I love the elegance of combining AC and HP (and physical saving throws) into a single Fortitude score! I also think keeping six Attribute scores make sense. While sometimes it seems maybe like one too many, I feel like the three-score system of Cypher is too few.
Okay, you know I have Opinions about how race is handled in fantasy media. I think you're right to avoid the dodge of calling races "species," because the history of the two concepts has always been enmeshed, and if different kinds of humanoids can have children together, they pass the most basic and common of the twenty-some-odd definitions of species. Race is of course a made-up thing we came up with in the nineteenth century—so why not use it to distinguish made-up people?
I think where it gets problematic is when you attach essential differences in physical and intellectual abilities to race. To say *all* elves are smarter and quicker just because of their genetic inheritance seems deterministic, and any social scientist would say that differences within a particular group of people are greater than differences between groups (because our concept of the group is always an average or, let's be honest, a stereotype). Imposing penalties based on race seems equally if not more problematic.
So while I think it's helpful to allow players to bump ability scores, to give them more choices and derive enjoyment from crafting a character, why attach those bonuses to race? Could this be an early way for characters to start to specialize in your class-less system? "I'll be the kind that has trained to be extra good at Strength, Intelligence, and Charisma," for example?
Thanks. I think both Fortitude and Willpower will made for very interesting characteristics of the game. They are passive defenses initially, but for ongoing effects, they become active 'saving throws'. For example, if you're held by some spell and it looks like an enemy is about to end you, you'll definitely get to roll Willpower to see if you break the spell effects. We'll be talking about that probably in the next part.
Yeah, I kind of agree with you on the 'racial characteristics'. I'm thinking about just including positives instead of negatives. Like, does a dwarf have to suffer regarding charisma. It's quite stereotypical. I do like the idea of elves (or maybe we can come up with a different name, slightly different race) being a bit alien and aloof. You know, stuck up :-)
Size is an important characteristic, however. Hit points are based on medium-sized creatures (most humanoids). A halfling is considered 'small' (literally has less mass) so it takes a penalty to hp. Whereas an ogre is 'large' and has a +8 bonus to hp. We'll discuss that more as well when we talk about why hit points are the way they are. So, without worrying too much about the perfect balance, how do we make halflings playable. That's part of why they have so many other bonuses because of the penalty to strength and hp.
I love the elegance of combining AC and HP (and physical saving throws) into a single Fortitude score! I also think keeping six Attribute scores make sense. While sometimes it seems maybe like one too many, I feel like the three-score system of Cypher is too few.
Okay, you know I have Opinions about how race is handled in fantasy media. I think you're right to avoid the dodge of calling races "species," because the history of the two concepts has always been enmeshed, and if different kinds of humanoids can have children together, they pass the most basic and common of the twenty-some-odd definitions of species. Race is of course a made-up thing we came up with in the nineteenth century—so why not use it to distinguish made-up people?
I think where it gets problematic is when you attach essential differences in physical and intellectual abilities to race. To say *all* elves are smarter and quicker just because of their genetic inheritance seems deterministic, and any social scientist would say that differences within a particular group of people are greater than differences between groups (because our concept of the group is always an average or, let's be honest, a stereotype). Imposing penalties based on race seems equally if not more problematic.
So while I think it's helpful to allow players to bump ability scores, to give them more choices and derive enjoyment from crafting a character, why attach those bonuses to race? Could this be an early way for characters to start to specialize in your class-less system? "I'll be the kind that has trained to be extra good at Strength, Intelligence, and Charisma," for example?
Thanks. I think both Fortitude and Willpower will made for very interesting characteristics of the game. They are passive defenses initially, but for ongoing effects, they become active 'saving throws'. For example, if you're held by some spell and it looks like an enemy is about to end you, you'll definitely get to roll Willpower to see if you break the spell effects. We'll be talking about that probably in the next part.
Yeah, I kind of agree with you on the 'racial characteristics'. I'm thinking about just including positives instead of negatives. Like, does a dwarf have to suffer regarding charisma. It's quite stereotypical. I do like the idea of elves (or maybe we can come up with a different name, slightly different race) being a bit alien and aloof. You know, stuck up :-)
Size is an important characteristic, however. Hit points are based on medium-sized creatures (most humanoids). A halfling is considered 'small' (literally has less mass) so it takes a penalty to hp. Whereas an ogre is 'large' and has a +8 bonus to hp. We'll discuss that more as well when we talk about why hit points are the way they are. So, without worrying too much about the perfect balance, how do we make halflings playable. That's part of why they have so many other bonuses because of the penalty to strength and hp.