Don't Keep Score: Attributes as Adjectives

Over the past year I have been playing RPGs much more than I have been running them, but I recently returned to some adventure writing and it had me reflecting on how I like to use PC attribute scores in my games.

I rarely if ever call for attribute checks. While I see their uses, I find that once you start using them, any player who has spent significant time with d20 system derivatives will start framing what they can and can't attempt around their attribute scores. "Oh, I'm strong but not that strong, you have a 5% better chance of success - why don't you try?" That kind of analysis immediately pulls me out of the fiction.

That doesn't mean that attribute scores have no bearing on my games. I treat attribute scores like gates: either you're strong enough to do it without risk, or you're going to need something else to succeed (tools, help, etc.). Take this example from Necrotic Gnome's The Incandescent Grottoes (p. 12):

"Lifting the door: Requires a combined 25 STR."

What is this saying? Of course there are multiple permutations, but at a glance I read "a combined 25 STR" to mean 3 normal characters (STR 10) or 2 strong characters (STR 13+). So, what do I need to know? I need to know if the characters attempting it are strong or not.

For my purposes, being strong is usually true or false. It rarely matters in my games if you have STR 13 or 14. It also more closely aligns with how we perceive strength in the moment. Sure, in some sports recruiting publication you might measure one strong guy as an A+ and another as an A-, but when you're trying to lift a heavy rock either one of them would do!

Here is another example of how the Old-School Essentials Advanced Fantasy Referee's Tome (p. 192) uses an attribute score:

"Spade of Mighty Digging [...] Minimum STR: Only a character of STR 18 or greater can use the spade."

What is this telling me? You have to be very strong to use this item. And, for my purposes, I don't even need to be that granular. It's enough to say "only strong characters can use this." STR 18 is so rare in a normal OSE character that even if a party found this treasure it's unlikely anyone could wield it!

Both of these examples care if the characters are strong enough or not. If they are, they can succeed without any check. If they aren't, they need help and no amount of attribute checks will change that.

A magic-user trying to prove that he is "Strong"

 

Does this mean we can jettison the scores altogether?

Look at a character sheet. If we have a PC with fairly standard scores aside from a high DEX, what do we lose if we give them the "Quick" attribute and ignore the scores? What if we note that the PC with high CHA is "Suave" and call it a day? Can attribute scores simply be attributes?

You could easily expand this with antonyms in the case of low scores:

ATTRIBUTE -- SCORE < 8 -- SCORE > 12

STR -- Weak -- Strong

DEX -- Slow -- Quick

CON -- Frail -- Tough

INT -- Dense -- Clever

WIS -- Naive -- Wise

CHA -- Awkward -- Suave

There is something about stripping away the numbers and leaning into the adjectives that brings me closer to the character as well. You could also branch out into various synonyms to give characters a slightly different flavor (e.g., using Graceful instead of Quick for a character with high DEX).

When I first thought about this, I was also reminded of Numenera's "I am an adjective noun who verbs" approach to creating your character. Now, in that system the various words also come with a lot of fiddly baggage, but I obviously find the basic concept intriguing.

Now, I do see some holes in an OSE game where you bypassed attribute scores altogether. How do you handle reaction roll bonuses? Retainer maximums? Open stuck doors rolls? But, those seem fairly easy to solve with quick rulings (ok, so your Awkward character has a -1 malus to a reaction roll with a cocky bandit ...). When I take this adventure I'm writing for a test run, I might give this little modification a whirl as well.

Attributes as Skill Variations

Consider this another entry into what now constitutes a series of posts on merging game systems together with the intent of minimizing our pen-and-paper RPG rules.

5th Edition marries skills to related attributes. For example, you make a Dexterity check if you want to test your ability to be stealthy. And, if you have skill in stealth, you get to add your current proficiency bonus. As a shorthand, people will say "make a Stealth check," but there is no such thing.

In my current adventure, I strip out skills altogether. You don't have stealth skills or nature skills. However, you can note things you're trained in: athletics, smithing, cooking, hunting, etc. Think of these as actual trades that you could be trained to do. If you make an ability check that involves your training, you get to add your proficiency bonus. 

A thief in the act of using espionage skills

Where I really differentiate this from 5e, though, is that this training isn't tied to any particular attribute. Take this as an example:

Let's say you're a trained athlete. Not just naturally gifted, but you have participated in a sport with rules and structure.

Certainly you'll add your proficiency to Strength and Dexterity checks related to athletic attempts - running, jumping, climbing, etc. It doesn't matter if you're not particularly strong (say, a +0 STR bonus). Maybe you're a runner. But, in my mind, you're still an athlete, trained to use their physical gifts. So, I'd still grant you a proficiency bonus in an attempt to lift a boulder.

Taking it a step further, let's say you're kind of a dullard (-1 INT bonus). But, someone asks you who won the big yearly race in your city a decade ago. If you're a trained athlete who has spent years in that social circle, you're more likely to know that answer than someone who doesn't live that lifestyle. So, in 5e terms, I'd allow a proficient Intelligence (Athletics) check to recall that information.

NOTE: I very rarely use lore checks in my games. But, if I did, I'd handle them like this.

Another example could be training in woodcraft. You learned from a master outdoorsman how to survive apart from civilization. 

