I have a mechanic I came up with for a Pen and Paper Roleplaying game, possibly something OSRish, that I kind of came up with by accident and somehow I want to build a game around it.

The idea originally came from the Accelerated rules for Fate Core, namely Approaches. Approaches are kind of dynamic adaptations of the six classic ability scores, which are static. They are adjectives and the moment I realized this I adapted them for use in Cortex Plus Heroic to combine with skills I lifted from Firefly which were verbs. The result was you could make a Declaration of Intent which would tell you what dice to include in your pool. It would follow the formula something like, "I [Approach]ly [Skill] the [Target/Objective] with my [Power Set/Signature Item]." That might have been the most elegant mechanic I have used in an RPG.

However, using Approaches for an OSR/d20 Hack would have to be different because there aren't things like Aspects/Distinctions or Power Sets, not in the same way. I should point out that I don't use the Approaches as written in Accelerated. They were probably derived from the classic six ability scores and they kind of reminded me of the base classes from d20 Modern. The names I use are: Charming, Clever, Forceful, Quick, Tough and Willful. I don't like the last one but I haven't found I word that I like better yet.

My first thought for an OSR/d20 Hack was to use Approaches in place of character classes, which would still make them somewhat similar to the d20 Modern base classes. It was kind of a neat idea but also kind of convoluted. Also, I kind of like character classes in this kind of game.

So then I thought, what if I use them the way they were intended to be used in Fate Accelerated, to simplify and replace Skills? This would be different than how I used them in Cortex Plus Heroic which were combined with skills. This is not contrary to the spirit of the OSR, where some classic games didn't even have skills originally. How would I handle this?

It occurred to me that the way to go here would be to have a clear definition of Actions that can occur and then tie those actions to Approaches. The most obvious would be Forceful for a melee attack, or Quick for a ranged attack or melee with a light weapon. These would combine with ability scores and added to a d20 roll. However, I also playtested Cubicle 7's Doctor Who Adventures in Time and Space and one of the things I really liked was that you could combine Abilities and Skills depending on the circumstances. For instance, someone like Scully from the X-Files shot a gun with surgical precision because she was a surgeon with detailed knowledge of anatomy. She might combine Intelligence with Quick because she just knows where to aim. It is entirely possible for two characters to be able to accomplish similar results with different Approaches.

It also occurred to me that there are different sorts of actions, including reactions and move actions and sometimes free actions or quick actions, and then it occurred to me that Saving Throws were pretty much reactions and all of a sudden I don't have to worry about Saving Throws anymore. Considering 5e uses Ability Scores for saves, that's easy enough to relate to.

As for progression, if we were to compare this to 5e then Approaches would also replace Proficiency Bonus. Bonuses are related to character class. You would have your Warrior Type whose main Approaches would be Forceful and Tough, your Rogue Type who would have Quick and Clever. I'm inclined to make a Science Fiction setting so I might use classes inspired by the Buck Rogers XXVc RPG and iterations of d20 Star Wars, though I may go with something generic like Fighter, Rogue, Expert, Noble(Leader), Adept, Explorer/Survivor. I have thought of going classless, but if I do it will be for a non d20 version of Approach, that uses 2d6 for rolls, three ability scores and the six Approaches. Damage in that system is inspired by Cubicle 7's DWAITAS, but the core mechanic is similar to the d20 version.

So as I mentioned there will be character classes, for fun and familiarity. I'd probably use something like BECMI/RC type classes as a base since this is supposed to be kind of an OSR like thing and then go from there. Multiclassing would work like 3x+ because it works, though I have considered an optional AD&D 1eish type multiclassing which also kind of works like 3e Gestalt rules. Each class would have two Main Approaches (or maybe 1-3? I'll only know when the pencil hits the paper), two Secondary and two Tertiary or some combination which is kind of reminiscent of Saves in 3.x. I might even do something like the class only stating what the Primary Approaches are and then you get to decide what is Secondary and what is Tertiary though it might be best to just make that decision myself and add some classless progression as an option. But later. Much later.

I've been thinking about this mechanic and writing notes for it for some time now. I don't even have a setting in mind, I just think it's fun to write it out and see where it goes.

Ok, I like that, it's pretty neat to see your thought process coming up with this stuff, however, it's very unclear how your idea would play out. I know you're still kinda brainstorming, but if you could come up with a simple situation, and explain how two characters might use a different approach and get somewhat similar results while staying true to their character, that would be neat.

