[Terry]

There's a simple addition I'd been planning to make in my current RPG project - at the start of the game, I wanted to give the player the opertunity to "gift" the main character with a certain bonus attibute. You could choose to gift her with strength (which makes combat easier), charisma (which makes conversation easier), intelligence (which has a number of subtle effects, quick thinking in battle to do slightly more damage with well placed hits and avoided blows, bonuses in conversation thanks to a boost in perception and slyness), and sensitivity (which has particular effects individual to the game). The idea came from nothing more than the desire to have a simple char-gen system. (I've always liked, for example, choosing the alignment of my main character in Baldur's Gate, or ... sorry, I'm rambling...)

anyway, All the personality type discussion that I've read on the forums recently gave me an idea for something that I may or may not implement in my current project. I've just thought that it might be cool to choose the main character's personality type at the start of the game, and have their stat bonuses depend on that.

So for example, if you choose to make your character extroverted, then they get the a charisma bonus. If you choose to make your character introverted, they get an intelligence bonus. The only big problem with this is that extroverted people aren't nessicarily very charismatic, and introverted people aren't always that clever. Plus, there's no reasonable way to give strength bonuses this way. Those problems aside, I think it could work.

(It reminds me a little of one of those Ultima systems (I forget the number) where you were asked a load of questions at the start which determined your class...)

Anyway, does it sound like it could work? Or would it just be annoying?
_________________
http://www.distractionware.com

[js71]

It could work. I'm not sure about tying it in with bonuses though, maybe you should have them seperate and have the personality type just affect conversations. It'd add a lot of replay value if the conversations and general dialogue were different enough with each type.

[Nephilim]

[Terry]

I've been thinking about this, and I don't think it would work after all. It's one thing to define an aspect of the main character's personality, but to define it completly throws up too many plot problems.
_________________
http://www.distractionware.com

[tcaudilllg]

As far as I can tell, this is the way people's attributes filter by persona type:

Extroverted types avoid thinking about what they say before they say it. They like to be "where the action is". Extroversion is actually synonomous(sp?) with charisma. The thing is, when people advance into adulthood, they attain the ability to act as their own social vice, although only to a small degree. Introverts learn to extrovert themselves and affect others one-on-one, and extroverts learn to begin "thinking about themselves first", and begin thinking about how they relate to the people around them and what their role is. So although charisma is by its nature charismatic, past the age of 22, both extroverts and introverts can use it. A few people are naturally charismatic and reflective, although I don't yet know how to describe the role of megalomania in personality....

The problem is complicated further because even in youth, an introvert can let information in from the outside and an extrovert can stop to consider what their role in the outside world is. These events are only momentary, however. They seem to be what are referred to as "moments of growth", and they happen throughout the human life cycle. They are the "moments of revelation" and clarity. The difference between controlling information flow as a child, and controlling it as an adult, is that the adult can control it consciously. In the mind of a child, the information enters unconsciously, but the conscious mind puts the pieces together to prevent the individual's ego from falling apart and going insane.

In terms of intellect, there are several different forms of it. "Sensate" people tend to be stronger than their intuitive counterparts. Intuitives, especially intuitive thinkers, tend to have a lot of difficulty building strength. (although I can't say with certainty whether there really is a difference in genes, or if it is a matter of personal preference toward working out and being physically active. It's probably a mixture of both) Sensing people tend to get headaches when they try to visualize something in their head (e.g. using spatial imagination); Intuitives are adept at spatial visualization, but at the price of noticing where they left their keys, for example. Cross-sensory intuitives are a whole different story, sensing patterns and intuiting reality, and what not. Heavy super-mage Sephiroth-like thinking. (and the secret of DarkDread's appeal, offhand. No offense to him of course. Oh yeah: DD and Shigeru Miyamoto are the same type. How about that...?)

The difference between thinking and feeling is, frankly the lack of one or the other. A feeler thinks little, and a thinker feels little and thinks a lot. Now both can process information about the same; the difference is how the data is interpreted. Feeling people are adept at understanding how parts of the world relate to each other, give and take, action and reaction. Thinkers are better at examining cause and effect. You say you scored INXP? That means you get the emotional cause and effect data from a logical suggestion. You know the emotional harm a logical suggestion will cause. You also know the logical consequences of an emotive response.

Beyond feeling and thinking, sensing and intuition, extroversion and introversion, there is the issue of perception vs. judgement, which seems to be a difference between "RAM" sizes. Judges have little temporary storage, perceivers have a lot. The two are equalized because neither can make a decision until they have all the information they can temporarily store. If a judge has 16 k of RAM and a perceiver has a meg, then the judge will make 64 times as many decisions in the same space of time as the perceiver takes to make one, which can be an advantage or disadvantage depending on the situation.

I would advise against using personality types to make a game, unless you're going to use AI to manage the personalities. However, using personality types is an excellent way to better understand character's relationships with each other, so it can be useful for storytelling.

Are you really an INXP? Sylvia Path was an INXP, so is John Nash. So, being an INXP has its benefits, but it also has its risks.