About APP

[Lloyd Dupont]

I might be missing something.. but APP doesn't seem very useful...

One way it could shine, in theory, with some mechanic is using general conflict rule. Where APP could be used, effectively, as your social HP, and Persuade would be your weapon skills...

But, I tried a few times, it didn't feel like it was working well... The only time it worked well, I think, was during a trial, to be convincing enough.

I have an idea... But I think it might be gamey... (other idea welcome, in fact requested! ) 

Fast Talk could work like spell casting. Failure does nothing. Success would enable an APP vs INT save on the resistance table.
Same Intimidate could led to a STR vs STR save (or could be APP vs INT in a social context)

What do you think? any other idea?

Edited June 1, 2020 by Lloyd Dupont

[hix]

Some games in the mythras family use your characteristic as a pool of HP. Contestants must then make opposed rolls to deplete the others' pool. Or something like that, it's interesting.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I might be missing something.. but APP doesn't seem very useful...

It isn't. 

2 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

What do you think? any other idea?

A few.

First off it depends on how much you want the stat to impact roleplaying. I mention this becase some gamers feel that people should "just "roleplay" that stuff, and won't welcome game mechanics that affect the roleplaying. I disagree figuring that we don't "just roleplay" the fighting, poisoning, skill use or other aspects of the game. 

Assuming that you don't mind that, here are some ideas:

1) You could just get rid of APP. It's not like it would change much. The everybody just decribes what thier character looks like and try to take that into account. 

2) The GM could make "reaction rolls" (APPx5) to see what sort of impression the PCs make on the NPCs, The multiplier could be adjusted based upon how the characters act and thier situation. This reaction roll could apply modifiers to rolls to get the NPCs to do something. 

 

[g33k]

APP is... odd.

Having looked at various before/after images, it doesn't seem to me to be a "basic" stat, the way CON or STR or DEX is.  You can change your APP by a /LOT/ with some makeup & other gear, and a short bit of time.  q.v. the Wayans in White Chicks, for example.

Honestly, it seems more like a "Feat" or an "Advantage," or something from that family of game-mechanics, than a basic characteristic.

 

[olskool]

4 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

I might be missing something.. but APP doesn't seem very useful...

One way it could shine, in theory, with some mechanic is using general conflict rule. Where APP could be used, effectively, as your social HP, and Persuade would be your weapon skills...

But, I tried a few times, it didn't feel like it was working well... The only time it worked well, I think, was during a trial, to be convincing enough.

I have an idea... But I think it might be gamey... (other idea welcome, in fact requested! ) 

Fast Talk could work like spell casting. Failure does nothing. Success would enable an APP vs INT save on the resistance table.
Same Intimidate could led to a STR vs STR save (or could be APP vs INT in a social context)

What do you think? any other idea?

Just change it back to Charisma.  Charisma is a measure of one's ability to influence others [for good or bad] and doesn't rely solely on "looks."  One would be hard-pressed to argue that Winston Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt, or Adolph Hitler were very good looking, BUT YET, they got people to do the things they wanted them to do.   I always use Charisma for just this reason.

 

Edited June 1, 2020 by olskool
spelling

[Chaot]

52 minutes ago, olskool said:

Just change it back to Charisma.  Charisma is a measure of one's ability to influence others [for good or bad] and doesn't rely solely on "looks."  One would be hard-pressed to argue that Winston Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt, or Adolph Hitler were very good looking, BUT YET, they got people to do the things they wanted them to do.   I always use Charisma for just this reason.

 

This is what I do exactly. The Stat is Charisma and the x5% roll is Influence.

Here's the thing, appearance by its nature is fluid. If I spend a fortune on my wardrobe and grooming I will have a higher rating on appearance if I don't. It is also subjective. So I have a highly rated appearance but in what genre? Am I goth, preppy, fashionista, coffee-chic, etc?

It fits terribly with the other stats. As soon as you change App to Cha the stats break down to Strength, Dexterity, Constitution as physical and Intelligence, Power and Charisma as mental. Size is that weirdo stat in the middle that separates them. 

5 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

Fast Talk could work like spell casting. Failure does nothing. Success would enable an APP vs INT save on the resistance table.
Same Intimidate could led to a STR vs STR save (or could be APP vs INT in a social context)

If you go this route I would use Cha vs Int for both with the option of using Str vs Int for certain situations. I don't have to be strong to be intimidation.

