1 Character, 13 Systems - Part 15: Closing Thoughts

    After roughly 840 minutes of character creation (that's 14 hours) and almost half again in typing and posting, what do I have to show for this rather odd endeavor? 
    Well, not a great insight or anything, but mostly I am re-evaluating how I describe games.  The thing is, each character had something about that specific system that I liked or disliked.  Strengths the systems had or weaknesses, or just things that were different from how I would have like them to be.  So my understanding of each game has increased by using one broad measuring stick to compare them to.  But the biggest revelation is that I feel like I need a new way to describe games, a new system for comparing them.  There is no good or bad game, actually, each one is designed to be good at a specific thing or a style of play - if you are judging the system by what it was designed for, it is good - if not, it is bad.  So most important of all is knowing how to see what each system was designed for, or what style of play it was designed for.  So I want to come up with a system, a set of axis, to help see what each game's purpose is.
    This is going to be off the top of my head, and based on the games I've recently been working with, so I do not expect it to be complete or possibly even intelligible.  But here is an experiment on describing games:

Level Of Detail
    In general the higher the level of detail the longer the character sheet and the longer to make a character.  Microlite20 has you roll for only 3 or 4 attributes, Rolemaster has you roll for 10.  Pathfinder has about 30-ish skills, I have no idea just how many Rolemaster has (easily over 100 I'd guess, I'm afraid to count) - and generally the more skills available the more each character will have.  I'm not really thinking of how many things you have to choose from, that's more Explicitness or Complexity below; I almost want to measure this by the length of your character sheet.  From like note card sized to sheet of paper to 4 sheets of paper.  Not sure if that would be terribly menaingful though.  I can't get a good handle on this, I will have to think about it more- but here's a current idea for now.
    So, how would I describe this, what kinds of measurements to use?  Well, most reviews use stars, like 1 to 5, but I don't think that would quite convey what I want.  So let's do numbers, from 1 being low on the axis and 5 the highest.  With that as a range, let me brainstorm something:
    1) Minimal - few measures, possibly not enough to completely describe the character (Microlite20)
    2) Short - few measures and mostly categories or fields (Swords & Wizardry)
    3) Moderate - many measures, mostly individual items (13th Age, Marvel Super Heroes)
    4) Long - lots of measures and sub-measures [ie, Dex and the AC it effects] (Pathfinder)
    5) Extreme - many attributes, sub-attributes, derived measures, skills, abilities and so on (GURPS, Hero System, Rolemaster)

Randomness
    While knowing how many numbers or sentences is important to get a feel for a system, you also have to look at how you get there.  How much randomness is in the system?  High randomness means that you are going to "discover" your character, low randomness means you can begin with a soild and detailed character concept and know you should be able to make something close.  This is mostly just for character creation, randomness in the game itself is another thing (and one more difficult to measure, almost all games use randomness - the diceless kind or few and far between, and cards are a randomness all their own).  Also, some systems may allow more than one option (I think 2nd ed Skills & Powers took the cake with about 12 different ways you could determine your attributes).  For point buy systems this also matters becasue you might have to check with the GM and make sure you spent the right number of points.
    1) Single-read Rolls - roll the dice and keep them in thier order (Swords & Wizardry)
    2) Roll and Place - roll the dice, but decide where you want to put each score, or roll and choose from a table (Marvel Super Heroes, Pathfinder)
    3) Rolled Pools - roll the dice to get a pool of points, then spend the points however you like (Rolemaster)
    4) Fixed Point-buy or Priority - all characters start with the same number of points or list of options (Fate, The Riddle of Steel, 13th Age optional)
    5) Variable Point-buy - spend points, how many may vary by setting/power level or GM's decision (GURPS, Hero System, Pathfinder optional)


