Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1447262" data-attributes="member: 10201">Well, i consider the inverse to be the flawed mechanism: the idea that flaws have to limit a character in the very areas they (or, rather, the player) care about. For examples of exactly why this doesn't work, take a look at Unearthed Arcana. The Traits [yes, i know they aren't intended to be "flaws"] illustrate exactly the problem: since they give a bonus and penalty in the same area, they're useless for adjusting your character's focus, and instead provide just flavor. Similarly, the guidelines for creating Flaws (also from Unearthed Arcana) are wrong-headed: "A Flaw must have a meaningful effect regardless of character class or role....Similarly, a flaw that penalizes a character's Charisma-based skill checks only has a significant impact on teh party spokesperson--the quiet fighter or barbarian likely won't feel any impact from the penalties." But that's the whole *point* of them [IMHO]: to characterize your character. Following those guidelines makes it impossible to design a character that is mechanically limited from becoming a spellcaster, or mechanically incapable of good diplomacy. It prevents those aspects [aspects of your character that are conceptually supposed to be weaknesses] from being actual flaws. And it's a bogus, inconsistent ruling. At least two of the flaws presented give penalties on combat rolls. If you can take a penalty to attack rolls when you're playing a non-combatant wizard, and that's not munchkin, then why can't you take a penalty to social rolls when you're playing a strong silent barbarian?The problem is not disadvantaging one area while advantaging another. The problem is allowing a character to gain points for a disadvantage that never shows up in play. All you have to do to fix the problem is make disadvantages actually disadvantageous. As GM, make a note to yourself to remind you that everyone [NPCs] is supposed to react negatively to the barbarian, if the problem is you forgetting about the flaws. If the problem is players "forgetting" their flaws (whether intentionally, or as a legitimate mistake), then only let players take disads that you trust them to remember. If you had a player who took a penalty on attack rolls as a flaw, and habitually forgot to apply it, you wouldn't blame numerical, or combat-affecting, flaws. You'd rightly blame the player. Same thing with social flaws. oh, and, finally, is it really a problem if someone is a better sword fighter because they stutter? Everyone has the opportunity to take flaws for the extra points, so it all evens out. The important thing is to keep the magnitudes inline with one another: stuttering shouldn't be worth very many points, in any case, so who cares?</blockquote>

Verification