Descriptive Sprectra

[Avery]

I’m working on a concept I call Spectra. Basically, it is adjectival descriptions of degrees of gradation of “Spectra” (which are general descriptive concepts. An example will clear this up somewhat. One Spectrum is “Hot/Cold.” Degrees range from –5 through 0 to +5 and include

Bitterly Cold
Very Cold
Cold
Very Cool
Cool
Pleasant
Warm
Very Warm
Hot
Very Hot
Scalding

Other Spectra include Beautiful/Ugly, Fast/Slow, etc.

What ones you think of. After a while, we’ll capsulize them into one document.

Marc

 

[Gatsby]

Just MHO:

Call them 'benchmarks' - 'Spectra' is unclear.

I used the benchamrk concept...based it on 1-10+ scale - very easy to explain since everybody 'thinks' in that way.

Then you just say " to make it a benchmark into a die roll, add 3 to the benchmark. "

So: average is 5, add 3, you need a 8+. Very tough: 10 + 3 = 13+. Easy 1 + 3 = 4+. Impossible? 12 + 3 = 15+.

How hot/cold? 1 is frozen, 5 is room temp, 10 is on fire.

Maybe a little simplistic for most tastes, but it worked easy and people could pick it up right away....

Gatsby

 

[Gatsby]

...but that is what you were doing anyway ....just from -5 to +5 instead of 1 to 10....

D'oh....I get it now.

Gatsby

 

[T. Foster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Avery:
I’m working on a concept I call Spectra. Basically, it is adjectival descriptions of degrees of gradation of “Spectra” (which are general descriptive concepts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand the concept, but without some more context I'm having real trouble imagining how these will be applied. Are they going to form a continuum of standard task DMs, or what?

I'dgladly comment further, but I need a better idea what's going on...

 

[JBM]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by T. Foster:
I understand the concept, but without some more context I'm having real trouble imagining how these will be applied. Are they going to form a continuum of standard task DMs, or what?

I'dgladly comment further, but I need a better idea what's going on...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm in the same position, in that I to would like to comment further. Having read the other post's here the 1-10 spectrum idea sounds fine as a descriptive tool, but beyond that I'm not at all clear how you would use it.

 

[Avery]

But before we cram it into a system, I'm looking for the qualitative rather than quantitative descriptors... as a basis for brainstorming. "Benchmark" implies quantities, and we're not that far yet. "Range" gets confused with range (of weapons). etc.

I'm at this point just looking for suggestions for Spectra. Like

Hot/Cold, Fast/Slow, Good/Bad, Pretty/Ugly, Acid/Alkalai, Weak/Strong.

 

[DaveShayne]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Avery:
But before we cram it into a system, I'm looking for the qualitative rather than quantitative descriptors... as a basis for brainstorming. "Benchmark" implies quantities, and we're not that far yet. "Range" gets confused with range (of weapons). etc.

I'm at this point just looking for suggestions for Spectra. Like

Hot/Cold, Fast/Slow, Good/Bad, Pretty/Ugly, Acid/Alkalai, Weak/Strong.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean like these:

Advanced/Underdeveloped, Rich/Poor, Ellegant/Ugly (in an engineering sense), Honest/Dis-honest?

 

[Gatsby]

But isn't there one combination for every adjective in the language? In what 'genre' are we to think? Scientific superlatives? Common object descriptives?

Gats'

 

[Alan]

For equipment I guess reliable/unreliable, repaired/broken.

I don't think this would be applicable to describing a world.

 

[Avery]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DaveShayne:
You mean like these:

Advanced/Underdeveloped, Rich/Poor, Elegant/Ugly (in an engineering sense), Honest/Dis-honest?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes!

D&D described characters in terms of Evil/Good and Chaotic/Lawful. Some other thoughts are Noble/Common, Happy/ Sad, Strong/Weak, Smart/Dumb.

 

[BitKnot]

I like it, but I don't see any contributions, so here's some...

Electromagnetic Spectrum (I like the Spectra term)
-5 Radiowaves (lowest energy)
-4 Microwaves
-3 Vibrational
-2 Infrared
-1 Molecular electronic
0 Visible
1 Ultraviolet
2 Atomic electronic
3 X-rays
4 Gamma rays
5 Cosmic rays (highest energy)
[Hey, I like the way that fits!]

I'm not sure how this fits, but...

Planetary Placement (like bombs/ misjump)
-5 Inner core (dead center)
-4 Outer core
-3 Mantle
-2 Crust
-1 Troposphere
0 Stratosphere
1 Mesosphere
2 Ionosphere
3 Thermosphere
4 Exosphere
5 Magnetosphere (edge of space)

Or more exotic...

