Matrix" power stat, in that setting) under Perception/Acumen/Knowledge? What would be the reasoning behind that decision, if you don't mind sharing?

I could see knowledge of them being in those attributes, but what about the power to wield them?

To be fair, knowledge would be the last attribute I'd associate them with, if for no other reason than it all ready has a ton of skills. However, the power of the mind can be an incredible thing, and I wouldn't have a hard time suspending disbelief enough to accept that it can be the driving force behind it all.

More realistically, I'd put the extranormal skills under whatever attribute houses Willpower. For Star Wars, I recall that being under Perception (god only knows why, but my memory could be fuzzy). Even making them specialized Willpower skills accessible only after purchasing a particular Advantage during or after character creation could be an alternative.

[Lee Torres]

To be fair, knowledge would be the last attribute I'd associate them with, if for no other reason than it all ready has a ton of skills. However, the power of the mind can be an incredible thing, and I wouldn't have a hard time suspending disbelief enough to accept that it can be the driving force behind it all.

More realistically, I'd put the extranormal skills under whatever attribute houses Willpower. For Star Wars, I recall that being under Perception (god only knows why, but my memory could be fuzzy). Even making them specialized Willpower skills accessible only after purchasing a particular Advantage during or after character creation could be an alternative.

I could see Willpower carrying it, if there was a Willpower attribute in the game - I did that myself in a D6 homebrew many years ago. I think that an Advantage and that would cover it as well or better than an Extranormal attribute. Thanks for the clarification!

[asmkm22]

I know I listed Attributes yesterday, but I'll list another set that's a bit more standard.

Intelligence. Non-paranormal mental abilities. Standard stuff like academic training, and non-standard stuff like riding an animal.

Agility. More standard stuff. Most combat stats fall under it.

Perception. General awareness, like normal. Would also include Initiative as a skill rather than rolled as an attribute.

Technical. Normal craft-like skills such as first aid and hacking, as well as mechanical skills such as operating a vehicle (very different than riding a horse).

Strength. Probably limited to climbing, jumping, swimming, and it's normal combat modifiers.

Endurance. Physical and mental resistances. Everything from surviving a gout of dragon fire to not throwing up when you see your friend fail to. Willpower would be here, for example.

[asmkm22]

Another option would be to eliminate the non-physical attributes entirely. The idea being that knowledge and experience on a subject, be it rock climbing or swinging a sword, are represented well enough in the form of "skill points".

[Lee Torres]

But what about something like physics, mathematics, literature, or tactics, that would be driven largely by some form of intellectual knowledge instead of muscle memory or rote training?

I could see reducing all that to one attribute (Mental, or Intelligence, or something along those lines) but not eliminating it entirely.

Of course, in the D6 "cookbook" there's a "skill only" option I've seen used, especially in the Starship Troopers D6 (http://www.mediafire.com/?myyem4jnyh0) RPG. In fact, when I first saw Green Ronin's "A Song of Ice and Fire RPG" I thought it looked a lot like someone had taken that notion, changed pips to Bonus Dice to deal with smoothing out the progression, and lowered the difficulties to top out around 21 (which, in the system, works out fine, since 7D is a Legendary level of prowess). 2D is average for them too, though!

[Kalzazz]

I allow people to base init off dex or per, as a choice

Or mech, if in a vehicle

[Cryonic]

The most attributes I ever recall being comfortable with in a game was from the old techno-thriller RPG "Millennium's End" which had ten:

Intelligence
Sensibility
Agility
Coordination
Constitution
Strength
Personality
Appearance
Bravado
Willpower

Most of these are just a typical five attribute spread drilled down to more detail. Intelligence and Common Sense could be the same attribute easily enough, but the distinction is okay too. I do remember liking that "Bravado" was an attribute; I could see in a D6 game having conflict between someone on the team with 1D in Bravado versus the one with 4D in it. Also it would allow a grittier setting if the players needed a successful Bravado check to go actively into harms way, which could work well for some settings. When the tendency of the majority of the population is to flee a firefight, it takes something extra to run toward it instead.

Intelligence and Common Sense don't really have much to do with each other, heheh. I've seen quite a few very intelligent people (at least their education would say they are intelligent), but have little in the way of common sense.

