tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038823840472916624.post4767969173933162146..comments2024-03-28T04:29:32.814-04:00Comments on The Lands of Ara: A Non-Numerical Approach To D&D AttributesCarter Soleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01286436801953647693noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038823840472916624.post-20937570553449509242009-11-16T22:28:57.786-05:002009-11-16T22:28:57.786-05:00Wow, that looks good, thanks for the link!Wow, that looks good, thanks for the link!Carter Soleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01286436801953647693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038823840472916624.post-26094694373316054992009-11-16T07:41:19.131-05:002009-11-16T07:41:19.131-05:00I roll attributes but then convert them to names f...I roll attributes but then convert them to names for bonuses or penalties: mighty/feeble, bright/dim, insightful/foolish, skillful/clumsy, tough/frail, and inspirational/laughable. There's no special descriptor for the normal range, and we just say "exceptionally mighty" or "super-dim" for two standard deviations from the norm.<br /><br />I like it because it's a great way to introduce the character when I populate the roster at the start of the session - "Lotur the Scurrilous Cur is mighty, foolish, and dim" - and I'm much happier during combat having people remind me that they're mighty than that they get a +1 to hit.<br /><br />Here's the guidelines I use:<br />https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AX7IQrnAKr7rZGhkcWdjNHZfNTlkNHh0NGJkMg&hl=en <br /><br />- TavisAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038823840472916624.post-65830441864710744132009-11-16T01:56:21.394-05:002009-11-16T01:56:21.394-05:00Yes, it seems like this approach would make things...Yes, it seems like this approach would make things more difficult to adjudicate until you got used to it. I am fascinated by the qualitative attribute concept and consider it great food for thought but will likely stick to old fashioned rolled attributes for my upcoming Labyrinth Lord campaign.Carter Soleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01286436801953647693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038823840472916624.post-40087370457564624612009-11-15T21:10:29.131-05:002009-11-15T21:10:29.131-05:00I like the idea of non-numerical stats. I recall ...I like the idea of non-numerical stats. I recall playing around with this 15 years ago.<br /><br />The only challenge was to come up with descriptors that were suitably evocative, but also seemed progressive. For example, strong (13-15), very strong (16-17), mighty (18), hurculean (19+). Easy for strength perhaps. But try to create textual descriptions for the other 5 stats, both high and low ranges, and have the text as an accurate descriptor of the ranges. I finally abandoned the attempt.<br /><br />You could have only 3 descriptions for each stat (for strength, weak, average, strong) but it just doesn't evoke the same image.Aaron E. Steelehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07789462075611254929noreply@blogger.com