Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="prabe" data-source="post: 8152574" data-attributes="member: 7016699">I agree that D&D has gradually reduced the importance of alignment, in the forms of penalties for players who disagreed with their DMs over what those two words on the character sheet meant. As you might guess from that construction, I don't have a problem with that.As to Bonds, etc.: I think the intent was to reward players who, e.g., actually played to their Flaw. The biggest problem is that the reward is Advantage, which is ... pretty easy to get (and doesn't stack (and is the primary mechanic for altering difficulty)) so the incentive isn't all that great; the second-biggest problem is that there isn't any mechanical effect for not, e.g., playing to your character's Flaw; the third-biggest problem is that remembering these five things (Bond, Flaw, Ideal, 2x Trait) per character and engaging them adds to the DM's mental overhead more than I found to be worth it (this is a problem I see with Aspects in Fate or Beliefs in BW, at least as far as the need for the GM to remember them--I'm willing to believe that GMs in those systems find they reward the overhead in ways 5E doesn't, and I'm not endeavoring to pick a fight over this).That seems reasonable. As I said, I've only read a little about it.</blockquote>