"The only thing common about common sense is the common lack of it"

[Lee Torres]

Intelligence and Common Sense don't really have much to do with each other, heheh. I've seen quite a few very intelligent people (at least their education would say they are intelligent), but have little in the way of common sense.

"The only thing common about common sense is the common lack of it"

No disagreement. Plenty of RPGs out there do lump them together, though. I thought that, for a system using ten attributes, it was pretty well thought out.

[Cryonic]

D&D doesn't have them lumped together. Wisdom and Intelligence... :)

[Lee Torres]

True. And Traveller does make a distinction, with Intelligence and Education, but GURPS, Tri-Stat, Hero, BRP, and a fair number of others are not so enlightened.

[Lee Torres]

Here's an interesting site that should provide more fuel for this topic. Enjoy!

http://www.fudgery.net/omnium-gatherum/lag.html

This list brought an interesting possibility to mind - using the Masterbook attributes for D6 - MasterBook (West End Games): Agility, Dexterity, Endurance, Strength, Intellect, Mind, Confidence, Charisma.

[Jurgun]

I've been working on my own homebrew for a while now, which I'll probably fold back into D6 now that it's open. But one of the most basic issues I've continually gone back and forth on is what attributes to use and how many. Whatever list I come up with is never quite right. Basically what I'd like to do is throw out attributes entirely, but I still want to give characters bonuses to various skill groups based on natural aptitude or inclination. (Yeah, I know. A rose by any other name...)

Another idea I was working on was skill synergies, in my case adding up to two different skills together in one roll. For example, adding your Divination Spells skill with say Knowledge: Forensics when performing tasks in your CSI: Waterdeep campaign. I think I'll still keep this in D6. Add skill_1 to 1/2 of skill_2 (rounded down) and go for it. I did a quick spreadsheet check of this and it seems to be close enough for government work. (As in pip costs of the two skills compared to the pip cost of one skill of the same combined magnitude.)

The thing I like about this is it now allows me to chuck attributes, or alternatively just treat attributes as skills you can combine with regular skills where appropriate. So you can combine Coordination with Marksmanship and get the same basic result as having a skill based on an attribute. (I can then also do things such as combine Intelligence and Marksmanship in situations where a character's skill in that area might help the figure out something.)

Anyway, I'll have to look at it some more. But I like the direction it's heading at the moment.

[Lee Torres]

Welcome aboard!

That's a very interesting idea - it's one I'd want to playtest to see how it handles, but if it works it could greatly improve the "no attributes" version of D6. So far I've only seen one D6 setting with that variant from the D6 "cookbook" edition (which is on the list of books to be converted and OGL'd by Temprus), and that game was a free version of a Starship Troopers (http://www.mediafire.com/?znyuxqudgag) RPG that originally appeared on the old West End's Devoted Game Enthusiasts (WEDGE) website.

What appeals to me about your idea is it adds a little bit more "crunch" into that variant - not too much, just sort of a dash of it, but there's definitely appeal to that for me.

[Lee Torres]

Just had an idea after reading over the thread again. It's just sort of a notion I had between the Millennium's End attribute set I referenced back on page one, and the collapsing of Mechanical and Technical for settings where they were not needed.

This is a concept to create a minimal set of core attributes that can be further divided to more precisely define a character in a D6 setting. Inspiration comes from the old Last Unicorn Games (LUG) Star Trek RPG line, where a similar concept was utilized.

In the following example, a Player Character is given 13 Dice to divide between 5 Core Areas, Mind, Motion, Physique, Social, and Spirit. For a more Classic D6 approach, in which Player Characters have 3D in all Attributes to move around, 15 Dice would be allocated.

The Player assigns 3D to Mind, with the idea that the character will be a brilliant person, but of a typical amount of common sense (or street smarts, or wisdom, or however one wishes to define it). He adds 1D6 to Intelligence, and subtracts one from Sensibility. For Motion, he sees the character as being average in both his manual dexterity and his overall agility, and so leaves both at the base 2D. For Physique, he sees the character as a bit tougher than most, but typical in lifting ability, and so adds 1 Pip to Constitution, while balancing the exchange by subtracting 1 Pip from Strength. For Social 2 Pips are juggled, and for Spirit, like Motion, the Player leaves the core 3D allotment intact.


http://i577.photobucket.com/albums/ss219/Pegasus_XO/FoldedAttributes.jpg

Once the balancing step is complete, the Dice and Pips allocated should equal exactly twice the starting Dice Pool, as demonstrated above.

