Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5552054" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Agreed, a system like that can work. For instance the example of "honor: +1 diplomacy, -2 bluff" is still flawed (though at least in 4e they use the same stat, so it isn't actually that bad). Players will usually select the feature of that type which gives them a +1 to something they're maxing and a -2 to something they could care less about. If instead it was reformulated as "Honor: you may take a +1 on a Diplomacy check, the DM may impose a -2 on a Bluff check." then it becomes dynamic (there would in some systems be some sort of counting system in place, fortune points or whatever). In a routine situation the bonus might not be worth bothering with, knowing it reminds the DM of the character's flaw... Also when it is restricted to social skills/situations it is a lot more of a character building tool than anything else (DM can set up a situation where bluffing is an option, but the paladin's refusal to go along leads to favorable reactions when he acts honorably). These can be helpful to the player but won't usually break the game and go well with the story.</p></blockquote><p></p>