Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_Smith
Hi all,
The purpose of this thread is to debate if attribute bloat is a real problem in TFT or not. I've seen people dismiss TFT out of hand, saying that it is OK for a while, but soon breaks down because the only thing you can do with experience is raise attributes, and soon your attributes are so high, that you always hit, always make saving throws and the game becomes boring.
In another thread, ecz wrote:
Others pointed out, that attribute bloat starts to become a problem well before 50+ attribute figures arise.
I pointed out, some GM's (such as myself), are BORED with constantly playing with 32 attribute characters. Many players are frustrated and alienated by a game where their characters are dying constantly. Such GM's and players prefer a game where the characters are likely to reach into the high 40's if they play long enough.
***
Anyway, this thread is intended for a drag out, hold no bars debate. Is attribute bloat a real thing?
Warm regards, Rick.
|
For me, no. But I pretty scrupulously followed the e.p. rules in TFT and did NOT use the jobs table. I generally assumed that PCs more or less broke even in their day job and that adventures were the real adventurer retirement plan... And my campaign was fairly deadly. I explored the statistics in detail in another thread, but I think I estimated that it would take a year of weekly adventures to get in the attribute bloat range, if you strictly adhere to the TFT experience point system. And if a campaign has a 5% attrition rate per session - in a 5 character party, an average of about 1 death every 4 sessions - a figure will survive for 50 weeks only about 7% of the time.
That said, I think attribute bloat must be a real problem, since a fair number of people complain about it. These folks are credible for the most part, so I believe them.
However I personally think that most RPGs break down at high levels. This is a function of the typical RPG combat resolution mechanic - roll to hit, roll for damage. Also, if figures with average skill ratings succeed success rolls ~50% of the time (I.e., a 3 die roll requiring a 10- to succeed), any reasonable skill advancement system will get the skill to virtually 100% pretty quickly. In TFT, a mere +3 to an average attribute (10 being average) yields an 84% chance of success. That means 5 out of six times, the roll will succeed. (This is my complaint with the 3d6 (or 2d6) resolution mechanic - it’s way too sensitive to modifiers).
These problems can be addressed, or course, but the result would be a game that is manifestly NOT TFT. (The easiest fix is to use a d20 instead of 3d6. That would require an attribute of 17 to get the same success chance as an attribute of 13 with the 3d6 mechanic. But most TFT folks find this blasphemous.)
Anyhow, since I think that this problem is endemic to most RPGs, I don’t sweat it too much. I submit that it is the responsibility of the GM to properly calibrate his campaign so that it’s very, very hard to get to the attribute bloat point (whatever that is).