In use, an unmodified sub-pair would not necessarily appear on the character sheet - in the above example, Motion and Spirit would not need to be broken out. If the GM needed a roll dealing specifically with dodging or repairing a tiny device, Motion would be the base roll for both situations.

One last strange idea tied to this - even with the attributes "unfolded" the initial number could still be used for resistance rolls, since they're the median of the two, the pivot point, as it were. Say the character was in a political campaign, and was in danger of suffering a crushing defeat - he'd roll on Social versus the Difficulty set for the campaign, and, if that failed, on Spirit to see how the character gets hit psychologically. Most of this is really more for NPCs than PCs. The Player would want to determine their characters level of Bravado in a fight, or how they react to a massive social setback, but it might be a way of mechanically determining the actions of NPCs in a setting. Of Mind, Motion, Physique, Social, and Spirit, I could see the Five Wound Level model applied to all except Motion. But I could see Mind being challenged as sort of sanity mechanic, Physique for wounds to the body, Social for setbacks from debates or social situations, and Spirit as a sort of measure of the character's despair.

Maybe this would even lead to a variant of D6 with no GM, where the PCs interact with their surroundings and the dice determine the course that the NPCs take. But that, to borrow Grimace's phrase, is just crazy talk... :D

This was more a thought exercise, really. Nothing wrong with ignoring the folding/unfolding and using, for instance, the column to the right with 30D allocated around 10 attributes. Just thinking at the keyboard.

[Dranix]

For the german version I'm working on I settled for the following six:

Geschicklichkeit
Beweglichkeit
Physis

Intelligenz
Wissen
Psyche

plus the optional 4:
Metaphysik
Psionik
Magie
Wunder


I' currently working on the Skills and their spread ;)

[wraith]

I think everyone is forgetting the beauty of total skill based gaming. I'm not using it in anything I'm currently working on but for really simple games I've done in the past, like Caveman Misadventures, it's amazingly fun.

[Lee Torres]

I think everyone is forgetting the beauty of total skill based gaming. I'm not using it in anything I'm currently working on but for really simple games I've done in the past, like Caveman Misadventures, it's amazingly fun.

Actually, Jurgun was just talking about it in post 43, so it hasn't been forgotten...


The thing I like about this is it now allows me to chuck attributes, or alternatively just treat attributes as skills you can combine with regular skills where appropriate. So you can combine Coordination with Marksmanship and get the same basic result as having a skill based on an attribute. (I can then also do things such as combine Intelligence and Marksmanship in situations where a character's skill in that area might help the figure out something.)

[Sevya]

I've been working on my own homebrew for a while now, which I'll probably fold back into D6 now that it's open. But one of the most basic issues I've continually gone back and forth on is what attributes to use and how many. Whatever list I come up with is never quite right. Basically what I'd like to do is throw out attributes entirely, but I still want to give characters bonuses to various skill groups based on natural aptitude or inclination. (Yeah, I know. A rose by any other name...)

An option, based I think in the Conan RPG, would be to have a bonus to all skills in a category based on how many dice of skills you have in that category. So, the more strength based skills you have, the higher bonus to all strength based skills.

Sevya

[Lee Torres]

Good thought, Sevya! I liked that version of the Conan RPG. If memory serves, it was more or less 10% of the total in that area, so if you had 20 total points in Prowess, you had a base of 2 points, or something along those lines. Maybe for D6, everything could begin at 2D (average ability), and then use the dice pool in a similar way, so someone with 20D total in that area would have a default of 4D (from 2D base + 2D talent increase). A character without any dice in that pool would default to 2D (average ability).

Good call!

Thinking a little more about it, maybe every 5D in a talent pool should give a 1D increase, since D6 tends to allocate fewer dice at character generation, unless Advancement is factored in, then it could comfortably stay at 10D, I think...

[Jurgun]

An option, based I think in the Conan RPG, would be to have a bonus to all skills in a category based on how many dice of skills you have in that category. So, the more strength based skills you have, the higher bonus to all strength based skills.

