Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
do you allow flaws?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 2445786" data-attributes="member: 172"><p>To be fair, "per-incident compensation" is a fairly new advent in RPGs and are just making their way into more popular RPGs. The classic "up front point farm" style disadvantage has been with us for a long time, but I think that in general, people are seeing common behaviors behind players which are slowly pushing more and more designers toward the per-incident model.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But my point is that what it takes away is often highly variable in actual value, and players will tend to pick the ones that they feel have the least impact on their character.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is true, but I think when a mechanic causes problems when used with other mechanics that are simply following a general design principle of the game (in this case "feats deeper in the feat tree are more powerful), you set yourself up for more widespread problems.</p><p></p><p>And, as long as we are mentioning badly designed character options, to me the biggest badly designed ones that people complain about (and I agree with) are those that give you too many benifits without sufficient or meaningful cost. We're in the same boat. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Even one additional feat could net you a feat in a feat chain intended for a higher level character.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A fighter is a component of the core system. Any d20 fantasy product should take into account how many feats a fighter has. The same cannot be said of other systems that add feats which are not part of the core system. If you make an add on mechanic that does not do its best to forsee problems, you are pretty much asking for problems.</p><p></p><p>And the flaw mechanic is. Asking for problems, that is.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>True. A designer can do that. But again, a designer <s>should not have to</s> <em>cannot possibly</em> consider all the non-core add ons out there that break core assumptions.</p><p></p><p>(Frex, you assume BAB is safe. H:ROE has classes with higher than a fighter's BAB. That's a bad thing, too.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Psion, post: 2445786, member: 172"] To be fair, "per-incident compensation" is a fairly new advent in RPGs and are just making their way into more popular RPGs. The classic "up front point farm" style disadvantage has been with us for a long time, but I think that in general, people are seeing common behaviors behind players which are slowly pushing more and more designers toward the per-incident model. But my point is that what it takes away is often highly variable in actual value, and players will tend to pick the ones that they feel have the least impact on their character. This is true, but I think when a mechanic causes problems when used with other mechanics that are simply following a general design principle of the game (in this case "feats deeper in the feat tree are more powerful), you set yourself up for more widespread problems. And, as long as we are mentioning badly designed character options, to me the biggest badly designed ones that people complain about (and I agree with) are those that give you too many benifits without sufficient or meaningful cost. We're in the same boat. ;) Even one additional feat could net you a feat in a feat chain intended for a higher level character. A fighter is a component of the core system. Any d20 fantasy product should take into account how many feats a fighter has. The same cannot be said of other systems that add feats which are not part of the core system. If you make an add on mechanic that does not do its best to forsee problems, you are pretty much asking for problems. And the flaw mechanic is. Asking for problems, that is. True. A designer can do that. But again, a designer [s]should not have to[/s] [i]cannot possibly[/i] consider all the non-core add ons out there that break core assumptions. (Frex, you assume BAB is safe. H:ROE has classes with higher than a fighter's BAB. That's a bad thing, too.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
do you allow flaws?
Top