What kind of bonuses would Approaches replace? Skills (active Approach), saving throws (reactive Approach)? Anything else?

Once I declared my approach, do I just roll and add bonuses based on my approach? Again, a

You would be better off working up a campaign you want to run. Then work through, via posts, how you are implementing the various elements with your ideas. This will keep you grounded and not spiral into abstract nonsense like some RPGs find themselves in. Talk about design theory will still be there but folks will see it in action as well.

My view is that doing the rules first is putting the cart before the horse. Figure out the setting/campaign first and then the rules to run that. If you just have a genre in mind then go with the most stereotypical setting for that genre.

I think the biggest obstacle you'll face (in the reception to this approach) is the difference between very ephemeral measurements of capability versus physical\in-world measurements of capability.

For example - If I'm more "enthusiastic" than another character, can I life more weight than that other character? What if I'm a Halfling and the other character is an Ogre? I believe the classic ability scores give you some indication of in-world measurements of capability and some (albeit abstract) relativity of like "things" in the world. I find it more difficult to measure things in "dramatic impact". I feel like that should be based on player choices and representation (call it "player skill" if you want).

I DO like having some emotional or supernatural context that enhances the in-world relativity. So, for me, I like it that generally the Ogre is stronger than the Halfling BUT if the conviction of the Good Halfling outweighs the corruption of the Evil Ogre, then in a dramatic conflict the Halfing might get an edge because of that conviction. In this one moment, the drama trumps the assumed reality.

I DO appreciate your enthusiasm, and with the new Cortex Prime in the works, you may consider putting something together for the community program for that system. If you get in on the Kickstarter, you can download the system draft right away.

At work right now but I'll see about compiling some of my hand written notes into something more coherent.

@estar Yeah this thing is weird. I do have some ideas for a setting but haven't made any decisions. This thing just popped in my head a while back but I figured I'd try developing it anyway. I have some ideas but I don't want to tack on something generic.

Okay, I'm going to try and recall some stuff here to clarify on how Approaches work.

- Approaches replace skills by acting as broad skills, kind of similar to the original mechanic in Fate Core.

- The Approaches that I am currently using are called Charming, Clever, Forceful, Quick, Tough and Willful (still need a better word for that) corresponding loosely to the ability scores of Charisma, Intelligence, Strength, Dexterity, Constitution and Wisdom as well as the d20 Modern Base Classes of Charismatic, Smart, Strong, Fast, Tough and Determined.

- I am attaching actions to them. Some actions can be used by all such as Attack, Move, Saving Throws etc, and some will be class specific like a Rogue's Sneak Attack.

- Maybe I'll add some RP stuff for training that lets you unlock some class specific actions, but it's not high on my list of things to do.

- Approaches will typically be used as a d20 roll plus Ability Score plus Approach and any relevant stuff you have like weapons and armor or other equipment. This could be things like melee attack being STR+Forceful or DEX+Quick for light weapons and range weapons, but other combinations are possible kind of like how Doctor Who Adventures in Time and Space allows for other combinations. Oh yeah I'm going to have fun writing that without giving players licence to break the game.

- Approaches are also designed to act similar to Proficiency Bonus in that you get a bonus that progresses as you level. In a way, progression will work similarly to how 3.xe saving throws work. There will be two Good Proficiencies, based on class. Two average and two weak which can be decided by the player, maybe. For progression, I am thinking something like Good: +1/2 levels, Average: +1/3 levels and Weak +1/4 levels. The game would cap at Level 20 to begin with, which would give a maximum Approach bonus of +10 at level 20 and a minimum of +5. Characters that elect to multiclass will likely have Approaches somewhere in the middle. The reason I am doing it this way is that in 5e Proficiency caps at +6. I like this, because it means that even at level 20 I can kill you with goblins. What I mean is that a lower range makes level disparity easier to handle. You can have a party with two level 8 characters and a level 12 character and build encounters where they are all useful. For combat, progression follows something like 1/1, 2/3, 1/2, 1/3 or 1/1, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4 depending on which system you use. My range is smaller because even if I incorporate powers, I am not making a superhero game. Oh, and I liked e6 for 3.5e.

