[Svelt Rho'Vannion]

Seeing as you've at least taken the hook, let's see if we can get you line and sinker. I've been tossing around a notion in my head for a while now, and it is this; exactly like the DT RP, but with stats and other similar RPG elements like an actual GM.

Obviously there would be no dice, and it would be an extremely simplistic system that still primarily focused on RPing. The main idea would be to remove a lot of the snake-measuring that tends to go on in the existing set-up. No more "I slaughter the guards easily" or "I stab your character" or "My illusion automatically takes effect on you". All of which is already discouraged in the character-making process, but still tends to show up in the actual threads.

At the moment I'm thinking a basic system of two stats; Body and Mind. These would represent a character's natural talents. To supplement these stats would be skills which would be filled in by the owner of the character. All stats and skills would work on a scale of 1 to 10. 10 obviously being supremely gifted (unlikely that anyone would have a score like this) and 1 being incompetent. Characters with no mention of a specific skill would be assumed to have a competence of around 2, while a moderately trained person would have a 3.

Example: An average Templar might have stats like these.
Traits -
Body: 4
Mind: 3
Skills -
Prowess (Sword and Board): 4
Knowledge (Demons): 3
Training (Bodyguard): 5

As you can see, he is a more than competent fighter with a solid Mind score to represent the amount of mental fortitude expected of those sent to combat demons. His skills represent those things he would have been trained in, though a character with a full story would be expected to have more varied and lengthy skills.

Example 2: An average Warden might look more like.
Traits -
Body: 3
Mind: 5
Skills -
Prowess (Sword): 3
Knowledge (Demons): 4
Magic (Banishing): 4

Important: A 5 does not always beat a 4, nor does a seven always beat a five. The GM for the thread would have to make a judgement based upon their relative talent levels combined with what was posted to decide who would come out on top. This is, of course, only for important things like who stabbed who. Small cantrips and such could simply be considered automatic successes or failures based on stats alone.

As previously mentioned, I'm still brainstorming, but before I put too much thought into even a simple system like this, I'd like to get some feedback and see if anyone is interested in mixing a little RPG into their RP.

[Improbable odds]

This could work. Unfortunately I think one might have to divide your two main traits up just a little bit more in order to really get a feeling for what a character's real strengths are. For example if the 'Body' stat encompasses all traits physical one could in theory have two characters with a score of five that on paper would look identical but be completely different concepts.

For example one character might be rated at a 5 because they're abnormally dexterous and deft, able to run, jump and tumble with the greatest of ease.

Another character might be rated at a 5 because they're physically imposing, incredibly strong but not terribly deft. It's the difference between an Olympic gymnast and an Olympic Wrestler. Otherwise I think it might need a little fleshing out in regard to what each number signifies. You say one is incompetent and 10 is near superhuman, but what do the other numbers mean? What does it take to rank at an 8? Can an average character eve rate at an 8?

The devil is in the details, as they say. Otherwise I would enjoy a more stat driven RP, can always help with figuring those little things out about a character.

[Svelt Rho'Vannion]

While an Olympic Gymnast and an Olympic wrestler might have different ways of being competent, they're both (presumably) equally competent at a 4. Though one might use brawn to trip you and the other might outmaneuver you, the effect would be approximately the same. And, like I said, the numbers are only a rough guideline. The GM, who is presumable familiar with the story and strengths of the characters beyond mere stats, would make the final call.

People like to make a big deal out of dexterity and strength being wildly different, but that's an artificial concept created by RPGs, table-top games, and novels. Most adroitness (or dexterity) comes from physical strength. And while a steroid-popper might not have much dexterity, anyone who trains practically in a kill-or-be-killed world would have roughly equal measures of each. Most things that people think of as being governed by the dexterity trait (i.e. Juggling), are actually more a matter of practice, which would be represented in this setup by having a skill.

