Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="uzirath" data-source="post: 7914658" data-attributes="member: 8495">I've experienced this range with player preferences too. I once played in an innovative GURPS game with a bunch of hardcore method actor types that attempted to circumvent this to some degree. We developed characters with skills and advantages but left disadvantages and quirks blank for the first few sessions. Then, after experiencing the characters facing challenges (both internal and external), we added character elements that fit. It helped that the GM was completely willing to customize or invent new disads to fit the character concepts. This wouldn't work with every group, but it was a pretty fun way of going about it at this particular table.I have also played at GURPS tables where official disadvantages were entirely optional. Players that found them cumbersome skipped them and roleplayed their characters as they saw fit. This worked well but required two things: a GM who was flexible about character point values, and players who were committed to roleplaying complex characters who didn't just choose system-optimal choices at every turn. While the latter would technically work in GURPS (no disads mean you have no mechanical limitations within the scope of your character's defined attributes and skills), it would depart from the culture of the table which was very much about flawed heroes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="uzirath, post: 7914658, member: 8495"] I've experienced this range with player preferences too. I once played in an innovative GURPS game with a bunch of hardcore method actor types that attempted to circumvent this to some degree. We developed characters with skills and advantages but left disadvantages and quirks blank for the first few sessions. Then, after experiencing the characters facing challenges (both internal and external), we added character elements that fit. It helped that the GM was completely willing to customize or invent new disads to fit the character concepts. This wouldn't work with every group, but it was a pretty fun way of going about it at this particular table. I have also played at GURPS tables where official disadvantages were entirely optional. Players that found them cumbersome skipped them and roleplayed their characters as they saw fit. This worked well but required two things: a GM who was flexible about character point values, and players who were committed to roleplaying complex characters who didn't just choose system-optimal choices at every turn. While the latter would technically work in GURPS (no disads mean you have no mechanical limitations within the scope of your character's defined attributes and skills), it would depart from the culture of the table which was very much about flawed heroes. [/QUOTE]

Verification