-Ability scores have a soft cap of 20, a medium cap of 30 and a hard cap of 50. Ability scores in creatures will rarely be over 30. Did I mention I'm not making a superhero game? Well funny thing here. My ability score caps come from my old old conversion of Marvel Superheroes to D&D 1e, and I had to rescale Strength. I had a copy of Mayfair's DC Superheroes when I was working on it which used a progression of x2 per level of Ability. That was too much overkill, but when I used the square root of 2 as my multiplier it worked a lot better. The huge hard cap of 50 is because I want to be able to make a kind of universal table, like what is found in Mutants and Masterminds 3e, so if I drop a building on someone I'll have a good idea of how to deal with it. The game itself would only go up to 30 for some powerful monsters, and no one would ever see the hard cap unless for some strange reason people like the game or something.

-I don't want to get crazy with defining different sorts of actions, but I would like to have the ones I use to be clear in how to act in a round. For combat, I am not sure how I want to handle iterative attacks or even if I want to use them at all. There is some charm in having a single attack that scales which can be described as a barrage of blows if the player likes or any other descriptive fluff. A lack of iterative attacks does make working out what you can do in a round much easier especially when combining different sorts of actions. However, I realize that fighter types having multiple attacks is an attractive feature. I may be able to handle it as a class related unlockable not necessarily limited to a fighter.

-I like how 5e defines damage types. You can have a sword which does 1d6 slashing and 1d6 cold damage, which still does 2d6 but could do more or less if the defender has resistances or vulnerabilities. Damage types that give saving throws would be attached to certain Approaches. Once again, you might have the option of using more than one. A rogue dodging an explosion might use some sort of tumble or evasion to jump out of the blast radius, whereas someone else might jump behind cover, say using Clever to think quickly combined with Dexterity because you still have to haul your butt there, though a Barbarian might use Clever and Strength. Once again, I have to be careful not to give licence to break the game.

Other newisms: Ascending AC which I'll probably just call Defense. Average numbers for Health (hit points) and weapon damages. This will be an optional thing, but something I want to include because I often use it for mooks and other minor NPCs and monsters. So numbers would be represented something like 2d6 (7) where the number in parentheses is the median rounded down. Some people don't like it, but remember ascending AC is exactly this, 10+ your defense bonuses and armor. You can easily roll a d20 for Defense if you wanted. Stacking multiclassing. I'm sure I said that in my first post. 1e like Multiclassing may be offered as an option maybe with some elements of Gestalt. You could use one or the other or neither.

Things I don't care for: Feats. Feat chains. I allow Feats in 5e because I allow RAW. In my own game though, I don't really want it. Maybe I'll have some sort of Kit/Background/Secondary Skill/Profession thing. I don't like too many rules so if I add this it will have to have a specific purpose, maybe like how Secondary Skills/Professions worked in 1e, with possible unlockable actions.

Races and Species: I don't like Tolkienisms. Yet, I also bought AIME because the reviews were THAT good. I don't want to be entrenched in the culture/folklore of a specific society because there is no reason a Fantasy World would have to be parallel to our own, that is if I use Fantasy. I have thought some things out, and have my own take on fantasy races. I have also considered Science Fantasy. My favorite authors as a kid before I even got into D&D were Larry Niven, Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein. If I were to pick one, it would likely be Niven. But then again as a kid I also liked shows like He-Man, Black Star, and Thundarr the Barbarian with maybe some Arzach and Dancers of the End of Time thrown in, but more mortal and less Godlike and no Cyphers. My current method for working on game worlds is to make Random Fractal Maps in Fractal Terrains, tweak them and then export them to Campaign Cartographer. Then I just kind of stare at them for a while until some sort of inspiration happens.

Classes: Actually my initial idea for this system was to try and make a semi-clone of Buck Rogers XXVc. I like the idea of a Solar System based game with no FTL travel. Many d20 systems are inspiring. You need a Fighter type, likely a Rogue type which may or may not be buildable from an Expert. I like the idea of classes like Expert and Noble being viable. Games like Star Wars d20 and XXvc have some neat ideas. I'm sure I have a PDF somewhere with a breakdown on how to build Classic D&D like classes. True20 had some neat stuff along those lines as well.

So basically for classes, I'm going to have to come up with a system to build classes, which means making charts. Fortunately, I am good at making charts. I probably want six, which just seems like a good number for mixing and matching and they can be min/maxed with ability scores and Approaches. Maybe I could just rename Barbarian to Tank for a Con based build and then I could make an ability called "Tank Fury". Or maybe even some good Tank puns. The only exception will be The Adept, which will be versatile and be able to base their Powers on different abilities.

