[PnP] Re: Attribute Gen proposal for v2

Choinski, Burton Burton.Choinski at MATRIXONE.COM
Sun Jun 27 18:21:13 CEST 2004

Another hot proposal to for y'all to club to death :}  This one even more
contraversal, I'll bet.

Most "modern" systems have gone to a more granular numbering scheme for
attributes and skills, as opposed to the percentile skills of P&P or
Runequest and the (effectively) percentile attributes of P&P.

The benefits are primarily streamlined math and easing of the learning

Going with my otherwise proposed dicing (2d6+3 for low, 3d6+2 for medium,
2d6+8 for high), or "classic" (2d10), add racial/sexual modifiers and divide
by 5, round up.
   1-5  = 1
   6-10 = 2
  11-15 = 3
  16-20 = 4
  21=25 = 5

When multipliers are assigned (whole number only), you get the maximums.
Thus, a native of 3 assigned a x3 has a maximum of 9.

This would require an overall recalc of all funtions, since the key
attributes are now 1/5th the previous.

So, what have we gained?

1) The step down brings numbers into the "fast math" range.  working with
multiples of single digits is quicker for Joe Average than divisions of
multiple digits.

2) Any increase is VERY meaningful, whereas a single point before have very
little impact for all the math you had to do in recalculating.


1) We have to refigure EVERY formula.  Some may need to be tweaked (Anything
that is Attribute x2 would reformulate to Attribute x0.4, tweak to
Attribute/2).  Skill maximums will do well ((I+W)/10 now becomes (I+W)/2 --
Bonus! A simple average!)

2) Experience gains in order to increate attributes will go up a quanta (250
points per combat attribute, 125 points per magic attribute).  This may be a

Now, Hit points and damage can remain the same, unless you want to run
damage rolls through the /5 conversion as well (which would produce some
interesting results...anything that does at least 1 point of "unconverted"
damage goes from being a pittence to signifiant hits. "Scratches" would be
getting a 0 or less damage result, obviously.

I do think reducing the fine numbers to more granular ones does have a
benefit, as long as the overall "flavor" of their effect is maintained.
While not as "impressive" on a sheet, Joe the Barbarian with his mighty 15 S
is still 5x the bad ass of Joe Normal with his 3, just as the guy with 11 is
not as buff as the guy with 55. It certainly is visual...you see some sheet
with double-digit stats and you know it's trouble.

Burton Choinski
Principal Software Engineer, Quality Engineering
email: burton.choinski at matrixone.com

phone: 978-589-4089
fax:      978-589-5903

MatrixOne, Inc.
210 Littleton Rd.
Westford, Ma 01886

The First in Intelligent Collaborative Commerce

-----Original Message-----
From: Albert Sales [mailto:drite_mi at YAHOO.COM]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: Attribute Gen proposal for v2

I, personally, LOVE the fractionals, and have no trouble with them. The
charts make it hard to see where there is a problem. If  fractionals are to
be removed, I recommend doing so by doubling (3-8 in standard multipliers),
and doubling divisors and algebraics (the bonus table has a top range of:
Some of digits to  (Bonus+2) x 5, use x 10 instead). This would still allow
the range, and would get rid of the fractions. However, creatures would have
their average stats doubled, as well. It is a thought.

Sylverrs_ dragon <abnaric at HOTMAIL.COM> wrote:

My thought would be to add something like the proposed system as an optional
rule. I also think revising the generation system by eliminating fractional
multipliers might be a good idea. They were included originally to allow the
player more flexibility. Didn't think the math involved would be a problem
but it was.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.powersandperils.org/pipermail/pnp/attachments/20040627/23d8e781/attachment.html>

More information about the pnp mailing list