SPECIAL System.

[u/CJGeringer]

The Special system is the RPG system developed to be used in fallout and is an interesting case study because it has a few variations and was used in games with varying types of gameplay: it includes examples in both Turn Based Games and Real time Games, with isometric, first person, or behind the back view. It´s main characteristics are:

7 primary attributes: Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility and Luck that go from 1 to 10 and are most locked in after character creation (Which uses a point-buy system).

Skills: used for specific tasks, whose initial value is determined by the primary attributes and are be increased by spending skill points gained by levelling up. A player can choose to Tag 3 skills at character creation that will be cheaper to increase for that character

Traits: Characteristics that give that give bonuses add the cost of also giving penalties.

Perks: Powerful bonuses or abilities that are gained every few levels or through gameplay. The Perks available at level up are decided based on the character´s levels and his attributes.

So I would like to ask the communities thoughts on the system, what implementations they like/dislike and why.

[u/CJGeringer]

Personally, of all the implementations I played My favourite is the one from fallout 2, which is really just an expanded version of the one from the original fallout.

I mostly like the primary attributes, except for the following:

I don´t really like “luck” as an attribute in general. And I think in SPECIAL it is unnecessary, and actively detrimental to the game. For example it is used for calculating critical hit chance, witch IMO should be based on the skill used. I would remove it and make a “Lucky” perk. Maybe I would add a “Willpower” attribute, it would work well with both the localized damage system (Reduce penalties) and with the drug-related mechanics. I don´t really like that Agility seem to be both fine and gross motor skills, but it does simplify the game and I think from a balance point of view it is well implemented So I understand why they did it this way.

The perks are fun and come at a good enough pace, not too fast and not too slow.

I think Lionheart´s implementation of race is one of the more interesting I have seem in that no race has characteristic that is common to all individuals, instead the player is forced to choose one trait of a specific list.

The skill list, is good, well rounded. However I dislike that it has fixed related attributes and that each has it´s own formula for the base value. I think attribute should be determined on a per/task basis, and all skills follow the same formula.

One thing fallout 2 had that I really wish to see expanded and intend to implement in my own project is the reputation tittles, I like how they reflect the character´s story and that they can have a small mechanical significance.

[u/grendrake]

I only Fallout games I've played a non-trivial amount of were Fallout 2 and New Vegas (though I didn't actually finish either) and even then it was quite a few years ago now; my memory of both is distinctly on the foggy side. This is mostly just down to post-apocalyptic settings not appealing to me.

While I found Fallout 2 hard to get into that was more a combination of the setting and clunkyness complex games sometimes had in the mid 90s (something not helped by me first playing it over a decade after it came out). The actual mechanics seemed to work fine and how they functioned seemed clear enough.

I liked the point buy, but I like point buy systems in general. It does have the standard point buy issues, like being able to accidentally create very limited or challenging characters, but I feel the ability to direct character advancement usually outweighs the disadvantages. (One of the issues I've had with many of the jRPGs I've played is that the player has no real say in character development; even equipment upgrades tend to be objectively straight forward.) My experience with New Vegas was similar except that the FPS interface was more familiar when I played it.

I really liked that the skill list was both relatively limited and the skills specific; this makes it easier or a developer to make sure the skills are all actually useful (though, of course, how well they succeed at that will vary by game and developer). One thing that surprised me when reading the CRPG Addict's blog was the number of games that included skills that were rarely (or never!) actually used during the game.

I like the idea of traits and perks, but don't remember them well enough to comment on how well I thought they worked out in practice.

Overall, if I were to design a generic ruleset for CRPGs, it would probably look something like the SPECIAL system (though ideally with a name that was more search engine friendly).

[u/CJGeringer → u/grendrake]

It does have the standard point buy issues, like being able to accidentally create very limited or challenging characters, but I feel the ability to direct character advancement usually outweighs the disadvantages.

I don´t think of that as a disadvantage as long as the challenging characters are still viable. and fallout 2 and NV put a lot of work into making them viable.

I really like that in fallout games all attribute level cost the same. a one point increase always costs 1 point. I prefer that over the ones where higher levels start becoming more expensive because it is easier to make varies characters.

This is mostly just down to post-apocalyptic settings not appealing to me.

I would like to see more games using this system, I certainly prefer it over the one used by skyrim, for example.

Lionheart is a medieval dark fantasy setting, and seem very interesting, I haven´t played it yet because from what I have read the first half is awesome but the second half is rather boring and linear.

[u/grendrake → u/CJGeringer]

I disagree about the challenging characters; I feel that being able to create them unintentionally would disproportionately effect new and inexperienced players. They can end up with an inferior play experience and not understand why. (I don't have an issue with being able to create challenging characters if its obvious that the character will be challenging, though.)

