PROPOSAL: Make stats less static

[Maso]

I would like a guaranteed stat bump of "1", after playing for 1 IC year, for all characters.   Roleplay not required.

After you log into your character, and they have aged 1 year, , and you get the message, 'Your birthday has passed', you have the opportunity to select a single stat to bump, and it will be bumped by 1 level.  This doesn't necessarily move it from 'poor' to 'below average', but moves it from '7 -> 8' on your hidden character sheet.

It is only available once.

Pssssssssh. Don't ask you don't get! Aim higher! I want a stat bump of 1 EVERY IC YEAR. Age related changes still apply, so at some point you would be fighting against that.

[Alesan]

I would like a guaranteed stat bump of "1", after playing for 1 IC year, for all characters.   Roleplay not required.

After you log into your character, and they have aged 1 year, , and you get the message, 'Your birthday has passed', you have the opportunity to select a single stat to bump, and it will be bumped by 1 level.  This doesn't necessarily move it from 'poor' to 'below average', but moves it from '7 -> 8' on your hidden character sheet.

It is only available once.

Pssssssssh. Don't ask you don't get! Aim higher! I want a stat bump of 1 EVERY IC YEAR. Age related changes still apply, so at some point you would be fighting against that.

I feel like Mansa's idea is more likely to gain staff approval, even if that chance is still almost zero.

[MeTekillot]

I constantly argue for a system of coded bonuses and penalties that players can opt into to reinforce the theme.

What if players could choose to take quirks for their character, up to a cap of 3 4 or 5, and every one or two IC years, they receive that many points to apply to their stats for bonuses?

Examples (non exhaustive):
Virulent racist - choose one race that your character absolutely detests. When in the presence of this race, your character receives penalties of some kind unless they perform a hostile action against them.
Terrified of Templars - your character receives a delay (similar to the delays incurred by skills) when addressed by a Templar for the first time in a day (every RL hour).
Terrified of magick - as above, but they receive this delay once every ten RL minutes when they witness Elementalist or non-Templar magick.
Vice - your character is dependent on a particular vice. Whoring, spicing, alcohol, gambling, etc. Not to the degree of an actual addiction a la spice, but they must participate in this activity regularly or take penalties to skills or stats.

At the same time that a characterer would receive the stat allocation points as a result of these traits, allow the player instead to spend a stat allocation point to remove or add a quirk.

To qualify to receive the points, you must have 6 hours played since your last dispensation of points. You cannot accrue more points than you have quirks.

[wizturbo]

Not a fan of giving a stat boost without it costing something.  Not a fan of letting people EVER get to "max strength" short of getting lucky at character generation.  If you let up on those things, you take out the exceptional nature of having good stats.  It just means given enough time, ALL warriors will have max strength...  that's fine for some folks, but I'd rather have the diversity of haves and have nots that distinguishes Arm from other experiences.  Also has some game balance considerations if everyone can max out combat stats.

[Narf]

I'm gonna concur with the above poster, I'd be much more okay with stat boosts if they costed something.

[lostinspace]

I am generally against stat increases, I am however fine with stat redistribution.

If you really want that +1 strength, pick another stat to -1.

[pilgrim]

I don't think it would take too much code work to make stats draw from a set potential pool of points rather than a randomized one, or that it adds that much to the game to have "loser characters" who generally suck and "winner characters" who are great at everything. If anything, this design leads to a twinky attitude rather than a roleplaying attitude -- to be concerned with things like re-rolls and potentially generating throwaways until you get a character with good stats. When I roll a character it's because I have a concept in mind that I want to play and I plan my stats to support that concept, with according highs and lows. Of course it's realistic to have losers and winners, but we have a whole game world full of NPCs and VNPCs to provide that level of realism.

And sure, it doesn't really matter in terms of the way I play out a concept whether or not my character rolls good stats or not. Stats are a mechanical reality, however, and I don't think they should exist in such a way that: 1. detracts from the experience of players who prefer to focus on story, and - 2. encourages a form of twinking for people who are content enough to mow through throwaways.

Water finds a crack. Similarly, I don't think that time-gating stat progression is a great idea. With skill progression being a part of the game loop, adding stat progression could cause balance issues that don't need to exist. Longer-lived characters already have plenty of advantages over newbies. I prefer the idea of a set pool of points, again, and being eventually able to shift points from one stat to another in order to support the course of potential character developments.