I like that idea. I'm cleaning up my Age of Enlightenment rules and then I'll turn my attention to fleshing out a steam fantasy world I have sitting sitting around on various bits of paper. The magic system will only have a couple skills per domain, but this may still work.

[Lee Torres]

Going with the Base 2D to build upon idea, how about for the core talent pool adding one pip for every 1D in the total talent pool? So with a 2D base, a character with 5D in one area would have an additional 1D+2, for a total of 3D+2 in the base?

I was thinking with the lower amounts of dice allocated it might make the core pool a bit meatier - if the original 18D for attributes in a game utilizing them where added to the typical 7D for skills, we'd have 25D to distribute amongst the character skills, and skills not selected would be rolled at the base talent pool default...

So, to use Conan as an example, they had six pools:

Prowess - covering Strength, Movement, Swimming, Climbing, etc.
Fighting - covering Weapons Proficiency, Wrestling, Brawling, etc.
Endurance - covering Stamina, Damage Endurance, Poison Endurance, etc.
Knowledge - covering Spells, Engineering, Reading, Writing, Languages, etc.
Perception - covering Shadowing, Pickpocketing, Animal Training, etc.
Insight - covering Natural Magic, Poetry, Telepathy, etc.

Having a total of 10D allocated to the Fighting Pool would give a base fighting of 5D+1 - Base 2D +10 pips (= 3D+1).

Possibly using the pips route it might not be necessary to provide a base 2D; I'd been considering it because of other similar games where a baseline default is provided, such as Starship Troopers or A Song of Ice and Fire, but it might make the talent pool base too strong (i.e. stronger than some of the skills within it.)

[Lee Torres]

I like that idea. I'm cleaning up my Age of Enlightenment rules and then I'll turn my attention to fleshing out a steam fantasy world I have sitting sitting around on various bits of paper. The magic system will only have a couple skills per domain, but this may still work.

Wow! Glad to have you here! :D I really enjoyed your Age of Enlightenment (http://www.northernmountains.com/hd6/aoe_toc.htm) rules - looking forward to seeing where you're heading next!

[Jurgun]

Wow! Glad to have you here! :D I really enjoyed your Age of Enlightenment rules - looking forward to seeing where you're heading next!

Aw shucks. My head is swelling now. :D

Anyhoo, I'm still planning on going the combined skills route, so I'll start everything off at 0D. Though at this point it's looking like it will be a combined skill + subskill subsystem. (Melee plus your choice of 1H Sword style, 2H Sword, Sword + Shield, Two Weapon, etc.)

I'm looking at the skill group bonuses we've just been talking about, but perhaps something exponential. New characters can get a +2 or +3 in a couple of their groups while advanced characters hopefully wouldn't have more than +3D. I don't know what level of granularity my skill groups should have yet (e.g Reflexes - Combat Skills - Melee Combat). I may just leave that up to the player and GM. With a bonus system that scales exponentially a narrower group of skills will see a more immediate benefit but with a lower potential bonus. So it should balance out. (Hmm... On second thought that my not be true. Back to the spreadsheet again.)

As I'm thinking about it while I write this, I think I'll put a cap on the skill bonuses and let the people playing the game group their skills as they see fit.

[Prime Evil]

I don't know whether anybody is interested on my thoughts on this matter, but for a homebrew space opera campaign setting that I am currently working on I decided to increase the number of basic attributes from seven to ten. I felt that the game could benefit from a little more granularity. I also felt that it was a good idea to break up a couple of attributes that PCs often dump most of their points into. This is obviously a matter of taste - some folks prefer fewer attributes while others prefer more of them.

I attempted to keep the new attributes generic in order to make it easy to transfer them from one genre to another. And I deliberately selected names for the new attributes that bring them into line with the naming conventions used by other RPGs. IMHO, this makes it easier to convert material from other games to the D6 system.

Obviously, these changes have had a number of effects elsewhere in the game system. For example, I needed to modify the character creation rules slightly to accommodate the increased number of attributes. I also needed to change the attribute associated with certain skills.

Anyway, for what it is worth, my rules for attributes are provided below:

Attributes
Each character has ten attributes that measure basic physical and mental capabilities common to all living creatures, no matter what universe they exist in.

