(Proposal) Flaws

[Scott DeWar]

neither have I just due to the stick proble of whinc feat to lose if the flaw is removed, such as the blindness one.

 

[orsal]

It's probably better, at least as a first pass, to say that flaws just can't be removed by any means (short of a wish/miracle). Don't people who play with flaws usually have some kind of clause to that effect? I've never played a game with flaws in it, myself.

I agree with that. For that reason, I agree with Zerith's rewording.

 

[Scott DeWar]

are judges the only ones to be able to agree/disagree? if not, I should hrow my hat in as I just re-read it

perhaps you are just uncoordinated or somthing dos not click right in your brain

I missed this ealier as I was running out of power on my laptop. sorry. I agree, if it counts.

 

[Zerith]

[FONT=&quot]@covaithe

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]A general rule with flaws, unless I missed something, is that when you level up and are eligible for a new feat, you can get a the new feat, or you can buy off a flaw.
For example, an uncreative character (Who might be a young character who has not built up their nerve) attains level 3 and chooses to buy off the flaw instead of getting another feat (explained it in game as the character getting the nerve to rush into the fray instead of hesitating before every battle.)

Also, blind fight is a feat that makes sense to lose by having your sight tampered with: your brain has gone from working with one camera to two and is spiting its attention (without our knowing, it merges the image from both eyes for our waking mind, and it is filtering the image into something we can understand, it's why 2d objects can look 3d, our brain simplifies everything, but it has to work to do so)
And while the brain's attention is being distracted by an additional/duplicate sense, it can't pay as much attention to everything else: if you get stabbed in the arm you're not going to notice the guy who is just standing in front of you; you still see him, but you don’t notice.
in the same way, if someone is shining a light in your eye you’re not going to notice that faint breeze cased by that troll sneaking up behind you as it’s body forces the air out of its way.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

Any ways, sorry about nitpicking like this, but i tend to say what I think and I tend to over explain thing: Don't as me how to open a jar; I'll tell you in detail: wrist, shoulder and hand moments. Don't think I Wont!

@Scott

That is an interesting question, and thanks :3

Also, if my vote counts I also chose to agree with myself!: *dose the silly smugness dance!*
[/FONT]

 

[orsal]

are judges the only ones to be able to agree/disagree? if not, I should hrow my hat in as I just re-read it

I missed this ealier as I was running out of power on my laptop. sorry. I agree, if it counts.

Opinions are welcome from everyone, but only judges get to vote.

 

[Zerith]

Awh.... *stops doing the silly smugness dance; Starts using teh puppy dodge eyes*

Btw, how long dos it normally take this kind of a thing to get a yay or a nay? a please tell me it's less then a month ^^;

 

[orsal]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]A general rule with flaws, unless I missed something, is that when you level up and are eligible for a new feat, you can get a the new feat, or you can buy off a flaw.
For example, an uncreative character (Who might be a young character who has not built up their nerve) attains level 3 and chooses to buy off the flaw instead of getting another feat (explained it in game as the character getting the nerve to rush into the fray instead of hesitating before every battle.)[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]

Unless I'm missing something... I'm looking over the Flaws rules and I don't see anything about that option.

As for time: we'll see. It can go quickly, if enough judges are attentive and active. It passes if (number of Yes) - (number of No) is at least three, for at least 48 hours.

 

[Zerith]

It's not? hmm, that is interesting.
And so is the voting system: with all five character judges active two have the power to veto, and if any one judge is not on post any of the remaining four have the power to veto any change until the 5th is back

I like that in a privet entity with nothing to prove: it enforces stability, something highly desired in any kind of venture. :3

 

[covaithe]

A general rule with flaws, unless I missed something, is that when you level up and are eligible for a new feat, you can get a the new feat, or you can buy off a flaw.
For example, an uncreative character (Who might be a young character who has not built up their nerve) attains level 3 and chooses to buy off the flaw instead of getting another feat (explained it in game as the character getting the nerve to rush into the fray instead of hesitating before every battle.)

I'm not thrilled with this. It seems ripe for powergaming.

In fact, after looking at the possibilities a bit more, I'm not thrilled with flaws at all. Consider an Orc barbarian 1 with maxed Str. He takes Shaky and Pathetic (cha) to let him have Power attack, Cleave, and Improved Initiative. Shaky is irrelevant; he's never going to make ranged attacks. And I can't think of a practical difference betwen Cha 6 and Cha 4. But those feats with that build are going to be ridiculously unbalanced at low levels. I wouldn't want to have such a character in one of my games, either as DM or as one of the other party members.

I'm inclined to vote no.

 

[orsal]

with all five character judges active two have the power to veto, and if any one judge is not on post any of the remaining four have the power to veto any change until the 5th is back

All judges not all character judges. The Guide to LEW currently lists nine judges (are all those currently active? I lose track.) Judges are the people who can approve adventure proposals, and monitor the adventures, as well as vote on house rules. The character judges are a subset of the judges specifically responsible for approving characters.