The thing is. I don't want to make another Stars Without Number, or White Star, or DCC or whatever. I'm doing this because once I thought of this mechanic, it wouldn't go away. You know, I write things down in a coil notebook at night for different ideas and mechanics. I mostly end up doing thinly veiled math exercises. Last night I was reading through my copy of the new Blue Rose and I worked out the probabilities for ability score generation. Statistically in AGE, you would have to roll seven characters to get one with a negative Ability Score. Anyhow. I just like playing with numbers and ideas, and I'm having fun. With Approach, I just kind of started writing it out on a lark and then stuff started to fit, and when I realized it solved my saving throw problem I was sold. I really like the idea of having something to replace skills, because skills wasn't really much of a D&D thing unless you were a thief. Apparently I'm still in the classes section, so I am not certain what all the classes will be but definitely some sort of Fighter, Rogue and Adept and very possibly an Expert and Noble. Oh, and the Tank. I'm very tempted to making them all versatile with regards to Primary Abilities and Approaches.

I realize I can roll everything into three classes, but... no. That just seems too generic for me. Naming them after abilities like d20 Modern is a no go too, since that's what Approaches are for. I want named classes that can compliment abilities and Approaches but can do neat stuff on their own. And I just like the number 6.

Powers: This will exist. It may be Psionic or something. Rest assured, there will be no MTHAC0s, no MACs and no tangents. Damage to Health is still damage. Um, I did say I wasn't making a superhero game, right? So yeah, I'm just calling Hit Points Health. I did think of some kind of Fatigue system that would apply to exertion and power use. But then I thought that since I am not making a superhero game and I am not using an Ability Score Scale I came up with as a conversion from MSH to 1e that maybe I should use Karma as a kind of stat to use powers. So basically, Karma is power points. However... it might be possible to make meta-game mechanics or stunts work as well, for those with good Karma. By good, I mean lots of points. There probably won't be alignment, At all. I kind of like the idea of non adepts being able to perform stunts and stuff. Kind of reminds me a bit of Dragon Fist from years back. This will take some serious number crunching.

Sorry for going on so long. Writing like this helps solidify some ideas for me.

Well I have an idea of what I am doing, going hand in hand with the stuff I am working on in the Menzter thread. I know how I am going to handle [strike]magic[/strike] powers, and I have a good idea of the kind of classes I want to use.

The thing I am hung up on is a system. I have a few options I've considered.

1. Something based off of the Buck Rogers XXVc game, basically Science Fiction set in the Solar System with no FTL travel. Since XXVc had technology which was based on an extension of our own, I'd probably continue along that path. Transhumanism may be touched on, but would not be a focus. The problem is, the original game had rules in three books running around 200 pages. I don't want to go that big if I don't have to.

2. A colony game. After an accident in space, a colony ship evacuates to the nearest habitable planet and the survivors need to search for other Life Boats, Life Pods for survivors and tech in order to try and make a viable settlement from what they have. Since I like the idea of planetary romance, there may be at least one humanoid species. This could also be a lot of work, especially when I considered rules for procedural generated systems, planets and creatures. It might be easier to go with something I pre make.

3. Urban something with superpowers maybe less X-men and more Scanners.

4. Urban Fantasy, some sort of Scooby Doo/X-Files thing.

Suggestions would be welcome.

So over the last few months, this idea kind of mutated quite a bit. This was in part because of my Mentzer Monster Reaction Chart thread, where I mapped the Mentzer Table to d20 for fun because I do stuff like that, being a nerd and all. For fun, I decided to try and map a d20/OSRish based game on 2d6, basically taking what I did with the Mentzer Table and applying it in reverse to pretty much everything. But I wanted to do something different. I didn't want something static and I didn't want the kind of progression that other d20 games have. I also read some comment about Pundit not liking dice pool games, which left me to wonder if it was possible to make a dice pool system he might like. Who knows? But I really like where I am going with this. I work really slow because I am chronically ill and have a job that I have been working at for three years against my Doctor's wishes (nine years in total) because it pays well and I like paying bills.

Anyway, here we go. You have a basic 2d6 for almost every roll, replacing the d20. But this is a dice pool system, so you get more dice. You roll the pool, and add two dice together.  

Approaches as mentioned above can also be described as Dynamic Ability Scores. I might just call them abilities. Who knows? For the time being they are the same as listed above: Charming, Clever, Forceful, Quick, Tough and Willful (or some better word if I fine one). Abilities are no longer linear, they are rated in d6s similar to any given WEG RPG. Approaches/Abilities will probably have some cap around 4-5d6 for really talented characters.

