Originally Posted by Naqel
Because the decision, as far as gameplay goes, is not for your character to hit the gym, but for a number to go up on a spreadsheet.
You change equipment throughout the game constantly, if you temporarily need more strength, it's better to do so by wearing the right belt, than it is to invest levels into it.


I agree with the number on the spreadsheet problem. Do you feel the same about your RPG characters in every system? Because I genuinely want it to feel more like your character has been hitting the gym / prioritizing muscle. I also want to avoid making gear a requisite for hybridization or an avenue to change your character after creation. Maybe a way to accentuate, but not a requirement.

Originally Posted by Naqel
Especially in a situation where stats can be orders of magnitude apart:
If you have 10 strength and 30 dexterity, gaining 2 strength isn't quite as significant in terms of catching up as it would be if both stats are in a 1-10 range.


I agree that in any system the numbers need to tweaked from current. Either provide more stats/level and less from gear with the current itemization. So the total number of stats available is the same but you have more ability to direct that manually. Still, if you're at 30 dex, you've neglected str long enough that I can only posit that you don't care. So it will be more like comparing 20 dex and 12-14str and you add 4/level and find less on gear (no +7 int items)

Originally Posted by Naqel
On top of that, those 2 points in strength, in the current system, will eventually stop providing any benefit: there will be no new gear they unlock, they will not contribute any bonuses to skills, etc.
Meanwhile a system that scales the benefits of a point with level, rather than the amount of points, is universally tuned such that each point has those benefits regardless of your level.


I agree that this is a problem. I want to change the current system, I'm just not sure a static (like DnD) attribute system would be the best solution. It could work, but I think we can do better.

@Naqel

I feel like you have a specific system in mind that sounds decent but aren't quite getting the whole picture across. What were you thinking specifically?