[creeper386]

My personal opinion is having some sort of, everyone's pretty much average that comes from a pool of points ... really would make Arm a completely different game.

But then again almost all my characters already are pretty average so perhaps that's already kind of the norm.

[MeTekillot]

if you all insist that you must incur some sort of penalty in order to raise your current stats, at least make it a two-for-one. 2 points to one stat for every one you lose in another.

all of your physical stats already go into freefall if as your character gets older.

[Quell]

if you all insist that you must incur some sort of penalty in order to raise your current stats, at least make it a two-for-one. 2 points to one stat for every one you lose in another.

all of your physical stats already go into freefall if as your character gets older.

Oorrrrrrr, good ol' one for two. Lower two stats 1, raise one by 1.

[Lotion]

I would like a guaranteed stat bump of "1", after playing for 1 IC year, for all characters.   Roleplay not required.

After you log into your character, and they have aged 1 year, , and you get the message, 'Your birthday has passed', you have the opportunity to select a single stat to bump, and it will be bumped by 1 level.  This doesn't necessarily move it from 'poor' to 'below average', but moves it from '7 -> 8' on your hidden character sheet.

It is only available once.
what about after every 2^n years?

1,2,4,8,16, etc

[Greve]

I don't think it would take too much code work to make stats draw from a set potential pool of points rather than a randomized one, or that it adds that much to the game to have "loser characters" who generally suck and "winner characters" who are great at everything. If anything, this design leads to a twinky attitude rather than a roleplaying attitude -- to be concerned with things like re-rolls and potentially generating throwaways until you get a character with good stats. When I roll a character it's because I have a concept in mind that I want to play and I plan my stats to support that concept, with according highs and lows. Of course it's realistic to have losers and winners, but we have a whole game world full of NPCs and VNPCs to provide that level of realism.

And sure, it doesn't really matter in terms of the way I play out a concept whether or not my character rolls good stats or not. Stats are a mechanical reality, however, and I don't think they should exist in such a way that: 1. detracts from the experience of players who prefer to focus on story, and - 2. encourages a form of twinking for people who are content enough to mow through throwaways.

That's what I've always wanted. It really bothers me that you could have the same character roll VG/A/P/G or AI/EG/VG/EX depending purely on luck. Stats have such a gigantic impact on coded events that this level of randomness feels broken. While it should of course be said that it's nearly impossible to roll such awful stats that any concept is unplayable, assuming you at least prioritize properly, your stats absolutely can make the difference between a character that isn't codedly impressive in any way and one that stands out as incredibly powerful and succesful.

It's a stat system that has its roots in D&D. Back before all those new editions, stats in D&D were a total crapshoot, just like here. However, that game system offered a variety of ways to compensate for it. Magic items, freely available buff spells, multi-classing into something that better suits your stats, and - most importantly - a dungeon master who could accommodate the characters in their game and throw a bone or an extra challenge at players who rolled terrible or godly stats. We have none of those things on Armageddon. If you roll bad stats, your character is codedly crap forever. If you rolled awesome stats, your character is premium-mode at no cost or disadvantage. There's simply nothing that compensates for it. Rolling godlike stats is like paying for perks in a pay-to-win freemium game.

I've floated the idea before of rolling stats from a static pool. There didn't seem to be much support for it. Apparently, lots of players think it's awesome that a character can be crap or godly depending on blind luck. I've never really understood why, but that's the way it is. It's like if the game flipped a coin at creation to determine whether your skills cap at journeyman, advanced or master. Stats really can have that much of an impact in some cases.

If it was up to me, I would make it so that there's a static pool of stats and then a roll to determine the distribution. That leaves ample room for differences between characters. One guy might get VG/G/G/VG and another EX/A/P/EG. If you don't roll a really high stat, at least your other ones will be decent. If you do roll high in some, the others will be low. There would still be optimal outcomes, but they would come with disadvantages. There would be no rolls that are just straight shit for no reason. You know, the way literally all other forms of gaming have worked post-1990s, including the ones upon whose original systems Armageddon was based.

If you bring this up, however, you get accused of being a powergamer and not caring enough about roleplay, as if you could only care about one thing or the other. Dunno about anyone else, but I would focus less on code if there weren't these broken systems that get in the way. Armageddon doesn't turn into a MUSH if some of its more archaic and flawed systems are overhauled, same way it didn't when stat prioritization was implemented, or visible skill levels, even if people insisted at the time that it would. It's just silly. The less people have to worry about getting screwed over unfairly by the code, the more they'll focus on roleplay. Not the other way around. If people care too much about stats, it's because the stat system compels them to do so. The solution is very obvious.

