Anti-feats?

[RSKennan]

I wonder if you'd mind if this idea was stolen, LostSoul? I'm not sure if it suits my current project, But it would definitely work for one I have on the back burner....

 

[LostSoul]

Of course I mind! That's why I posted it on a public message board.

Feel free. If I thought it up, then I'm sure thousands of others have too.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I'm capable of saying "no," but it's hard when the rules support it. The rules should probably (IMHO) be the reference of things you can do no matter your DM. Going beyond the rules requires some OK-ing/Veto Power, but the rules themselves should present a well-balanced and fair base to go from (IMHO, again).

Which is why a good points/disadvantage system has the GM approval right there in the rules. GURPS says it a few times, bold print "A disadvantage which doesn't cost you anything isn't worth any points." You cannot take blindness and blindsight. You cannot take parapaligic and enough TK to move yourself around without effort. You cannot take dyslexic if you're already blind and illiterate. It is against the rules. You just need a good enough GM to stand up and say so.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Conaill]

Originally posted by Ace
I am insanely fond of GURPS and I hate disadvantages too.

My solution was to let people play what they like but give them fixed points X+45 (the normal 40+5 disads and quirks) in GURPS

And in fact, this is a published optional rule in Compendium I.

Heck I didn't even know that was an optional rule! Allowing any amount of disadvantages is, well... rather silly.