In addition, characters may possess one or more optional paranormal attributes that represent extraordinary gifts such as the ability to wield magic or psionics.

Each of the ten basic attributes is described below:

Strength: This attribute measures muscle-power and physical might. It provides a rough indication of the character’s overall physique. This attribute can be used to perform feats of prowess such as lifting heavy objects or breaking through locked doors. This attribute is important in combat because it determines the amount of damage the character inflicts when armed with muscle-powered weapons such as swords, spears, or axes.

Constitution: This attribute measures stamina, endurance, health, and general physical fitness. It is used to resist the effects of fatigue, disease, poison, starvation, torture, and physical injury. This attribute is important because it influences the character’s ability to survive adverse environmental conditions and physical harm. A character with a low endurance is more vulnerable to the effects of injuries.

Agility: This attribute measures balance, reflexes, reaction speed, and full-body motor abilities. It provides an indication of the character's overall gracefulness and nimbleness. This attribute is important because it influences the character’s ability to react quickly to dangerous situations and evade physical attacks. A character with a low Agility attribute will find it difficult to dodge in combat.

Dexterity: This attribute measures hand-eye coordination and fine motor skills. It is used to manipulate small objects, utilize tools, and perform other actions where manual deftness is a significant factor. This attribute is important in combat because it influences the character’s accuracy with weapons.

Intellect: This attribute measures clarity of thought and ability to perform structured logical reasoning. It indicates ability to learn new concepts, comprehend ideas, use deductive logic, construct rational arguments, and engage in reasoned debate. It can be used as a rough indicator of overall intellectual prowess. This attribute is important because it is the basis of many mental skills.

Knowledge: This attribute measures level of education and general knowledge. A character with a high knowledge attribute will possess an encyclopedic knowledge of many subjects. This attribute is important because it is also the basis of many mental skills.

Technical: This attribute measures aptitude with technology. It determines a character's ability to operate, manipulate, modify, and repair technological devices. A character with a high Technical attribute will seem to possess an innate knack for technology. This attribute is important because it is the basis of technical skills, including the ability to operate sensors, computers, communication devices, and force fields.

Acumen: This attribute measures your characters alertness and attentiveness. It include elements of common sense, intuition, wisdom, and attention to detail. A character with a high Acumen attribute will be insightful and will have a sound judgment in practical matters. This attribute is important because it is the basis of skills such as Perception and Search. A character with a low Acumen will rarely notice subtle clues and may be more susceptible to traps or ambush.

Determination: This attribute measures the character’s self-discipline, conviction, courage, and willpower. provides an indication of the character's overall mental and emotional stability. This attribute is used to resist the effects of fear, stress, and temptation. It is also used to resist psionic powers that have mental effects. And it can be used to resist the gradual dehumanization often associated with cybernetic enhancement. (In horror-based campaigns, perhaps it might also used to resist the sanity-blasting effects of certain eldritch artifacts and entities??).

Presence: This attribute measures charisma, personal magnetism, leadership ability, and force of personality. It may include a component of physical attractiveness, although this is not always the case. This attribute is important because it influences the character’s ability to interact effectively with NPCs. It is also the basis of most social skills.


Paranormal Attributes
Paranormal attributes are optional attributes used to measure the extent of a character’s natural talent with extraordinary abilities such as magic, psionics, or chi powers. Each paranormal ability is associated with a separate attribute. Most characters begin with a score of 0D in these attributes, since people with such abilities are extremely rare. Characters who wish to possess a paranormal talent must spend some of their precious attribute points to purchase a positive die code in the relevant attribute. Characters should not be permitted to purchase more than a single Paranormal attribute under normal circumstances.


Attribute Die Codes
No Human character may have less than 1D or more than 5D in any other attribute. Other species have other minimums and maximums, which are either listed with the species description or specified by the GM.

Exception: A Human character may have no dice in the various optional Paranormal attributes; there is no maximum that a Human character may have in these attributes.

For human characters, following guidelines should be used to assess the meaning of the die codes assigned to each attribute:

1D - Below Average
2D - Average
3D - Above Average
4D - Exceptional
5D - Outstanding
6D+ - Superhuman

Purchasing Attributes
If using the 'Defined Limits' system of character creation, simply distribute 25 dice among the 10 attributes. The minimum is 1D and the maximum is 5D in all attributes except Paranormal attributes. Paranormal attributes have no minimum and no maximum.