Water finds a crack. Similarly, I don't think that time-gating stat progression is a great idea. With skill progression being a part of the game loop, adding stat progression could cause balance issues that don't need to exist. Longer-lived characters already have plenty of advantages over newbies. I prefer the idea of a set pool of points, again, and being eventually able to shift points from one stat to another in order to support the course of potential character developments.

Also very true. Stat progression would be a weak band-aid fix that solves basically nothing and adds an unsightly element to the already cumbersome progression systems of this game. More importantly, it would probably help characters with already great stats more than it helps those without. The way stats work, each point is worth more the more you already had, whereas an extra point at average might legitimately do nothing at all. I actually prefer that stats stay the way they are forever, just to keep it from being yet another feature to be gamed, but that they start out much more fair and without the need to grimace in anticipation when you first check them.

[Wday]

I would be happy if we could just do our bio after you get in game.  This way if I wrote the Hulk and he came out with POOR strength. I could Bio how on one summer day a elven person stabbed me in the back. Doing muscle damage causing me a great weakness.

[MeTekillot]

if you all insist that you must incur some sort of penalty in order to raise your current stats, at least make it a two-for-one. 2 points to one stat for every one you lose in another.

all of your physical stats already go into freefall if as your character gets older.

Oorrrrrrr, good ol' one for two. Lower two stats 1, raise one by 1.

Why? That sounds terrible and frustrating.

[Jarvis]

Honestly just have it so stats are rolled before putting up your descriptions. Its really weird to roll up Duncan the 8-packed DESTROYER of worlds and consumer of protein to have mediocre strength and crazy wisdom. Or even if all stats come up average, let me switch to the concept so I can make a captivating average guy.

I'd ask to assign stats but I know that to do that, the system would have to be unobfuscated, but some sort of solution so my anorexic human doesn't end up winning the Arnold Sport's festival three consecutive years.

[Jihelu]

Honestly just have it so stats are rolled before putting up your descriptions. Its really weird to roll up Duncan the 8-packed DESTROYER of worlds and consumer of protein to have mediocre strength and crazy wisdom. Or even if all stats come up average, let me switch to the concept so I can make a captivating average guy.

I'd ask to assign stats but I know that to do that, the system would have to be obfuscated, but some sort of solution so my anorexic human doesn't end up winning the Arnold Sport's festival three consecutive years.

I support this message

[spicemustflow]

Honestly just have it so stats are rolled before putting up your descriptions. Its really weird to roll up Duncan the 8-packed DESTROYER of worlds and consumer of protein to have mediocre strength and crazy wisdom. Or even if all stats come up average, let me switch to the concept so I can make a captivating average guy.

I'd ask to assign stats but I know that to do that, the system would have to be obfuscated, but some sort of solution so my anorexic human doesn't end up winning the Arnold Sport's festival three consecutive years.

I support this message

huge +1

[Greve]

I would be happy if we could just do our bio after you get in game.  This way if I wrote the Hulk and he came out with POOR strength. I could Bio how on one summer day a elven person stabbed me in the back. Doing muscle damage causing me a great weakness.

Honestly just have it so stats are rolled before putting up your descriptions. Its really weird to roll up Duncan the 8-packed DESTROYER of worlds and consumer of protein to have mediocre strength and crazy wisdom.

That's an imaginary issue. It's not a thing that happens unless for some reason you prioritize your stats in the opposite order from what you wanted. Your highest roll goes in your first priority, second highest in your second, etc. Things like age and class can affect the final result and could potentially make your 2nd priority be marginally higher than your 1st, but there's no such thing as what's described in these quotes unless you actively chose the options that would make that happen. If not, it's legitimately impossible. It's pure fiction and I don't understand why that gets +1'd. People make these scenarios up in their minds that literally cannot happen and then suggest changes based on it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Jihelu]

I would be happy if we could just do our bio after you get in game.  This way if I wrote the Hulk and he came out with POOR strength. I could Bio how on one summer day a elven person stabbed me in the back. Doing muscle damage causing me a great weakness.

Honestly just have it so stats are rolled before putting up your descriptions. Its really weird to roll up Duncan the 8-packed DESTROYER of worlds and consumer of protein to have mediocre strength and crazy wisdom.