Can you find food to gather? Make a proficient Wisdom check. Can you calm this wild boar? Make a proficient Charisma check. Can you climb a tree? Make a proficient Strength check. If you can find the right handholds and, through experience, make the task easier, it matters less how strong you are (though your Strength score still plays a role).

The key here is that your training enhances more than one type of check. It could enhance any related check, even if you aren't particularly gifted at that ability.

Playing without Attribute Scores

What if we took another step towards minimizing rules, but in an entirely different direction than my previous post. What if we removed attribute scores altogether?

First, let's consider what we typically use these scores for during a pen-and-paper RPG. 

• Ability checks
• Attack rolls
• Damage bonus
• Armor bonus
• Initiative rolls
• NPC reactions and loyalty
• HP bonus

While that's a significant list, think about a monster's stat block, especially in OD&D and its retroclones. As a GM, you didn't require attribute scores to run them in combat. So, let's assume that we could get by without attribute scores for the combat-adjacent entries above.

Essentially, that leaves ability checks and NPC reactions and loyalty. Let's focus on the more important of those two, the ability check.

Ability checks provide the GM with a tool to model most situations. Can you lift that rock? Make a Strength check. Can you find the path after getting lost? Make a Wisdom check.

However, if you start adding different skills into the mix, and adding skill modifiers or proficiency bonuses alongside ability modifiers ... then the system becomes less of an abstract tool to model different situations and more of a burden on your memory and cognitive load during play.

If you clearly define the scope of your adventure beforehand, you can forego attribute scores altogether and only define a handful of skill scores. And, your skills can change from one campaign to the next if you move from a dungeon-crawl to an urban point-crawl.

A forlorn adventurer contemplating the loss of attribute scores

Let's take a hypothetical adventure where the party goes from a town, through the woods to the adventure site, delves the dungeon, and then travels back again. What skills might they need?

• Bushcraft
• Climb & Jump (Acrobatics)
• Lift & Open (Athletics)
• Search
• Stealth
• Tinker (Pick Locks)

From here, I will use the concept of Specialist skills from Lamentations of the Flame Princess as the foundation for my entire skill system. Everyone starts with a 1-in-6 chance to do anything that requires a roll. Scale a wall without rope? 1-in-6. Bash open a stuck door on the first try? 1-in-6.

But, as a PC levels up, they can spend points to increase those skills chances from 1 to 2, 3, up to a 6-in-6 chance. In Lamentations, only the Specialist can increase skill. I suggest letting all characters do so, and expanding the skill list to also include other aspects of your character that you could increase your ranks in:

• Melee Attack Bonus
• Ranged Attack Bonus
• Initiative
• Luck
• Dodge (add to AC)
• Hit Die (increase die ranks)
• Hit Points (increase number of hit die)

Why stop there? The final piece of the puzzle is to use this system for your saving throws as well. You could choose to go with the classic Paralysis - Poison - Breath - Device - Magic or maybe just Fortitude - Reflex - Will. Regardless, these start at 1-in-6 as well. The dragon breathes fire upon you? You have a 1-in-6 chance to dodge it unless you start increasing your save ranks.

To sum things up:

• Every common character trait from pen-and-paper RPGs is an ability with 6 ranks
• PCs usually start with 1 rank (meaning, a 1-in-6 chance to do the thing, or a +1 attack bonus, or 1 hit die)
• PCs can spend points to increase ranks when they level up

Attribute Scores as Hit Points

After reading this post on the blog Aboleth Overlords, I started musing about how I could condense the rules I use. I have a tendency to strive for minimalism regardless, as I prefer the perceived elegance of minimalist rules. But sometimes, in practice my drive for minimalism can suck the soul out of a game, and that isn't always for the best. Imagine a "minimalist" Dungeon Crawl Classics - that's an oxymoron. So, I have to tread lightly.

Keeping that in mind, I do have on particular idea percolating in the back of my thoughts. What if I removed Hit Points?

It isn't a novel idea - the Cypher System does it, as does the fantasy pen-and-paper RPG Forbidden Lands. I'm certain other examples exist as well. Here's a take that also removes damage rolls.

My current adventure uses 5th Edition style attack rolls: roll a d20 and add your bonuses to beat their Armor Class. I'd keep that.

My attribute scores only exist as bonuses: -3 to +3. That means attacks will deal damage directly to those bonuses. Normal attacks would reduce your score by 1. Heavy attacks (two-handed weapons) would reduce your score by 2. Certain monster attacks could be even more deadly.

When you take damage when you're already at -3, you accrue points of Exhaustion or some other condition equal to the damage taken. If your inventory fills up with those conditions, you die.

(Note: you could also handle this without a slot-based inventory system. I'd simplify things and say that, if you ever accrue the same condition twice (effectively dropping to -5 in that attribute), you fall unconscious).

A man preparing to lose some attribute bonuses

So, what attributes do attacks damage? Brute force attacks hurt your Strength. Precision attacks hurt your Dexterity. Psychic attacks hurt your Intelligence. Eldritch abilities go after your Wisdom. Divine strikes attack your Charisma. Magic damage can run the gamut.

Some attributes do step on the toes of others. Do divine strikes attack Wisdom or Charisma? Does a crack shot from a bowman hurt your Dexterity or Strength? And what about Constitution? Is it your last line of defense? Does it just control your item slots (aka, your hit points)?

Because of this, I would likely seek to condense my attribute list if I implemented this hack. Something like Strength, Dexterity, Willpower (or, Fortitude, Reflex, Will).