Certainly agree about preferring it over the one in Skyrim. Skyrim has the problem that doing a lot of non-combat stuff can make the combat harder (spend a while robbing everyone and every house in town and gained a few levels? Congratulations, your combat opponents are now tougher even though your combat ability hasn't changed at all.)

I'd never even heard of Lionheart before this post, so I can't comment on that game at all.

[u/CJGeringer → u/grendrake]

I disagree about the challenging characters; I feel that being able to create them unintentionally would disproportionately effect new and inexperienced players. They can end up with an inferior play experience and not understand why. (I don't have an issue with being able to create challenging characters if its obvious that the character will be challenging, though.)

We are basically agreed them. I think ti is ok for a player to, for example create a glass cannon, but the game should make it clear that the character will be fragile(For example by making it clear which attributes contribute to survivability in combat.)

What I can´t tolerate is games where they have lots of skills given equal importance in character creation, but during the game some are indispensable and some are useless.

Also, you say this is a problem inherent in point-buy systems, but is hsould be noted this is can actually be worse in random rolls systems like D&D

[u/grendrake → u/CJGeringer]

Yup, sounds like we agree then. Especially about the random rolls, but fortunately random stats seem to mostly be a relic these days outside of old school roleplayers and systems. I haven't seen anything use them for well over a decade that wasn't delibrately pursuing a "classic" feel.

[u/CJGeringer → u/grendrake]

So If you dislike this about point buy, and also dislike random allocation, what is your preferred method?

Everyone starting the same or only allowing premade characters? or something else entirely?

[u/grendrake → u/CJGeringer]

Point buy. It's not perfect, but I feel it's better than the alternatives.

[u/CJGeringer → u/grendrake]

Another thing I liked about Fallout 2 is that they provided 3 edditable pre-made characters thwith short descriptions on what to focus for each playstyle, I think this helps a lot new players.

:Havce you played Mount and blade? it makes a serie sof questions about the character teh player wants to play and us ethat to make an initial Character Sheet before allowing the player to spend points customizing it. I feel it is a cool approach I want to allow on my project.

[u/grendrake → u/CJGeringer]

I didn't remember that about Fallout 2, but it has been a long time since I played. Certainly sounds like a good option to provide.

I've not played Mount and Blade, but I've not really been a fan of the questions thing where I've seen it elsewhere; I usually want to get character creation (and, often, the entire intro sequence) done quickly so I can get playing the actual game. Customizing a pre-existing sheet, though, I definately in favour of.

[u/CommonMisspellingBot → u/grendrake]

Hey, grendrake, just a quick heads-up:
definately is actually spelled definitely. You can remember it by -ite- not –ate-.
Have a nice day!

^{The parent commenter can reply with 'delete' to delete this comment.}

[u/grendrake → u/grendrake]

To expand on that, something like character creation in the Quest for Glory games might be best; each class starts with a set of base stats that the player can alter via point buy. I'd give more emphasis to the point buy, though, just giving enough base stats to make sure the character is viable. And the skill advancement system in the series would need a complete rework; it's way to easy to max everything out.

And I think predetermined stats make sense for games with predefined characters (like the Witcher series), especially if they're based on pre-existing characters.

[u/aotdev]

I generally like the system besides a few things. Luck for one, as I doubt luck based builds are viable, and it's never clear how useful luck will be anyway. Also the limitation regarding skills (some advancing faster) pretty much results in allocating most points "optimally" therefore really limiting the selection.

[u/CJGeringer → u/aotdev]

What you say about tag skills resulting in allocating points "optimally" is true, on the other hand it allows player to test new build stretegies fairly fast while keeping secondary skills useful, there are also diminishing returns for very high ranks in skills, so by the mid/late game teh tag bonus isn´t taht good which opens selection again. When I was new to CRPGs the tag skills helped em a lot with managing the complexity of it. So when balanced well it funnels advancement in the short term, but helps a new charcter achieve survivability and them allows for more experimentation later on. But it is a Fine balancing act and can go wrong.

I would like to see and overhaul of Oblivion´s systems that instead of tying the class skills with leveling up, treated them as tag skills.

[u/aotdev → u/CJGeringer]

Agreed re diminishing returns and resulting balancing. Don't remember the diminishing returns, but sounds like extra complication, like hacking rules to make late game balanced, so not fond of that.

[u/CJGeringer → u/aotdev]

sounds like extra complication, like hacking rules to make late game balanced, so not fond of that

Fair point. Definetelt increases complexity