If using the 'Creation Point Pool' system of character creation, increase the number of creation points that characters receive to distribute among the options various options to 85 but otherwise use the system as it is written.


Final Notes
I should note that this is still a work in progress and nothing is set in stone at the moment. For example, I have been debating whether to roll the Technical attribute into the Knowledge attribute to keep the list as genre-neutral as possible. Feedback will be gratefully accepted!

If anybody is interested, I will upload my preliminary skill list as well.

[Lee Torres]

Intellect: This attribute measures clarity of thought and ability to perform structured logical reasoning. It indicates ability to learn new concepts, comprehend ideas, use deductive logic, construct rational arguments, and engage in reasoned debate. It can be used as a rough indicator of overall intellectual prowess. This attribute is important because it is the basis of many mental skills.

Knowledge: This attribute measures level of education and general knowledge. A character with a high knowledge attribute will possess an encyclopedic knowledge of many subjects. This attribute is important because it is also the basis of many mental skills.

Technical: This attribute measures aptitude with technology. It determines a character's ability to operate, manipulate, modify, and repair technological devices. A character with a high Technical attribute will seem to possess an innate knack for technology. This attribute is important because it is the basis of technical skills, including the ability to operate sensors, computers, communication devices, and force fields.

Wow! Quite an introductory post! :D

I think you might consider folding Technical into Knowledge, as you said, for a more all-encompassing list - out of curiosity, though, what do you see as the difference between Intellect and Knowledge? Is one the capability of your brain to reason and the other how you are actually using it? Sort of like Traveller having Intelligence and Education?

I'd be interested in seeing your skill list - but you might consider starting a new thread over in Projects (http://www.wegfansite.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=24) - you can use it to post your ideas and get feedback without the attributes issue getting in the way! I've got my thread for Firefly D6 over there, and there's a number of others, like Judge Dredd D6 for instance...

[Prime Evil]

Thanks for the kind words!

The more I think about it, the more I agree that Technical should be folded into Knowledge.

The distinction that I have made between Intellect and Knowledge is very much influenced by the distinction between Intelligence and Education in Traveller. However, it also serves a couple of other purposes. From a roleplaying perspective it allows the creation of characters who are smart but have little formal education - as well as highly-educated idiots. And from a design perspective, it ensures that all of the mental skills are not hanging off a single attribute. I'm trying to ensure that each attribute is important in some way so that the trade-offs made during character creation are meaningful.

FYI, this is the also reason for the distinction between Agility and Dexterity (which has a precedent in the distinction between Agility and Coordination in a a couple of published D6 games). I feel that the Reflexes attribute is problematic - basing so many key skiils (such as dodge, marksmanship, etc) on a single attribute makes it more important in play than the other attributes, encouraging players to max it out at the expense of other choices.

The distinction that I make between between Strength and Constitution is a matter of personal taste, but it follows the pattern set by other RPGs. Also, the Physique attribute in most D6 games determines both Strength Damage and Body Points (assuming that this rule is used) - dividing this attribute into Strength and Constitution makes it possible to base each of these important secondary characteristics on different attributes.

Incidentally, the Determination attribute is something I introduced to provide a mental equivalent to the Constitution attribute....something that indicates mental fortitude and willpower. It also provides an easy way of handling morale for NPCs. And if you want to run a Cthulhu-meets-Indiana-Jones style game, you could introduce a Sanity Points mechanic using this attribute and a calculation similar to that used for Body Points. In other words, each character would start off with a number of Sanity Points equal to 20 + the result of a roll against the Determination attribute. I haven't thought this through in detail, but it's an idea that I have filed away for future experimentation...

I'm not entirely happy with the Acumen attribute, but I haven't come up with a better name for it - I'm thinking of making Perception into a skill based upon this attribute and allowing characters to specialize in vision, hearing, scent, etc as required. If I follow the example of other RPG's, I would call it Wisdom or Intuition - but neither of these names hit the right note in my opinion.

Thanks for mentioning the Projects forum - I might make up a new thread over there to toss some ideas around for my homebrew game and see if I can get some community feedback.

