Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="orsal" data-source="post: 5422991" data-attributes="member: 16016">OK, there are many parts to this proposal:(A) Adopt the Flaw mechanics.(B) Approve all the flaws in the d20srd.com &quot;Variant Rules&quot; section (which I believe come from Unearthed Arcana).(C) Approve the 4 new flaws Zerith has posted.We can approve or reject these in many combinations -- in regard to both (B) and (C) we might cherry-pick.Here are my initial musings:(A) I like the idea of flaws. I like the additional flexibility it gives to character creation, and I really like the possibility of characters who are noticeably disadvantaged compared to some baseline in a certain regard. I am inclined to vote Yes to this part, but I will wait for further discussion (since I've never played this rule before) before writing that in yellow.One amendment I'd like to suggest. The published version saysThat of course assumes a conventional game, with a single authoritative GM. For a Living World, I'd suggest deleting the part I bolded. I think it's simplest just to allow flaws only at 1st level. (The alternative would be to replace &quot;Game Master&quot; with &quot;Characte Judges&quot;.)(B) I'm also inclined to approve all the ones listed at <a href="http://www.d20srd.org" target="_blank">www.d20srd.org</a>. UA is generally a well-play-tested and well-balanced source, and I don't see any problems there. Again, I'll give any skeptics a chance to persuade me otherwise before colouring my Yes yellow.(C) In regard to your homebrew flaws, I want to think about them (and discuss them) more. In particular, are the balanced? Opinions welcome.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="orsal, post: 5422991, member: 16016"] OK, there are many parts to this proposal: (A) Adopt the Flaw mechanics. (B) Approve all the flaws in the d20srd.com "Variant Rules" section (which I believe come from Unearthed Arcana). (C) Approve the 4 new flaws Zerith has posted. We can approve or reject these in many combinations -- in regard to both (B) and (C) we might cherry-pick. Here are my initial musings: (A) I like the idea of flaws. I like the additional flexibility it gives to character creation, and I really like the possibility of characters who are noticeably disadvantaged compared to some baseline in a certain regard. I am inclined to vote Yes to this part, but I will wait for further discussion (since I've never played this rule before) before writing that in yellow. One amendment I'd like to suggest. The published version says That of course assumes a conventional game, with a single authoritative GM. For a Living World, I'd suggest deleting the part I bolded. I think it's simplest just to allow flaws only at 1st level. (The alternative would be to replace "Game Master" with "Characte Judges".) (B) I'm also inclined to approve all the ones listed at [URL="http://www.d20srd.org"]www.d20srd.org[/URL]. UA is generally a well-play-tested and well-balanced source, and I don't see any problems there. Again, I'll give any skeptics a chance to persuade me otherwise before colouring my Yes yellow. (C) In regard to your homebrew flaws, I want to think about them (and discuss them) more. In particular, are the balanced? Opinions welcome. [/QUOTE]

Verification