There are no skills. Each Approach/Ability has actions attached to it. Combat actions may be attached to Forceful or Quick. Saving throws are reactions attached to various ability scores. Defense stuff is also reactions attached to Quick, Tough and maybe even Clever because I know for a fact that quick thinking can get you out of the way of a weapon that is trying to kill you. Some actions are inherent, some are trained/unlockable. Unlockable actions would be stuff like Classic D&D Thieving Skills, weapon proficiencies (attack with a certain weapon/weapon group), specialized actions (Investigation as opposed to a Spot Check like thing). I have not yet compiled a list of actions, though my intention is to try and keep each Approach/Ability nearly equally useful. I don't want a God ability if I can help it. I'm looking at you, Quick. Certain unlocked actions may grant bonus d6s.

I am not sure of how big a dice pool I want to go with yet. Currently I am at somewhere between 7d6-12d6 as a hard cap. Probably the best approach (pun intended) is to figure out the sweet spot in playtesting. As for advancement, since you get more dice, the odds of rolling higher become more favorable. Here are the results from using a dice pool ranging from 2d6-12d6, keeping the highest 2d6.

Multiple actions

Yahtzee

Health and Karma

No character classes



No skills

So over the last few months, this idea kind of mutated quite a bit. This was in part because of my Mentzer Monster Reaction Chart thread, where I mapped the Mentzer Table to d20 for fun because I do stuff like that, being a nerd and all. For fun, I decided to try and map a d20/OSRish based game on 2d6, basically taking what I did with the Mentzer Table and applying it in reverse to pretty much everything. But I wanted to do something different. I didn't want something static and I didn't want the kind of progression that other d20 games have. I also read some comment about Pundit not liking dice pool games, which left me to wonder if it was possible to make a dice pool system he might like. Who knows? But I really like where I am going with this. I work really slow because I am chronically ill and have a job that I have been working at for three years against my Doctor's wishes (nine years in total) because it pays well and I like paying bills.

Anyway, here we go. You have a basic 2d6 for almost every roll, replacing the d20. But this is a dice pool system, so you get more dice. You roll the pool, and add two dice together.  

Approaches as mentioned above can also be described as Dynamic Ability Scores. I might just call them abilities. Who knows? For the time being they are the same as listed above: Charming, Clever, Forceful, Quick, Tough and Willful (or some better word if I fine one). Abilities are no longer linear, they are rated in d6s similar to any given WEG RPG. Approaches/Abilities will probably have some cap around 4-5d6 for really talented characters.

There are no skills. Each Approach/Ability has actions attached to it. Combat actions may be attached to Forceful or Quick. Saving throws are reactions attached to various ability scores. Defense stuff is also reactions attached to Quick, Tough and maybe even Clever because I know for a fact that quick thinking can get you out of the way of a weapon that is trying to kill you. Some actions are inherent, some are trained/unlockable. Unlockable actions would be stuff like Classic D&D Thieving Skills, weapon proficiencies (attack with a certain weapon/weapon group), specialized actions (Investigation as opposed to a Spot Check like thing). I have not yet compiled a list of actions, though my intention is to try and keep each Approach/Ability nearly equally useful. I don't want a God ability if I can help it. I'm looking at you, Quick. Certain unlocked actions may grant bonus d6s.

I am not sure of how big a dice pool I want to go with yet. Currently I am at somewhere between 7d6-12d6 as a hard cap. Probably the best approach (pun intended) is to figure out the sweet spot in playtesting. As for advancement, since you get more dice, the odds of rolling higher become more favorable. Here are the results from using a dice pool ranging from 2d6-12d6, keeping the highest 2d6.

Multiple actions are handled as such. A success depends on a target number which is determined by difficulty. A 7 (the median of 2d6) is a success for an average roll. If your dice pool has four or more d6s, then each success can be used as an Action. The limitation here is that in a round (6-10 second period of time) you can only choose one Approach/Ability to choose your actions from, because anything more complicated would drive me nuts.

Rolling 3+ of a kind. These have more value than pairs. Rolling 3 4's or 4 3's is worth more than 2 6's. If you roll three+ of a kind, you can choose to keep it, which has the potential of results higher than 12. Rolling two or more 1s gets progressively worse. If you roll many ones (5+ depending on what I choose) it could end up as TPK or a big rock destroying the game world.

