Why are the core stats never defined?

Why are the core stats never defined?

Why are the core stats never defined?

Was looking for the rule book’s exact definition of Charisma last night and realized that no where in the book are the 6 core stats clearly defined.

Was really just wondering why that was? Most every game I’ve ever played or ran has a little blurb defining what Wisdom, Strength, Constitution specifically encompasses in that particular game.

What was the reasoning behind not including something like this in DW core rulebook?

20 thoughts on “Why are the core stats never defined?”

  1. …by powering through, +Str

    …by getting out of the way or acting fast, +Dex

    …by enduring, +Con

    …with quick thinking, +Int

    …through mental fortitude, +Wis

    …using charm and social grace, +Cha

    this is the closest thing we have.

  2. What Jarrah said. The definition of stats is in the basic moves. Or all the moves, really. Charisma is  your ability to defying danger through social charm and grace, manipulating people with leverage, order hirelings around, and maybe use bardic music or lay on hands or such if you’ve got that move.

  3. I’m pretty sure they’re never defined because as Eric pointed out, you can go look the definitions up in the Player Handbooks for all seven (soon to be eight) editions of That Other Game.

  4. Well I’ve played lots of games and there are enough minor variations in statistic definition that it’s always a good idea to see how a particular game defines them. Charisma can be a representation of physical beauty or force of personality. Played games that view it either way.

    Just found it odd that the game defines the spell Invisibility (makes you invisible!) more clearly than it defines Charisma and Constitution.

    Defining them more clearly might also help people decide what stats are appropriate when they make custom moves, which is the really attractive part of this game for me.

  5. We used to have them, but we cut them. We didn’t feel like us trying to nail down Charisma-as-personality vs. Charisma-as-beauty was all that useful. Kind of like defining “armor” wasn’t something we felt like doing, instead we say armor subtracts from damage.

    The relevant things to how a stat are used:

    Defy Danger

    The debilities

    The basic moves

  6. So why is Charisma appropriate to the Heirloom fighter move and not Wis or Int? I was trying to get an answer to that specific question when I went looking for the definition of the attributes.

  7. Really the entire book is written on the assumption that the reader is somewhat familiar with other role playing games. Its just the same as how most of the monster entries don’t actually describe what the monsters look like.

  8. We’ve got precious little data on handing the book to people who have never played an RPG before, but from our few anecdotes it works well.

    If you do character creation by the book, you look at the moves available to you and set your stats based on that. That’s so we don’t have that weird dissonance where you choose high Strength because you like the idea of being strong, but what you really want to be is a defender.

    The exact meaning of a stat is a lot like the exact appearance of a monster: it doesn’t matter all that much.

  9. Besides, my characters Strength might come from the fact that I am 300lbs of pure muscle and Sage’s character might have the same Strength that comes from internal willpower backed up by some cosmic battery of celestial force.  Same mechanical effects, very different interpretation of the stat.  Same boundaries (the moves that are triggered by STR rolls) but different color to our solutions.

Comments are closed.