I don’t really like the opposing pair kind of stats (especially the personality ones), they get pretty annoying to control and can force you to pick choices you don’t want just because they fit your personality stats.
Also I don’t like relationship stats with fairmath where you can have 90% relationship and doing nice things with that person only increase it to 91% but one wrong choice and it goes down to like 70
The way I’m currently writing my piece, stats are usually automatically taken into consideration, so you never “fail” and you can never choose the “wrong” option.
Most often the fact that a stat is high leads to a choice with several options on how you wish to utilize that stat in the given situation. Thus, whether a stat is high or low creates the choices for the player, but the player still chooses which choice to take. All choices are equally “good”, since they affect numerical values that are taken into consideration at certain stages.
To give a loose example:
If your character has high Strength, you get a choice on whether you want to use it to focus on defeating the enemy, or the help your ally out from beneath some rubble or if you want to break some piece of equipment.
The choice then modifies a certain number. For example it could change “Win the fight” by + 1, or if you help your friend “Ally survival” by + 1, or the third option “Sabotage” + 1.
Then, other stats are given similar choices. They add numbers to stuff too. Then certain other things(like previous outcomes on previous scenes, whether you have some item, etc) may affect them as well. Finally, all the modifiers are calculated and a final number is created. Then this number is compared to several values. For instance, if your Ally Survival is 5, and the values it’s compared to are 3(ally dies) and 7(ally is uninjured). Since it’s greater than 3, your ally doesn’t die, but less than 7, it means your ally is injured.
This way the player’s stats have a meaningful effect on the game, but they aren’t “obvious” choices, since they give the player options on how to actually utilize the stat, and that utility itself is what drives the outcomes in a “non-linear” fashion, because many other things affect them as well. And since there are more than just 2 outcomes for the things, it’s not a question of “wasting” your stat by choosing the “wrong” option, but rather a question of “what sort of narrative would you roughly desire.”
It isn’t perfect, but I’m trying to experiment and see whether it can work, since I’m often annoyed at the way stats are implemented and I’d like to see a different way of doing things.
This sounds like the best thing since sliced bread!
I think it is best if games lean more on ability based stats and only use personality stats that effect the gameplay minimally. This usually makes for balanced gameplay and it’s what I am doing in my game. However, it is very good to use stat functions for character relations and such which I think is important.
It’s sometimes difficult to distinguish between ability and personalty, it seems to me. If I am rather polished and enchanting as an individual, that is certainly an aspect of my personality, but just as easily testable as an ability if I am attempting to impress a dowager countess at the society ball.
I could also imagine something like “Deceitful” being used to good effect both as a personality trait and an ability stat. Certainly these things could be mishandled, but I’m not sure I see a necessary distinction between ability and personality.
The problem with the stats is that sometimes you are required to farm certain points to achieve things you want, and no alternatives are provided. If there are different approaches for different play styles, then stats are not that big an issue.
I agree. Using a skill that’s somewhere in between personality like independence or assertiveness is a good idea to implement.
I’ll admit that some personalities have implied abilities behind them, but in practice there are two personal grievances with using personalities instead of abilities.
One is the stat determining my choices. For example: because I have a high ‘deceitful’, then at certain turning points I might be automatically forced to lie, or penalized for not lying.
The second is the stat being shaped by my in-game behavior (which would make sense as a personality stat, but not necessarily for an ability). For example: to get my ‘deceitful’ stat high enough to pass a difficult check, I must lie to anyone and everyone I meet, regardless of circumstances and role-playing choices.
Ooh, this is a really interesting topic for me, because I spent a long time thinking about my stats, and I have quite a few of them.
Sorry if I said something offensive, I’m just trying to get my point across. 
Stat bars exist to keep track of the choices you do that are of the same kind. So yes, if you want the game to know you’re a good liar, you have to lie. Otherwise, how would the game know that you’re good at it? You can’t just say you’re good at it and then not practice it. That’s telling, not showing.