[ArmoryDave]

I've always felt that Attributes were one of the best ways to distinguish the type of setting in which you are playing as well as add the desired level of complexity or simplicity to your game.

I haven't started in on my own project just yet, but some of the key questions for anything that I produce will be whether or not the Attribute: 1. fits with the setting 2. simplifies the setting or confuses it 3. has enough skills under it to qualify as a separate Attribute.

For example, in the D6 Fantasy book I didn't always see enough of a distinction between Agility and Coordination. I don't think the distinction hurt the book at all, and I would have gladly used the template provided for the ease of running a cohesive campaign/setting using that rulebook. For my purposes I may find it easier to combine the two, but I tend to be role player that leans to minimalism in rules and maximized role play.

Either way, D6 remains in my mind one of the premier systems for going rules heavy or light, and Attributes can accommodate both directions.

[Prime Evil]

I've always felt that Attributes were one of the best ways to distinguish the type of setting in which you are playing as well as add the desired level of complexity or simplicity to your game.

I think that you are raising a very important point here. Most 'universal' systems (GURPS, Hero, etc) assume that you will use a single set of attributes for every genre. I suppose the rationale is that this makes it easy to transfer characters from one genre to another or from one campaign to another. But it is not evident that this is the best approach in all cases - how much campaign-hopping goes on in the real world? And do you lose a certain amount of flavour by dictating a single definitive set of attributes for all settings?

I suppose that it is a bit of an unresolved question whether OpenD6 should be a one-size-fits-all universal system or a loose framework or rules that individual game designers can customize to their own needs.

[Lee Torres]

Based on what I've heard from Eric Gibson over the past year or two, it's the loose framework model. There are a few different designers and fans working on GURPS-like D6 Cores, though, for whomever would want to use them. I can see value in both, so I'm glad that both will be out there.

I've run a dimension-hopping fantasy before, inspired by the Amber novels and the comic series Grimjack, in which the PCs fought across Middle Earth, Hyboria, the Young Kingdoms, and a bunch of other fantasy settings, so a uniform set was good there. If I wanted to run a Transhuman post-scarcity culture science fiction, though, I doubt those same attributes would cover all the bases I wanted covered.

[Prime Evil]

The loose framework approach is an interesting one because no publisher has tried to pull it off before now. To date, the universal systems out there tend to assume a consistent set of core rules that can be used across multiple genres. Personally, I think that the loose framework approach is a good choice as it clearly distinguishes the D6 system from its competitors. It might make it difficult to build up traction with third-party publishers though.

[Lee Torres]

The loose framework approach is an interesting one because no publisher has tried to pull it off before now. To date, the universal systems out there tend to assume a consistent set of core rules that can be used across multiple genres. Personally, I think that the loose framework approach is a good choice as it clearly distinguishes the D6 system from its competitors. It might make it difficult to build up traction with third-party publishers though.

Ah, but there is one shining exception to the rule - FUDGE, from Grey Ghost Games - which has recently spawned FATE from Evil Hat. FUDGE has whatever attributes and skills the author wants to put in, silly to serious and everything in between.

So I'm hopeful that OpenD6 can work. I know a lot of people don't like FUDGE because of the special dice, but D6 doesn't have any of that - just the trusty old regular cubes from the Yahtzee set!

[Emperor Xan]

Should I assume that no consensus on unifying the three genre's attributes has been reached yet?

[Whill]

Should I assume that no consensus on unifying the three genre's attributes has been reached yet?

Yes, you should assume that. I sincerely doubt the D6 community will ever agree. And in the spirit of Open D6, they never have to. I think it's so cool that so many people propose their alternate systems and we can all discuss them.

I've always liked the customizability of D6 and feel the system is better if it is fine tuned to each specific genre, instead of a supposedly universal system of attributes and skills. But I do see the value in a universal system for multi-genre games, such as dimension-hoppers or even a D6 version of TORG.

A multi-genre, universal or general D6 system may be appropriate for a time travel game I dreamed up, if I can ever completely work out the premise in conjunction with the time travel logic that I subscribe to.

[theDevilofWormwood]

I too like the idea that creators can change the base attributes (even adding or subtracting) to give setting specific flavor to the system in their games, but the generic version of the rules really need a common base. Personally, my vote's for a D&D style Strength/Dexerity/Constitution/Intelligence/Wisdom/Charisma attribute list. Personally, I think it's the most intuitive, and the paradigm most gamers (both tabletop and video) are going to be familiar with, since so many games have followed D&D's lead on this.