That's an imaginary issue. It's not a thing that happens unless for some reason you prioritize your stats in the opposite order from what you wanted. Your highest roll goes in your first priority, second highest in your second, etc. Things like age and class can affect the final result and could potentially make your 2nd priority be marginally higher than your 1st, but there's no such thing as what's described in these quotes unless you actively chose the options that would make that happen. If not, it's legitimately impossible. It's pure fiction and I don't understand why that gets +1'd. People make these scenarios up in their minds that literally cannot happen and then suggest changes based on it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I guess I've had an imaginary issue then?
I've prioritized rolls and have gotten dog shit rolls. If I prioritize strength, roll up my hulking muscle man, and I get an average roll, I wouldn't have written my character to be hulking muscle man.

[triste]

Were you rolling characters that were also teenagers, or characters in their mid twenties or older?

We all know stats are age affected on Armageddon because your character's stats change right before your eyes as they age, this is not guesswork.

Look at this bullshit chart* that claims to be backed by science. Teenagers have higher peak testosterone but lower minimum testosterone. Minimum testosterone is highest around age 25. It takes a few years to build muscle mass. QED a human is likely to be at their physically strongest around age 25 and after, just like for humans on Armageddon.

_{^{* This chart is based on sources I haven't deeply investigated and pertains to men. Not excluding ladies, anyone who has had the misfortune of meeting me knows I have a lot of muscle for having XX chromosomes, and I know ciswomen who are ripped.}}

[Greve]

I guess I've had an imaginary issue then?
I've prioritized rolls and have gotten dog shit rolls. If I prioritize strength, roll up my hulking muscle man, and I get an average roll, I wouldn't have written my character to be hulking muscle man.

Unless you picked something really odd like a minimum age character with strength prioritized, or extremely old with agility, the odds of getting anything less than 'good' in your first priority are so microscopic that it's not worth thinking about. I don't believe I've ever seen anything less than very good in my 1st priority in the like sixteen years since stat prioritization was implemented, but I imagine it would be possible if you picked some really absurd class/age/prio combinations.

The posts I quoted claimed to be getting poor strength when prioritizing it, or medium strength and "crazy wisdom." I maintain that this is literally impossible. The mechanics for that to happen straight-up do not exist, unless that dude's "Hulk with poor strength" was like 70 years old. The  code does not permit for someone who prioritized strength 1st to roll mediocre strength and crazy high wisdom unless it's a max-age meme PC. It can't happen under normal circumstances.

You can roll pretty crappy overall stats, like VG/AA/P/A or something, but you cannot roll poor in your first priority without intentionally creating an absurdly configured character.

[eagle]

I'm just going to quickly add a plus one to the idea of rolling before the main description. My third character in, and somehow I still missed the face that you -can- reroll, so am now stuck with what would not have been a roll I settled for. Sure, I'm fairly new to arm but I'm not new to muds and I scoured to help files a bit more on each new character. Maybe I missed them because overall I'm tired of grindy stat based rp's, but I do feel that it should be more of an active part in the creation.

[triste]

Prepare for tons of people suddenly rolling one toothed dwarves when they know their stats are bad who have the sudden biography of "has always wondered what it's like to swim in the silt sea."

Prepare for people suddenly hitting "connection issues" or "bugs" during character generation to try and get free rerolls.

If you put stats before roleplay, the changes in behavior that follow are obvious.

[triste]

Also the obsession with physical appearance matching stats is funny AF as someone who has been friends with professional MMA fighters and professional body builders. I have to give y'all lads a rude awakening here: show muscle ≠ ability to fight or lift or what have you.

[Jarvis]

Also the obsession with physical appearance matching stats is funny AF as someone who has been friends with professional MMA fighters and professional body builders. I have to give y'all lads a rude awakening here: show muscle ≠ ability to fight or lift or what have you.

Its less about big muscles big strong man and the actual reasoning behind it and more the discrepancy in between the concept I wan't to play and am applying to play and what the rolls force me to play instead. Even if you prioritize everything fine sometimes you just get weird rolls, which I could have made work in an interesting fashion had I written my description and background after.

Yeah you can be a nearly obese man who can just bench a beetle, or a skinny elf that's emaciated and has the hand-eye coordination of a half-giant who had a stroke, but wouldn't it have been more fun if you could have that factor to take into account beforehand so you could design a concept to fit it? Instead of having to bastardize the character you rolled to fit the circumstances.