[Lloyd Dupont]

Thanks all.

Alright APP or CHA is indeed not that useful... I will think about ditching it.... or, alternatively, of simple way to vary it. I.e. bloody dirty adventurer, will incur a APP/CHA penalty that would imper all their persuasion roll... and the reverse could be true with some preparation!
Although, I just realise the character does the fast talk roll, while the opponent does the resistance roll, so it's not too gamey. And I am starting to like this idea more. 

Anyway, at that stage.. I have to let my unconscious process that idea for a while.. after a lifetime of using CHA as a characteristic I have a hard time letting go, need some perspective...

 

Hix, did you mean, some Mythras game do just as I suggested in the second line of this thread? How clever of them!  

Edited June 1, 2020 by Lloyd Dupont

[hix]

1 hour ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

some Mythras game do

characteristics used as opposed pools with successful opposed rolls doing damage to the pool. So pretty close.

[Guest Vile Traveller]

I think APP is an artefact of an era when many systems were trying for maximum "realism", and physical appearance may have been seen as more definable than charisma. I remember splitting SIZ into SIZ and WGT (weight) at the time, too.

There is an argument to be made that charisma is already represented by Oratory or other communication skills, which can be slightly improved by having a high APP (making a good first impression). I think either characteristic works fine, but I'm inclined to stick with APP in BRP-derived games just because it's one of the features that sets it apart from many other systems.

One of the most important features of characteristics, and one which doesn't get much attention, is that they define a mental image of a character, and you could say that APP does this better than CHA. Adding descriptions to a character sheet is all well and good, but if characteristics can do that job, too, they are doing a better job of pulling their weight.

I do think there is a fundamental difference between role-playing physical and social skills, though. We can't role-play piloting an aircraft or fighting a dragon at the table unless the referee knows quite a bit about flying or dragon slaying, but we can role-play two characters having a conversation because everyone is familiar with that (whether or not they are any good at it). I never let players just "roll for Oratory" without them having a good idea of what their character is going to say, same as I don't allow "Search" unless they tell me where they are looking and what they are looking for. I see skills as a resolution mechanism, but not a substitute for role-play.

[Lloyd Dupont]

Vile.. your argument edge me towards keeping APP after all...   Also.. I am not using point buy... so that relieve the pressure against APP. Point buy suffer from dump stats... (I roll normally and mercilessly and give them a +6 bonus at the end!)
Keeping APP, I think I will use the APP vs INT resistance roll after successful persuade/intimidate/fast talk... and also add some standard modifier to APP (say, grooming & nice clothes = +4, dirty bloody cloths = -4, for example)

As for roleplaying social skill... I take it easy... of course I will ask "what are you trying to say" but I am not demanding any kind of good performance from the players, just a good enough idea of what they say... After all, their character is a hero, most likely more cunning that the players, let them enjoy that!

Edited June 2, 2020 by Lloyd Dupont

[Guest Vile Traveller]

That makes me think .. the easy way to make sure players are smarter than their characters is to make INT the dump stat!  😆

[Lloyd Dupont]

Genius! 😅

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, olskool said:

Just change it back to Charisma.  Charisma is a measure of one's ability to influence others [for good or bad] and doesn't rely solely on "looks."  One would be hard-pressed to argue that Winston Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt, or Adolph Hitler were very good looking, BUT YET, they got people to do the things they wanted them to do.   I always use Charisma for just this reason.

 

Except that ib BRP there is no benefit to Charisma either. 

 

At least in games like GURPS and Bond APP and Charisma both had tangible benefits built into the game. In BRP it tends to come down to the GM, and most won't grant much solely to a high APP score.

Another option might be to go the old FASA Trek route. In that RPG combat skills got averaged with DEX. I could see averaging the social skills with the Charima roll (APPX5%) to get an effective skill score. That way the attribute would be useful, but the game mechanics could be easily worked out before hand. It essentially means adding half of APP to half of the social skill.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Atgxtg

[Atgxtg]

3 minutes ago, Vile Traveller said:

That makes me think .. the easy way to make sure players are smarter than their characters is to make INT the dump stat!  😆

That's why Pendragon ditched INT. That and the fact that it is rather difficult to play a character with an INT score that varies very much from your own. 

