Armageddon General Discussion Board

This would be in response to Myrdryn's suggestion in this thread: http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,37701.25.html

The way I believe this would work would be that you would see your stat roll before you submit your new character to be approved for play. Which means it would be visible to you before you create your background, sdesc, ldesc, etc.  I am going out on a limb here in saying I believe you would still get the 'reroll' and nifty 'reroll undo' function before submitting your application, giving you two chances at the stats you want.

If I am wrong in the way I have explained this Mryd, than just delete this post please.

Gods, no.  It will encourage more metagaming and will encourage people to change the concept to fit the stats.  People in real life think they're good at somethings when they are not (if you don't believe me, watch American Idol's audition episodes), and they pick their careers based on that... not on reality.  If you could see reality and then pick the skills your character would study, you're bypassing that.

Again, dear gods, no.

For sake of continuity, what I posted in the other thread:

Quote from: Cutthroat on January 26, 2010, 11:08:14 PM

Quote from: Myrdryn on January 26, 2010, 10:51:51 PM
What if stats were generated during character generation?  That would remove the problem of having stats that didn't fit a character concept.

SoI currently does this with its new character generation process, actually. There, the roll stays the same with the chosen role and area even if you try to make a new character before completing the app process. I imagine that a roll could be saved for each attempt for every guild, so if I make an assassin with str/end/agi/wis then see my stats and quit out before I write my description, if I try to make another assassin with str/end/agi/wis I'll just get the same roll back.

It's a weird idea that we'll need to get used to, but I think given proper implementation with failsafes that prevent metagaming (writing background then picking stats then writing description, saving the roll that we get so that it's there for the next character creation attempt, etc.) that the idea can work really well.

I think it's a great idea.

The ONLY way this is salvageable is if you only write description after seeing your stats and getting your rerolls.  If you get to write background, as stated before, I am 100% against this.

Quote from: spawnloser on January 29, 2010, 04:05:30 PM
The ONLY way this is salvageable is if you only write description after seeing your stats and getting your rerolls.  If you get to write background, as stated before, I am 100% against this.

I would have to ask for the horrid auto-formatting feature be turned off for a background then if you had to write it only once before finishing CG. They way things are now I always have to finish off CG completely and then go back and use .c and redo my background to keep the formatting I had before (so that it has easier to read separate paragraphs) and do the same for description before I submit anything.

I'd be fine with this but only so long as the only thing that comes after stat generation is description writing. Like someone else said, background should come before stats are generated.  And, not sure if this was already part of it but, the stats generated are saved and held in the system for the character. That way, one cannot look at the stats generated, then disconnect, log back in and start over to have another set of stats generated.

I don't think changing when they are generated is really necessary though with the current way things are done regarding stats now. I don't really think it would harm anything if done correctly either.

You have average, poor, below average, average and the reroll is worse.  Just restating the point -- that would be a discouragement to continuing the process.

Stats are a very D&Dish, H&S thing to worry about anyway.  I'm leaning towards the idea of giving everyone standardized stats, perhaps selected from a set of templates.  That way, you can match you concept with an appropriate range of stats. There could a 20% chance of a character being somewhat weaker than average, a 20% chance of a character being somewhat better than average, a 5% chance of being extraordinary, and everyone else just gets the standard.

a: Typical -- Of average ability for his race and class
b: Bruiser -- Very strong but not very bright.
c: Clever -- Fast and smart.
d: Intellectual -- Quite smart, but not very athletic
et cetra

Or, one's selection of classes, race, and starting location could determine stats.  

Another option we could do is a Q&A. Based on how you anser the questions, your stats would be assigned. An imm could then look over your answers and background to ensure the answers somewhat match your background. An online game called Gang Wars used this method to decide what type of gang leader you were. It could also be used to flesh your character out more.

Was your character beat up a lot during his life? Yes/No
Was your character depressed excessively growing up? Yes/No
When was your character abandoned, or when did you leave on your own? Pre-teens, early teens, late teens, early twenties?
Is your character a follower or a leader? Yes/No
Is your character stubborn? Yes/No
Was your character's parent(s) mercenaries, merchants, pick pockets, militia, or handyman?
Etc...

Quote from: Delstro on January 30, 2010, 07:00:59 PM
Another option we could do is a Q&A. Based on how you anser the questions, your stats would be assigned. An imm could then look over your answers and background to ensure the answers somewhat match your background. An online game called Gang Wars used this method to decide what type of gang leader you were. It could also be used to flesh your character out more.