I’m not really fond of choices that’re basically, “What’s your best, good, and worst stat?” I think it would be better if you determine what “stat” you’re best at through choices, one by one. Say, this choice determines your speed. Then the next one, strength. And not, “Do you dodge, or do you block?” That implies that you can’t be both strong and fast.
But, “Wouldn’t the player just pick all the options that increase the stats?” That’s a fair point. I guess you could limit the stat gains for the other stats. It’s also a way out of the four-point trap (choosing from the same four skills over and over) without having extra stats. That way, you explore the weaknesses of the character, and not just everything that happens be a success because you picked your best stat. Maybe create situations where all stats can be tested, so there are varying amounts of success and failure. There wouldn’t be a “best” stat build.
What I’m trying to do with my WIP instead is to make them into opposed personality stats, while keeping a few “attribute” stats like STR, that wouldn’t make sense to be opposing. I like personality stats because they can also serve as “flavor stats”. You can’t exactly tell if a person is strong or weak in a normal conversation.
The apparent problem is, there’s no incentive to stay in the middle. But, by making them personality stats instead of abilities, I’m automatically including a downside.
In my opinion, a “lying” skill works differently than being “deceitful”. A high Lying stat just means you’re good at it. But being deceitful can be seen as both positive and negative. There’s no negative to a high Lying skill, (not counting the consequences).
So, I think by making both sides of the opposed stats “neutral” or both having good and bad effects depending on the situation, you can avoid that problem. You can min-max that stat, sure, but there’s also consequences to it. You can stay at the middle and not succeed very much, but you are also in less “risk”.
I think this is what constitutes as a great opposing stat.
In this case, being too “honest” can make people like you more, as well as have some of them try to take advantage of that, or may think that you’re too blunt.
I have 10 “personality” stats I grouped into personality, thoughts, and actions. I plan not to gate any options or “actions” (although I think how the MC executes the action can also be influenced by the stats), but I’ll have your personality stat determine what your “reactions” are. I think that’s a happy compromise to the “roleplay” argument.
I still have “ability/attribute” stats for things that don’t work exactly that way (like strength). Brutality vs. Finesse like in Choice of the Dragon could work, but I think this is more about how exactly that approach works for your gameplay and narrative.
I haven’t really tested this approach yet, but the way I see it, it fits my story. I’m pretty sure it won’t work for everyone, and that it has both pros and cons to it.
@Tiavals I like your approach, but unfortunately that doesn’t work well in my story where I consider physical stats as secondary since the MC is a child in the modern world. So I think personality stats fits better for me.
I guess it’s how you use the stats that is important, NOT the type of stats you have. They exist for different reasons.
TL;DR of my opinions:
Stats should track your choices (how you act or how good/bad you are at something), not what you are good at.
Both sides of opposed stats can have both positive and negative effects. Not just positive ones. Preferring one stat over the other carries consequences as well. Staying in the middle is “low risk, low reward”, but gives a 3rd option.
Attributes/skills have their place, as well as True/False variables that wouldn’t make sense to track. Depends on the story.
Don’t gate actions according to personalities (choices), but how the MC reacts to something should be determined by personality (narrative). Depends on the kind of personality if it should be opposed stats or a true/false variable.
Personality stats are more engaging. Dialogue and narrative that doesn’t change make the MC sound bland and the same whatever your choices are. Depends on the story/POV/how much work you want to do, I guess.
I hope that made sense. 
This is just my own opinion and personal philosophy.
By the way, since I don’t think it was discussed here yet, what do you guys think of stat/relationship descriptions? You don’t see a lot of that and personally I like reading those, as long as there’s a number still visible. It’s more work but this solves the ambiguity problem with percentages.
I’m currently yet to get my relationship stats going, but I don’t think I’ll include descriptions that represent the stat’s value.
Instead, I’ll probably going to create 5 different “relationship” stats for every single npc: minor-good, med-good, great-good, minor-bad, and great-bad. All of them are “opinions level,” and – if you know where I’m going with this – I don’t combine them into a single opposed_pair stat.