For instance, a fellow might not have a lot of natural toughness, or magical capacity.
Body: 2
Mind: 2
But would have honed their mental and physical acuity at certain tasks.
Climb: 4
Prowess (Throwing Knife): 4
Reflex (Dodge/Duck): 5

Ultimately, I want the stats to be simplistic, or we might as well just whip out the d20 rules. As to what the numbers mean, that would be up to the GM. If they followed my examples though, like I said, trained is a 3, very trained is a 4, and excellence is a 5. I would think a player might achieve something as high as a 6 or even 7 if they were truly mindbogglingly spectacular. However, since there are power-limiting expectations placed on DTRPG characters already, I doubt more than one in a handful of characters would have a stat that high, and would likely have a few corresponding weaknesses.

[Improbable odds]

The one problem I think your idea presents is that even with the number of statistics one needs to calculate being low one still has a number of complicated features and quirks to try and handle.

For example we'll look back at your previous point:

Body: 2
Mind: 2
But would have honed their mental and physical acuity at certain tasks.
Climb: 4
Prowess (Throwing Knife): 4
Reflex (Dodge/Duck): 5

While this is fairly easy to understand at first glance, the lack of details can often mean that a GM might have a hard time painting an accurate picture of a character and their skills, because in order to have a full understanding of a person's skills and weaknesses we still need to have some measurements of what one might deem as an 'important' skill. So looking at this example we see this individual has a skill in climbing of 4, but what of any other skills that might not be listed? What is his skill in reading? in writing? What about his skill with a sword? The way I see it, one would conceivably need to list a multitude of these secondary skills to paint a picture of how a character can be accurately portrayed. On that point, what if a GM asks for a skill that you haven't previously listed on your character? You have climbing listed, but in this instance the RP or situation calls for the GM to know what your character's skill in bartering or trading. It's entirely conceivable that that isn't a skill you ever thought about on your particular character, and thus you would need to calculate or otherwise assign that value on the fly.

I'm all for simple, man. I've played d20 rpgs for years and years and years and I know I likely speak for many people when I say the idea of a simple system would save a ton of time and prevent a ton of headaches. However I'm just saying that it might be prudent to think about a few keys skills or values to encompass most anything one might see in this sort of RP.

One final point is that if it is as you say that so few characters in the -entire- DT setting have a score as high as 10 in anything, and that our characters cannot be expected to realistically meet these levels, then why bother to include that number at all? Why not simply make it on a scale from 1-7, with one being grossly incompetent to 7 being incredibly skilled or learned.

Don't get me wrong my friend, I enjoy the idea. I'm just saying that one can't make it too simple without risking losing the ability to wholly define a character and their skills or weaknesses. I would actually rather enjoy seeing this work truth be told, so I figure a bit of constructive criticism(or my attempt to) is always helpful.

[Svelt Rho'Vannion]

Well, I hadn't planned on it being an entirely accurate system. The idea was that any skill you do not mention is a score of 2, that being competent but no training. Presumably, since you know your character, you would already list anything that they are either exceptional or poor at. So the 2 baseline covers every other skill that might be dreamt up.

Obviously, there will be cases where this isn't so. And, because this is a casual RP, and not an RPG, you could simply point out part of your previously written background to your GM and say, 'See, I should have an above average skill here'. It's not a perfect system, and it's not -for- power gamers who want to max out their character and be good at everything.

Yes, this system calls for a lot of judgement calls from the GM. Which is how it should be in this situation. Rather than writing two core rulebooks about the game, we have a simple set of rules which the GM then uses to adjudicate the game as they think would make most sense, and let everyone enjoy themselves.

As to the 1-10 system; 8, 9, and 10 are there for things like Demons, Dragons, or other monsters that the players may run into. Of course, players could achieve these scores over the course of the game through magical events and the like if it went on long enough, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

I suppose it should go without saying that the GM would not have a character in the RP itself, as that could lead to arguments and conflicts of interest. And, in case anyone is wondering; yes, I do have an idea for a scenario, and would volunteer to GM if anyone else wants to play.