Was your character beat up a lot during his life? Yes/No
Was your character depressed excessively growing up? Yes/No
When was your character abandoned, or when did you leave on your own? Pre-teens, early teens, late teens, early twenties?
Is your character a follower or a leader? Yes/No
Is your character stubborn? Yes/No
Was your character's parent(s) mercenaries, merchants, pick pockets, militia, or handyman?
Etc...

Even though I think it would create more burden and unnecessary work on staff, I like the basic idea you have.

Quote from: Delstro on January 30, 2010, 07:00:59 PM
Another option we could do is a Q&A. Based on how you anser the questions, your stats would be assigned. An imm could then look over your answers and background to ensure the answers somewhat match your background. An online game called Gang Wars used this method to decide what type of gang leader you were. It could also be used to flesh your character out more.

Was your character beat up a lot during his life? Yes/No
Was your character depressed excessively growing up? Yes/No
When was your character abandoned, or when did you leave on your own? Pre-teens, early teens, late teens, early twenties?
Is your character a follower or a leader? Yes/No
Is your character stubborn? Yes/No
Was your character's parent(s) mercenaries, merchants, pick pockets, militia, or handyman?
Etc...

Naw.  There's a result a player is actually looking for and he needs to guess which option to take on a personality quiz.  Those things end up with cheat sheets, just by their nature, and that's a behavior Arm should be discouraging. Besides that, it's 20 extra steps in the process. It's better to clearly lay out potential results (stat ordering or my templates above) or allow direct point-buying.

I'm all for standardized stats.

Yes, I'm aware it's unrealistic, as people are not created equal, but you know what else is unrealistic? People walking out the gates and getting eaten - intentionally - by tarantulas because they didn't roll exceptional on their strength.

Have enough options to fit a vast majority of concepts and it'll be just fine.
Just a handful of standardized stats:

Select statistical makeup:
1 - Lean (above average strength/agility, average everything else)
2 - Muscular (high strength, above average endurance, below average agility/wisdom)
3 - Slender (below average strength, high agility, average everything else)
4 - Scrappy (average strength, above average agility, high endurance, poor wisdom)
5 - Athletic (above average strength/endurance, average agility/wisdom)
6 - Ripped (very high strength, poor agility, average endurance/wisdom)
7 - Scholarly (below average strength/endurance, average agility, high wisdom)
8 - Nomad (average strength, above average agility/endurance, average wisdom)
9 - Overweight (above average strength, below average endurance, below average agility, average wisdom)
10 - Obese (average strength, below average endurance, poor agility, average wisdom)
(I'm aware these aren't perfectly balanced but they're not necessarily supposed to be, and obviously some selections will be more popular than others)

And then once in awhile, maybe randomized to 5% of characters or by special app, you'd get something unusual, like:
21 - Strongman (very high strength, high endurance, poor agility, average wisdom)
OR
22 - Prodigy (high strength, high agility, below average endurance, high wisdom)
OR
23 - Elegant (average strength, very high agility, above average endurance, average wisdom)
OR
24 - Decrepit (poor strength, poor agility, below average endurance, absolutely incredible wisdom)
et cetera...



And yes, then, AFTER you pick this, you can do your description. It might change your initial concept, but generally a concept, to me, is a personality moreso than his physical build - and really, under this system, you should ALWAYS be able to select an acceptable build for your concept. It's just once in great while you'll have an option to be on the better end of the gene pool. And it'll be rare enough that people won't suicide over it (or if they do, it'll be obvious as they suicide 20 characters in a row to try and get their coveted Strongman option).

EDITed for clarity.

Quote from: Conspiracy Theory on January 31, 2010, 06:23:03 PM
I'm all for standardized stats.

Yes, I'm aware it's unrealistic, as people are not created equal, but you know what else is unrealistic? People walking out the gates and getting eaten by tarantulas because they didn't roll exceptional on their strength.

Those aren't your normal, every day tarantulas. And if you're walking out with 0hours, it doesn't matter if you have AI strength and agility. That tarantula is going to eat you.

The point went whoosh - right past your head, brother.

The hypothetical player intentionally walked out and died because they didn't roll well, which people have confessed to on these boards. It's not because they couldn't handle the tarantula, it's because they wanted to reroll and get better stats.

Quote from: Conspiracy Theory on January 31, 2010, 06:34:47 PM
The point went whoosh - right past your head, brother.

Nope. I didn't even read your post. Didn't even red past what I quoted for this one.


Oh, it seems your point wasn't clearly put forth. Not my fault.


edit: Went back and read your posts. Interesing idea. Don't know if I like it though.

this thread just got weird