Phanerozoic Periods
-5 Cambrian (~570 million yrs)
-4 Ordovician
-3 Silurian
-2 Devonian
-1 Carboniferous
0 Permian
1 Triassic
2 Jurassic
3 Cretaceous
4 Tertiary
5 Quaternary (0.01 million years)

More Techee...

Common Air Gases (by percent composition - earth, excepting other)
-5 Xenon
-4 Hydrogen
-3 Krypton
-2 Methane
-1 Helium
0 Other
1 Neon
2 Carbon Dioxide
3 Argon
4 Oxygen
5 Nitrogen

Noise Level
-5 Hearing Threshold (Extremely Quiet - 0dB)
-4 Rustling leaves
-3 Whisper
-2 Mosquito buzz
-1 Normal conversation
0 Vacuum cleaner (70 dB)
1 Heavy traffic
2 Gas lawn mower
3 Police siren
4 Machine gun
5 Next to jet plane (painfull 150 dB)

I know, kinda specific, more general might meet the point better. Hope this is close though!

 

[BitKnot]

Okay, rereading Avery's original post - I missed the point (um, there's a category - FUBAR/Inate?)... so here's another try:

 

[BitKnot]

Sorry about the code style above - hardly readable on my screen -

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>
5 Infinite
4 Gargantuan
3 Gigantic
2 Huge
1 Big
0 Typical
-1 Small
-2 Tiny
-3 Microscopic
-4 Elemental
-5 Sub-atomic
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here's more spectra bases:
repulsive/irresistable
depresent/stimulant
immoveable(sticky)/frictionless
perfect insulator/super conductor
arrogant(megalomanic)/submissive
irrational/logical
whimsical/anal
absolute vaccum/degenerate matter(pionic condensate = inner core of neutron star)
dead/super spastic
male/female (hehe)

 

[Darium]

You might want to check out F.U.D.G.E. rpg it uses a spectra/benchmark system as its core mechanic. It could provide some ideas.

 

[StoryTeller]

yep fudge do it too....the size one leads me to a thought on scales tho (a sideline i know) thered be nothing wrong with applying this scale setup as a detail generator i.e. we have two big objects 1, but if we need to we can define one as big 1/0 big/typical...and the other as big 1/3 big/gigantic.....clunky i know based on the wording, but a neat infinitely expanding "tool", giving as much consistent detail as needed for different situations and uses. (by the way, the diff between 1-10 and +5to-5 is that the latter is base 11, which IMO would work better for a system like this)
IMO, 'Benchmarks' for this system should be like the metric system (and science in general) and hang itself off real world benchmarks as much as possible.
a few more:
Habitable zone posn (with 0 as ideal)
Relative agility (for everything from fastdawing sixguns to spacecombat)
Starport Quality (within Starport type)
Xenophobia/Xenophilia
Light/dark
Scattershot i know, but then, this could be able to provide a self consistent link between all aspects of game mechanics and descriptions

 

[BitKnot]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StoryTeller:
... i.e. we have two big objects 1, but if we need to we can define one as big 1/0 big/typical...and the other as big 1/3 big/gigantic.....

...by the way, the diff between 1-10 and +5to-5 is that the latter is base 11, which IMO would work better for a system like this
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm a little fuzzy on that first sentence (and thirsty - how much will it cost to mail hunter's keg

?)... are you suggesting a ratio of big / gigantic, or a modifier: type of big = big gigantic? Or something else?

As to the range (both are still base(radix) of ten

), I took latter to mean you perferred -5 to +5, since this leaves a definative 'middle' qualifier?

P.S. StoryTellers not so bad - I picked mine based on my 7th or 8th nonsensical pick for a Yahoo mail account (not that you'd want to know the first ones!). Glad you participate regardless of your username!

 

[Graham Spearing]

As has been said Fudge uses descriptors as their core mechanics. That would be radical- using Fudge as the core mechanic for Traveller

I think I need a lie down.

------------------
Graham
graham@tux.uklinux.net

 

[Darium]

Look at this then ; http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275/
he he he

 

[Daniel R. Lane]

I just finished looking though T5,s playtest pages. I'm quite happy with what I see. One question so far. What do stats represent? Are the individul stats as comon as they would be if rolled? If so, a "C" is 2.2, 98.61th centile, and can be expectd to occur in less than 2 individual out of eavry 100 randomly selected. An "F" would be 3.52 standard deviations, 99.98th centile, and could be expected in 2 out of every 10,000 individuals. This hardly seems superhuman since one could reasonably expect to sometime encounter individuals with IQs of 152 or above (for example).