As an homage to Marvel Super Heroes, I use Health in place of Hit Points. It is also represented in d6s, for reasons. This means there is also Karma, which is not only works as some sort of points to enhance rolls, but also replaces XP.

I was originally going to use character classes but then realized that using Karma made a classless system possible.

Anyhow, I am brainstorming. I have most of my notes written in pencil in coil notebooks. I'd like to begin compiling a document for the game itself and I might even have a local playtest group. But any comments and questions are appreciated.

It's interesting, but it's going pretty far out from the boundaries of D&D.

Quote from: RPGPundit;993138It's interesting, but it's going pretty far out from the boundaries of D&D.

I blame Menzter. And math. Though you are correct, and I could consider revisiting my original idea. I think my big impediment is not being able to decide on a setting I want to do, mostly because if I tried to do fantasy, it would probably be bland and boring and there's little point to writing a game no one will look at when I have a stack of coil notebooks that serve the same purpose. Actually, revisiting the original idea might be a good idea, since my months long tangent might offer some new perspective and the original intention was something BECMIish.

Wait... I do have a fantasy setting I've worked on. Okay Pundit, I'm going to try and think in OSR again. I can work on the d6 thing another time. Maybe I'll let this thread get buried and when I have something to share I'll post something more coherent.

Good luck!

I only read the first post but it is amazing. Have you thought about NPCs having numerical value from their adjectives? Like a big, scarred and armored Taskmaster might have +15 to some sort of intimidation factor, from each of those adjectives. The same NPC could have +10 to combat actions, since his size and armor might help in combat but his scars wouldn't.

Quote from: DiscoSoup;994078I only read the first post but it is amazing. Have you thought about NPCs having numerical value from their adjectives? Like a big, scarred and armored Taskmaster might have +15 to some sort of intimidation factor, from each of those adjectives. The same NPC could have +10 to combat actions, since his size and armor might help in combat but his scars wouldn't.

You know, I hadn't considered that. The thing where I had [I ,ly the thing with my ] and then converting it to a dice pool was something I came up with for fun when I was running a hack of Cortex Plus Marvel Heroic. I never considered that sort of thing for an OSR. But... That is a pretty cool idea on a way to roll up an NPC, like a table of adjectives with bonuses attached to them. In your example, there could be four tables to roll from, which would probably have subtables. So if I'm just using modifiers instead of ability scores, with the explanation that the Dynamic Abilities/Approaches also encompass Actions including Saving Throws which are Reactions.

Um... so for example, since in my original premise, I wanted to make use of stuff I've done with the Mentzer Monster Reaction Table and use it for other things. In the case of descriptors for NPCs, I could do something simple like:

SIZE Table 1
2: Tiny; 2-5 Minuscule, 6-8 Tiny, 9+ Small but short
3-5: Small; 2-5 Tiny but lanky, 6-8 Small, 9+ Medium but short
6-8 Medium; 2-5 Small but lanky, 6-8 Medium, 9+ Large but short
9-11 Large; 2-5 Medium but lanky, 6-8 Large, 9+ Huge but... well it hardly matters anymore
12 Huge; 2-5 Large but lanky, 6-8 Huge, 9+ Really effing big

...and then add something like:

SIZE Table 1a
Minuscule; Forceful -3. Quick +5. Tough -2
Tiny; Forceful -2. Quick +3, Tough -1
Small; Forcefull -1. Quick +1
Medium; No modifiers
Large; Forceful +1, Quick -1
Huge; Forceful +2, Quick -3, Tough +1
OMFG! Forceful +3. Quick -5, Tough +2

I just made those up as quick examples. It's not really a bad way to put NPCs together. Each table with modifiers would be a category, and then you have to decide on how many categories you need to make a viable NPC, and whether you want some optional tables in addition to the standard ones. You'd have to assign appropriate modifiers to Abilities/Approaches while trying to keep them balanced. Each category using a Mentzer Template, which I intend to use because it is my main inspiration, allows for a range of seven adjectives/descriptors or what have you.

Actually this is not true. In the above SIZE Table 1, there are 15 possible outcomes even though there are only seven sizes. If you built your NPC on four or five categories, that would give you 50625-759375 combinations. Adjustments to power would be made by modifying your 2d6 rolls.

You would have to be able to figure out a challenge or threat rating. This is something that I will have to figure out for pregenerated NPCs/Creatures let alone randomly generated ones.

Hmm...

I have things to think about, thanks.