Originally Posted by GhanBuriGhan
I can fully relate to the difficulty of making sense of such number sets, as in Ad&D. The point is, though, that this has more to do with how the results are presented to the player than with the complexity of the rules behind that.
Take Da:O as an example. A health poultice is a health poultice and there are minor and regular ones. It nowhere states how many health points you actually gives to you, but its immediately apparent that a regular one is a lot stronger than a minor one. Spells are similar - a normal player will know that the Magic attribute influences spell damage (because the tooltip tells me so). And thats all he really needs to know! But I have to go here to find out how it is actually calculated. Now - the actual formula used here is very simple, but it could easily be something a lot more complicated (for example, instead of a linear increase, you might prefer something that provides big gains initially and slow gains later, e.g. using sqrt(spellpower) - as long as the actual outcome is intuitive to the player. Thats why I think one should not shy away from more complex calculations.
Of course there are people who like to understand and min-max the actual values - but I think for these players such details could be safely stored in a manual appendix or a Wiki.