Explicitness
    This really comes down to numbers or sentences.  The more numbers you have, the more the system is objectively designed - while more sentences means a more subjective design.  Let me illustrate with an example.  Let's say your system is like 13th Age, it reduces your occupation to a word or two.  So you are a Police Officer.  What does that mean?  What skills do you have?  Well, you might say you know some hand to hand combat, how to drive and shoot, you'd know the law, and probably first aid.  But that is only one way to look at it.  Maybe you have an animal companion, because you're a K-9 officer.  Maybe you know horse riding because you're a mounted officer.  Detectives know about interrogation.  Federal agents know federal law, while state troopers and local officers specialize in a state's law.  All of them are, in one sense or another, types of police officers.  Now, in a system with a high level of detail, each of these skills would be individually described and measured (so Drive 5, First Aid 3, Firearms 4, etc), so you could see on your sheet exactly what you knew, and how well.  But in the less explicit, 13th Age style system, you have to talk this over with your GM and make sure you and the GM are on the same page.  That's the key- either you have to talk with the GM and possibly other players, or else your character sheet does the talking for you.
    1) General Sentences - no specific numbers, only sentences (none of the games I worked with were like this, but Do: Pilgrams of the Flying Temple is an example)
    2) Sentences and Numerics - a mix of specific numbers and sentences (Fate, Active Exploits)
    3) Die Types - the 'numbers' are ranges like die types (I didn't do Deadlands, but that would fit here)
    4) Category Numerics - numbers that define a range of possibilities (Microlite20)
    5) Specific Numerics - numbers that define individual elements (Pathfinder)


Openness
    This is one simple concept to me: class or component?  Classes are predefined structures of abilities and development- they are easier to make characters for since you have fewer choices, but it is hard to make a character that does not fall neatly within the class guidelines.  Component games let you build a character with blocks of content, and while they are more flexible they also take more system knowledge and time.  Each person and each character concept will fit better or worse with each type.
    1) Rigid Class - everything fits into a class (the OD&D with race-as-class, Microlite20)
    2) Flexible Class - everything is built around classes (Swords & Wizardry, OD&D seperating race and class)
    3) Class With Options - the classes have flexible options for customization (Pathfinder, 13th Age)
    4) Block Components - characters are built with components, but they come in groups or blocks to make creation easier (Ars Magica)
    5) Pure Components - everything is a component that can be customized (Hero System)


Complexity
    How many times do you have to manipulate a number/measurement to get a usable roll/check/whatever?  This is related to Level of Detail, and maybe these should be just one axis?  Don't know.  I'll try them separate and see how it goes.  Complexity is not just in making your character, it's about using your character.  Does each number on the sheet get directly added to your die roll?  Or do you have to take a fraction of that number, add it to another number, and then look it up on a table?  Complexity is important because we all have different thresholds for how much we can stand.  Also more complex games are harder for new players to learn.
    1) Direct - each element on the sheet is directly used in the game (Microlite20)
    2) Interpreted- the element is the final, but it is open to intrepretation or a final judgment (Fate Core)
    3) Pooled - the elements are individual and the finals used, but draw from a common pool or stat that much be tracked (Hero System)
    4) Linked - two elements will combine for the final total (13th Age, Pathfinder)
    5) Combined Associations - one element will modify another which can modify the final total/element used (Rolemaster)

Setting
    Another thing to consider is weather the system comes with a setting or is designed for a type of setting.  Some games are built with a very specific and detailed setting in mind, which can make creating characters or campaigns tricky.  Some are built for a specific genera, like fantasy or science fiction or horror.  If you want to use that game you need to make sure you fit with it's setting, if you want to do something else you need to know the prep time will increase as you tweak the game for something it was not designed to do.
    1) Universal - the game was designed to accomidate as many settings as possible (Hero System, GURPS, Fate Core)
    2) Base Timeframe - the game is built of a specific time but accomidates multiple activities (Heroes Unlimited, Marvel Super Heroes)
    3) Core Genra - the game is built for a specific genra or type of activity with no setting (Pathfinder, Swords & Wizardry)
    4) General Setting - the game has a setting, but it is left open or undefined for the GM to finish (13th Age)
    5) Specific Setting - the game has a fully detailed setting (Ars Magica, Pathfinder optional)



    Just to reiterate, I am not saying that any of these is better than any other.  All games are good for what they were designed for and bad when we try to use them in a way they were not designed for.  Everybody will have different preferences, and even character ideas will mesh better with different systems.  That said, and with my new system laid out, let me go over the games I have designed characters for and see how I would rate them:


Game Name- 13th Age
Level of Detail: (3) Moderate - 6 attributes, some skills and relationships, mostly it is your class abilities list that is the longest single element
Randomness: (2,4) Roll and Place, optional Fixed Point Buy - most common to roll and place, but if doing point-buy there is only one level
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (3) Class With Options - class-based but with options in each class to customize
Complexity: (4) Linked - numbers are combined or related to get gameplay totals
Setting: (4) General Setting - while there is a setting it is open-ended and meant to be customized by each group


Game Name- Swords & Wizardry
Level of Detail: (2) Short - 6 attributes, no skills, some other numbers to track, though your equipment tends to be the longest single element
Randomness: (1) Single-read Rolls - only roll attributes, and in order (common house rule to Roll and Place however)
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (2) Flexible Class - class-based, with some out of class options
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (3) Core Genera - built for a fantasy setting, roughly middle ages European


Game Name- AD&D 2nd edition
Level of Detail: (2-3) Short to Moderate - 6 attributes, a few proficiencies, class abilities and equipment
Randomness: (1-2) Single-read Rolls to Roll and Place - both ways are options in the core mechanics
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (2) Flexible Class - class-based, with some out of class options
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (3, 5) Core Genera and Specific Setting - built for a fantasy setting, roughly middle ages European; however has multiple worlds/setting defined in expansion books


Game Name- Pathfinder
Level of Detail: (4) Long - 6 attributes, lost of skills and class abilities, lots of derived combat and saves
Randomness: (2, 5) Roll and Place, optional Variable Point Buy - only roll for attributes and place as desired or choose level of power for attribute point-buy
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (3) Class With Options - class-based but with options in each class to customize
Complexity: (4) Linked - numbers are combined or related to get gameplay totals
Setting: (3, 5) Core Genera and Specific Setting - built for a fantasy setting, roughly middle ages European; however has its own detailed setting in expansion books


Game Name- Microlite20
Level of Detail: (1) Minimal - 3-4 attributes, 4-5 skills and a handful of other stats, fits on an index card easily
Randomness: (2) Roll and Place - for attributes only
Explicitness: (4) Category Numerics - numbers cover broad groups of skills/abilities
Openness: (1) Rigid Class - while the class descriptions and mechanics are very short, there is no customization
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (3) Core Genra - built for a fantasy setting, roughly middle ages European


Game Name- GURPS
Level of Detail: (5) Extreme - only 4 attributes, but makes up for that with tons of other measurements and skills and abilities
Randomness: (4) Variable Point Buy - GM sets level of power in total points to spend
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (5) Pure Components - individually choose and build each element
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (1) Universal - no core setting, designed to work with many possibilities


Game Name- Fate Core
Level of Detail: (1-2) Minimal to Short - 5 Aspects, a few skills, and a few stunts, the longest part are the descriptions of the character and abilities
Randomness: (4) Fixed Point Buy - characters all start with the same options/choices
Explicitness: (2) Sentences and Numerics - aspects are pure sentence, but skills and stunts have numerics
Openness: (5) Pure Components - individually choose and build each element
Complexity: (1-2) Direct to Interpreted - skills have direct numbers while aspects are interpreted
Setting: (1) Universal - no core setting, designed to work with many possibilities


Game Name- Hero System
Level of Detail: (5) Extreme - 6 attributes, 11 secondary attributes, plus perks, talents, powers and complications
Randomness: (4) Variable Point Buy - GM sets level of power in total points to spend
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (5) Pure Components - individually choose and build each element
Complexity: (3) Pooled - abilities have direct numbers, but draw from a common pool that must be tracked
Setting: (1) Universal - no core setting, designed to work with many possibilities


Game Name- Ars Magica (4th ed)
Level of Detail: (2) Short - 8 attributes, a few flaws and virtues, plenty of skills, but that's about it and the optional magic system is brief
Randomness: (2,4) Roll and Place and Fixed Point Buy - can roll and customize off that roll or use a fixed point buy for attributes, all non-attributes are off fixed point-buy systems
Explicitness: (5, 4) Specific Numeric and Category Numerics - while most numerics are specific, the magic system uses category numerics
Openness: (4) Block Components - no rigid classes, but are groups of common components with customization options
Complexity: (4) Linked - numbers are combined or related to get gameplay totals
Setting: (5) Specific Setting - Ars is based in 'Mythic Europe,' the roughly middle ages of our own history assuming that magic was real