 

[Mugen]

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That's why Pendragon ditched INT. That and the fact that it is rather difficult to play a character with an INT score that varies very much from your own.

Plus, there's already a lot of mental attributes in Pendragon.

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Another option might be to go the old FASA Trek route. In that RPG combat skills got averaged with DEX. I could see averaging the social skills with the Charima roll (APPX5%) to get an effective skill score. That way the attribute would be useful, but the game mechanics could be easily worked out before hand. It essentially means adding half of APP to half of the social skill.

Which would be essentially the same as having skill bases equal to (characteristic x 2.5), and consider skills as bonus to those bases, using a scale with 0-50+ as a reference instead of 0-100+.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Mugen

[Questbird]

There is a bias towards beautiful people in the world. When I'm GMing BRP I usually write down my players' DEX ranks to make things a bit quicker in combat. However if I also wrote down their APP (or CHA) I could use it in subtle ways:

1. NPCs always first address the person with the highest APP, unless another character is clearly the leader (and even then..)

2. Whenever an NPC or monster has an otherwise equal chance of attacking one of two characters, they attack the one with the lowest APP (I normally determine this by random roll, but this could be intriguing). Unconscious bias at work!

 

BTW speaking of stats in combat I really liked the idea from the 'Stormbringer Action Economy' thread of declaring your intent in a combat round in ascending INT order, then acting in descending DEX order

Edited June 2, 2020 by Questbird
ascending not descending INT

[Kloster]

1 minute ago, Questbird said:

BTW speaking of stats in combat I really liked the idea from the 'Stormbringer Action Economy' thread of declaring your intent in a combat round in descending INT order, then acting in descending DEX order

In RQ3, we did the SOI by ascending INT order (sometimes ascending INT+DEX), then resolved by SR with descending DEX order within each SR.

[Kloster]

To answer original question, yes APP is not very useful. CHA has a much pronounced effect. I wished the new RQ and BRP using more (STAT+STAT) or (STAT times x) as a base for skill calculation. The skill categories are a step in the good direction, but we could for instance double them to increase the importance of STATS.

[Questbird]

50 minutes ago, Kloster said:

In RQ3, we did the SOI by ascending INT order (sometimes ascending INT+DEX), then resolved by SR with descending DEX order within each SR.

 

Yes I meant Ascending INT, Descending DEX. I've edited the post. 😀

[hix]

6 hours ago, Questbird said:

attack the one with the lowest APP

This is not a terrible idea, actually. Come to think of it, I can't recall ANY rpg system that had a method for determining aggro. I guess Shadowrun has "geek the mage", but I can't think of an actual mechanical system in any book that I've read. Maybe a wargame?

[Atgxtg]

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

Plus, there's already a lot of mental attributes in Pendragon.

Ttraits and passions, and "mental" but do not indicate intelligence per say. .Reckless isn't necessarily stupid, although it is certainly a contributing factor. 

9 hours ago, Mugen said:

Which would be essentially the same as having skill bases equal to (characteristic x 2.5), and consider skills as bonus to those bases, using a scale with 0-50+ as a reference instead of 0-100+.

Nearly, if skill bases were tied to one characteristic. I suppose setting most social skills to something like INT+APP x2% or so would work for games like CoC

 

[Atgxtg]

8 hours ago, Kloster said:

To answer original question, yes APP is not very useful. CHA has a much pronounced effect. I wished the new RQ and BRP using more (STAT+STAT) or (STAT times x) as a base for skill calculation. The skill categories are a step in the good direction, but we could for instance double them to increase the importance of STATS.

Back in RQ3 the skill categories modified improvement rolls, making them much more important than they are in other versions of RQ or BRP. A 12 APP meant a  +1% or 2% to improving various skills. THat added up over time.

[Kloster]

23 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Back in RQ3 the skill categories modified improvement rolls, making them much more important than they are in other versions of RQ or BRP. A 12 APP meant a  +1% or 2% to improving various skills. THat added up over time.

Yes very true. But this rule is consistent from RQ2 to RQG. As far as I remember, it is not present in any other BRP game. What makes RQ3 special on the matter is that every point of any STAT did matter, instead of having  increments in a table (RQ1, RQ2, RQG).

[seneschal]

Because no one else has yet said it:  "There's an APP fot that!"

[Lloyd Dupont]

5 minutes ago, seneschal said:

"There's an APP fot that!"

I need to remember and use that!