Do you mean that there are 5 levels of opinions with minor-good being the middle? I think that’s a really good way to simplify things instead of writing a description for each.
Oooh, and now you made me think of something. I was thinking of writing descriptions for waaay more than 5 levels. Five seems more reasonable. I’ll just have it so that the intervals adjust according to where you are in the story. Hehe. Thanks. 
For my relationship stats I have 2 for each major character: How much they like you and how much you like them. And then I show the average of the two values in a “summary” page. ROs get an additional relationship variable and for minor NPCs that don’t appear much I’ll just keep to a single relationship stat.
I don’t like fairmath very much, so my initial relationship values are low. Starting at 50% doesn’t seem to allow for much growth.
I think I’ve spent way too long in the stats screen. 
Let’s see, personality stats should only influence how others see you, or seriously affect your character ala Samurai of Hyuga, the worse you can do is heroes rise in that department. Opposed stats stink even with personality. And most importantly of all, down with fairmath. It’s awful.
And multiple stats should be in use for checks.
That covers my major opinions
Shouldn’t that be covered by relationship or reputation stats though?
I guess personality stats don’t have to be opposed stats, since they’re technically just a single variable. But I think it’s good to have it clear that a stat being low isn’t necessarily bad. I just find my personality stats more interesting than physical stats, you know. 
Oh yes. This is a really good idea for preventing just having a single high stat. I guess another variation you could make is, if you fail the first check, another stat is checked so that you don’t always fail completely.
People can act erratically or change through certain events, while it’s easier to judge how others will react to the character then how the player will want to be. So unless you’re intent on making the mc their own individual there’s not much reason to have the mc act independently from you.
And make failures not punishing all the time. Like that time in Fallout Dead Money’s where if you passed a check the companion would betray while if you did’n’t try or do it, he wouldn’t.
Fairmath isn’t bad; it’s just easy to abuse… 
As long as you don’t have too large changes (unless they really make sense) and never set the test points too high or low, then it’s easier to use than standard “math”. Admittedly, it works better with relationships than with, say, skills. 
Fairmath is just a simple way for non-coders to do those stats calculation easily: the stats can go up or down, but never beyond 0 or 100 (technically, it’s 1 and 99, but you get the gist).
I don’t think Dan intended fairmath to replace the conventional stats growth system. Just like CScript itself, fairmath is used to ease writers to write IF without heavy coding background.
I don’t recommend for these writers to get too creative with fairmath, though. I’d advise against using both %+5 and %+10 in your game; stick to a single value of addition/reduction to make tracking the stats easier.
Now, it’s just a matter if there’s a game out there with delicate stats system that’s fair and rewarding…
I always use a couple of variables for each stat: one for positive and the other for negative, each one initialized to 1. When the player makes a choice, I increment either the positive or the negative.
In the stat checks, I compare with positive / (positive + negative); and in the stats page, I show it multiplied it by 100.
I’ve seen people on this forum who dislike extreme uses of stats in COG’s. Namely when it comes to failing because a certain stat isn’t high enough, having to choose the option to raise one stat over and over again, or being forced to solve every situation the same way because you only have one stat that’s high enough.
I somewhat agree with these complaints. Though I’ve only played one game where it was a huge problem for me. But on the other hand, limiting choices based on stats is also a good way of preventing the player character from being unstoppable.
So, for those who don’t like extreme uses of stats, what would you do instead?
I’m in the middle of a WIP right now, and while I’m working with stats at the moment I’m seriously considering a re-write where the player defines a few things the MC knows and/or skills they’ve picked up and use those as a “soft” boolean check for obstacles. Eg the player picks “lockpicking” so the MC is good at quickly and quietly unlocking doors. An MC without that “perk” can still open the door, just not as quickly or as quietly.
Just in the concept stage right now (and really mostly a rehash of an rpg perk system) but I’d really like to get away from hard numbers and better let players define the type of character they want to play.