Game Name- Marvel Super Heroes (original)
Level of Detail: (3) Moderate - 7 attributes plus a few secondary ones, a few skills and contacts, plus powers
Randomness: (2) Roll and Place - the origin your choose gives you a table to roll on and some limited customization after that
Explicitness: (5,4) Specific Numerics and Category Numerics - while most numerics are specific, the powers are category
Openness: (3) Class With Options - every character is essentially a "super hero" implicit class with some customization
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (2) Base Timeframe - built for mostly modern-day setting, can handle several generas and ability types (but focused on super heroes)


Game Name- The Riddle of Steel
Level of Detail: (3-4) Moderate to Long - 10 attributes, 5 spiritual attributes, derived attributes and lots of skills
Randomness: (4) Priority System - characters choose priorities form same list of options
Explicitness: (2) Sentences and Numerics - the 5 spiritual aspects are defined with sentences and numerics, all other elements are numeric only
Openness: (4) Block Components - no rigid classes, but are groups of common components with customization options
Complexity: (5) Combined Associations - several levels of relationships exist to get final gameplay totals
Setting: (5) Specific Setting - Riddle comes with its own setting


Game Name- Heroes Unlimited
Level of Detail: (4) Long - 8 attributes, lots of skills (easily dozens for each character) plus class abilities
Randomness: (2) Roll and Place - only for attributes
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element
Openness: (2) Flexible Class - class-based, with some out of class options
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (2) Base Timeframe - built for mostly modern-day setting, can handle several genras and ability types


Game Name- Rolemaster
Level of Detail: (5) Extreme - 10 attributes, dozens of skill categories, hundreds of skills, spells and a few secondary/combat attributes
Randomness: (4,5) Variable or Fixed Point Buy - choose default starting total, or roll to determine total number of points
Explicitness: (5) Specific Numerics - numbers relate to a single element [while the skill categories do relate to multiple individual skills, they are not Category Numerics in that they are not open or subject to any interpretation]
Openness: (4) Block Components - no rigid classes, but are groups of common components with customization options
Complexity: (5) Combined Associations - several levels of relationships exist to get final gameplay totals
Setting: (3, 5) Core Genra and Specific Setting - built for a fantasy setting, roughly middle ages european; however expansions have created different worlds and even science-fiction based settings


Game Name- Active Exploits
Level of Detail: (1) Minimal - only a few attributes and skills, could fit on an index card easily
Randomness: (4) Variable Point Buy - a few different levels of power that all characters choose from
Explicitness: (2) Sentences and Numerics - some core character drives in sentences, numerics for all other elements
Openness: (5) Pure Components - individually choose and build each element
Complexity: (1) Direct - each element directly effects gameplay
Setting: (1) Universal - no core setting, designed to work with many possibilities


    Well, looking over this I am fairly happy for an off-the-cuff system.  If I ever talk about/review games in the future I'll have to try using this.  I think it manages to convey a fair amount of information in just a few sentences.
    This has been a long project, and utterly exhausting at times.  But I'm glad I did it.  It's shown me a lot about different systems, and most importantly about myself.  Things I like and dislike are a little more obvious now.  I am kind of surprised.  I liked the Hero System way more than I expected to, and Riddle of Steel way less than I expected to.  Marvel was surprisingly fun for being so simple, and Fate Core surprisingly deep for also being simple.  And since I'm working on my own game, I've been asking myself where it would fall on all these measures, what kind of a system I want to create.  So for all the hours I think it was worth it, and heck, I might even try this again someday with a different character idea and different games.  I have lots more that I could have used (choosing which ones was a bit of a challenge).
    I want to thank you, gently reader, for sticking with me through this very long series of posts.  I hope that this has been at least somewhat enlightening for you as well.  As always, you can leave a comment below.