do you allow flaws?

[Psion]

But again, we could make your same arguement.

What if the player wasnt going to make use of those abilities to begin with. You are again giving them something for nothing by the same reasoning.

[Jackie Gleason]What we have here is a failure to communicate[/Jackie]

Um, no. Not the same thing, not what I mean.

The said flaw is almost a substitution level. You are giving up abilities you would have had for different abilities.

What I speak of when I speak of "deficit spending" is making you worse at something you were never going to do in the first place. Like say, a fighter with an 8 charisma with 0 ranks in diplomacy taking a flaw that gives him a -4 diplomacy. He was never going to be the party talker in the first place; the team environment means that someone else can take up that mantle. The times that such a penalty would authentically penalize him would be just about zero, since he would not be relied upon to do that in the first place. It did not significantly narrow his options.

 

[Crothian]

I would probably allow flaws but the players would know that what ever flaw they picked would matter in game. I'm not the typoe of DM to ignore a weakness. But I've also never had a player want to take a flaw. Most of the people I know don't need to be bribed like this.

 

[Psion]

To both Psion and IcyCool--that's a player problem, not a problem with the flaw mechanic per se.

Heh. You were in the midst of the Ryan Dancey hates rules light maelstrom with me... I hope you would realize that such statements don't mollify me:

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2388064&postcount=333

Wizardru even sigged me. If I see a game mechanic proving to be an obstacle to what I see as fairly reasonable players, I see the problem being with the mechanic, not the players. Because mechanics (especially optional mechanics) are dispensable.

 

[Beholder Bob]

The game is bound by min/max issues - choice of race (look at the optimization boards), class mixes served like matinees (splash of this, dash of that, then run through these 4 prestige classes....), and even dump stats. Choice of feats allow for this as well - some chains are deadly, while a role player may chose a collection of feats whose combined might is incapable of pushing through a wet paper bag. Flaws fall into this mix. If you have a munchkin - ya got to watch em, corral their choices into a semblance of reason, and limit books, feats, classes, spells, equipment, etc.... If you trust your group/have few power gamer issues, then the choices are more relaxed/open sourced.

As DM you have to verify all matters (well, the savage species lists the 1/2 ogre as CR... uh, nope - no way) that dip into sourcebooks and alternate rules. These flaws fall into that fine. If you have problems with balance when dealing with a group, then I'd be disinclined to use them, but if I have faith in my group, then I'm open. Same thing for the alternate rules for classes, races, bloodlines, etc. Also, playing monsters from the new (or non-WOTC) monster books - it’s a DMs job to make sure its ok - and the efforts needed are dictated by the maturity of his players. Flaws are fine - as are many options, with a good group. They are, after all, optional rules.

I allow gestalt characters, variant classes, and a beer or two at the table - because the groups I game with make these options viable. Psion - I understand and even agree with your argument to a very limited degree - but I'd use the same attention as a dm to when players express interest in a prestige class as I do to flaws. Your argument against flaws is grounded in their potential for abuse – which is no more then the prior mentioned (and time honored methods), and offers at the other end a tool for giving further twist and detail to a character. I’m less worried about flaws then I am about that latest FR prestige class and spell combo.

As a final note – the xp per incident method has a problem – the man missing an eye gets xp when he reaches for his binoculars? The 1 legged man when he is challenged to a sack race? This method works great for a PC with alcoholism breaking down and drinking while performing watch duty… but it only works for some aspects. That, and a player who plays his alcoholic as struggling with his ‘issue’ too frequently rises up a level faster then folks who do not have ‘issues’ – so this method has a flaw as well.

BB

 

[Psion]

As a final note – the xp per incident method has a problem – the man missing an eye gets xp when he reaches for his binoculars? The 1 legged man when he is challenged to a sack race?

Oh come on, now. Even most "point for disads" style advantages don't give you points for things that don't hinder you. Why would "reaching for your binoculars" be worth anything?

Bringing up bad examples of implementation doesn't make the concept faulty. I know of no actual implementation of the concept that does it that way.

 

[Beholder Bob]

Oh come on, now. Even most "point for disads" style advantages don't give you points for things that don't hinder you. Why would "reaching for your binoculars" be worth anything?

Bringing up bad examples of implementation doesn't make the concept faulty. I know of no actual implementation of the concept that does it that way.

My comment was tongue in cheek - though it still stands as a concept. Having a severely shy character struggle to interact during a ball the group attends to find a spy - sure, I'd give the xp for the shy effect penalizing his efforts. A pc with personality disorders/weaknesses are easily implemented in social interactions of the game, but some aspects (1 leg, poor health, seizures,...) require some mechanical treatment such as flaws - the RP xp for a 1 eyed character reaching for a pair of binoculars was a joking reference to this. I do not see giving a per situation bonus to xp for the 1 legged characters permanently impaired movement, balance, jump, and climb.

BB

 

[Desdichado]

because it is good to have a friendly discussion written down as opposed to being lost to the wind?

Actually, it was just a lame joke about how your usernames are pronounced exactly the same.

 

[Kelleris]

No, because it is good to be able to tell the two disputants apart.

Actually, it was just a lame joke about how your usernames are pronounced exactly the same.

Hey, that's what I said! I was wondering if anyone actually caught my meager contribution to the thread.

 

[genshou]

I allow flaws on a case-by-case basis. Generally, I reserve them for NPCs such as Evendur Greycastle in my story hour. They're difficult to balance at best, so I don't trust any but the best of players to use them responsibly. Then again, I allow enough other potentially game-breaking rules variants in that I might as well just use flaws, too

 

[Desdichado]

Hey, that's what I said! I was wondering if anyone actually caught my meager contribution to the thread.

I saw it! Congratulations; you get a no-prize for getting the lame joke!

And.... A NEW CAR!!!

And... THE HAWAIIAN VACATION!!!

Vanna, do we have anything else for Kelleris today? No?