On a similar note, the Agility/Coordination split in Adventure(?) D6 always felt weird to me - why have two very specific physical attributes on one hand, while Strength is a very broad physical attribute. It seems inelegant.

So maybe a six attribute list, something along the lines of Strength, Agility, Endurance, Intelligence, Awareness, Presence. Close enough to follow the standard pattern, but name-tweaked enough to not be boring. I really liked Asmkm22's suggestion that Endurance cover both physical and mental fortitude. Seems elegant.

Another option would be accepting less than six base attributes, and maybe making more skills. I know Unknown Armies only has four attributes, doesn't GURPS as well?

Someone should throw together a "Universal Base Attributes" poll at some point :D

[theDevilofWormwood]

Oh, and because I forgot, here's an interesting way of doing attributes: Cadwallon.

In Cadwallon, all characters have six basic "Attitudes" instead of standard attributes. These are Pugnacity, Sleight, Style, Opportunism, Subtlety, and Discipline. Skills are distributed across these six, linked with the attitudes they're most commonly used under. Bash, for example, falls under Pugnacity, while Sabotage falls under Opportunism. However, the rules allow for you to use a skill with different Attitude if the situations calls for it - trying to Sabotage a machine with a sledgehammer, for example, would be more Pugnacity than Opportunism, I'd think :D

Also, you "declare" the Attitude your character is in at the start of a game session (and can change it at any time), and if you use a skill while "in" that Attitude, you get a bonus - eg. anybody can Bash, but if you're in a Pugnacious mood, you bash all the better; if you're in a Disciplined mood, you Command better, etc.

The specifics aren't always intuitive (kinda like the rest of the rules for Cadwallon), but I think it's a neat concept. I was playing around with a possible conversion for D6, and it seems to map over pretty well.

Figured I'd throw this out there as another way to think about Attributes and how they function.

[Prime Evil]

IOn a similar note, the Agility/Coordination split in Adventure(?) D6 always felt weird to me - why have two very specific physical attributes on one hand, while Strength is a very broad physical attribute. It seems inelegant.

Maybe I'm cynical, but I think that the split between Agility and Coordination may have been introduced to ensure that ranged weapon skills don't run off the same attribute as Dodge. This ensures that players don't dump as many points as possible in a single stat that ensures high combat effectiveness.

I believe that there is a similar case for splitting Physique into Strength (which determines melee damage) and Constitution or Endurance (which determines resistance to injury and disease).

[JediGamer]

Let me throw my hat in the ring for an skill only game. Back in my old Star Wars game I played with some seriously math challenged players so rolling 6 or 7 d6 slowed down game play significantly. So I decided to revamp everything to skills only and gave everyone 3 points per die plus the pips (i.e. 6D+2 = 20) and used a single d10 as a randomizer.

What I liked was it really cleaned up the game play. Again, my players kept trying to add everything together (I have 2D in Agility and 5D+2 in Blaster, so I roll 7D right?) so it sped up game play quite a bit.

If I had it to do over again, I'd keep a tighter reign on the skill list, but it really worked well.

[Paragon]

Maybe I'm cynical, but I think that the split between Agility and Coordination may have been introduced to ensure that ranged weapon skills don't run off the same attribute as Dodge. This ensures that players don't dump as many points as possible in a single stat that ensures high combat effectiveness.

I believe that there is a similar case for splitting Physique into Strength (which determines melee damage) and Constitution or Endurance (which determines resistance to injury and disease).

I believe the Cookbook did that, and honestly, I'd have prefered if Adventures and Fantasy did too; automatically lumping those two together doesn't seem a good thing to me.

[Cryonic]

Why were they adding skill and attribute dice together? that should have already been set on the sheet to show exactly what they roll (barring modifiers like MAP).

As for being math challenged, teach players the group by 10 method of adding.

[JediGamer]

It was already done. Maybe they were trying to milk the system, but they sure tried.

And ever hear of teaching old dogs, new tricks? Yeah, that describes my old group.

Still, math aside, I rather liked the game that only had skills. Honestly, it worked well.