Wither disads/flaws?

[buzz]

I finally got a copy of Ars Magica the other day, and was looking through it. Having been originally designed by Jonathan Tweet (and Mark Rein*Hagen) in '89, I can see a lot of concepts that were later integrated into 3e. E.g., the games uses virtues & flaws (i.e., ads/disads), one of which is called "Lightning Reflexes."

But that got me thinking. The virtues in AM seem a big inspiration for 3e's feats. But where are the flaws? What was behind the decision not to have flaws/disads in 3e?

Now, I can sort of answer this question myself, in that all D&D characters have a really big flaw: they start the game at 1st level. Games with ads/disads seem to start PCs at the D&D equivalent of 5th-10th, ergo they balance things with a system for flaws.

Still, I wonder why 3e skipped over this concept completely. Is it just "not very D&D"? Thoughts?

 

[Happiest_Sadist]

Flaws invite powergaming. We got rid of flaws because they are easily abused. Suppose there was a skill anti-focus anti-feat. Every fighter would take skill anti-focus in crafts he would never use, or in hide, etc. in order to get better at fighting. This would work because he probably would never have to weave baskets, and hiding is already tough in full plate.

The only place we have advantages/disadvantages is in specialty wizards, and note how little of a disadvantage that is by how few general wizards you see.

 

[buzz]

Flaws invite powergaming.

I dunno about that. Any system worth its salt will emphasize that "a disadvantage that isn't a disadvantage" isn't allowed. E.g., I think HERO works just fine.

Honestly, I think that disads can providie a lot of interesting rp'ing oppportunities.

 

[Ilen]

How do you mean? Can't one RP being one eyed or missing a hand without having to have a Disadvantage 'feat' for it on your character sheet?

 

[buzz]

How do you mean? Can't one RP being one eyed or missing a hand without having to have a Disadvantage 'feat' for it on your character sheet?

You could, but you'd be throwing game balance out the window. A character with either impairment would be at a significant disadvantage compared to "uninjured" characters.

Now, if you don't care about balance (certianly a valid style of play/design), this is no big deal. But, as written, D&D is very much about balance.

To be clear, I'm not faulting D&D/d20 for not having a disads mechanic. I'm just curious as to the design choice, seeing as the ads/disads concept is common to most other RPGs out there. Seeing as 3e was a step towards bringing D&D "up to date" with current design technique, it's an interesting decision.

 

[Ilen]

Huh? I thought role-playing was all about imbalanced ineffectual characters?

To be serious though I guess you do have a point, being the blind monk with awsome hearing would require a flexable DM, or any other number of such situations.

 

[Umbran]

Well, one factor may simply be that older editions of D&D didn't have disads/flaws. They brought much of the game mechanic up to current design philosophy, but that doesn't mean they have to include everything that other games do.

Plus, for many possible flaws, you'd have a problem of logical consistency - specifically with physical impairments like having one eye, or having a gimpy leg - there's no general mechaic for inflicting that kind of damage to a person, and the hit point system actively discourages including one. So, how did your character get a given physical impairment without getting killed?

And, on top of that - the core game includes methods for removing physical impairments with single spell castings. That means the player can expect to be able to get rid fo the flaw after game start. And then he gets to keep the advantage it bought? That's not good.

 

[buzz]

And, on top of that - the core game includes methods for removing physical impairments with single spell castings. That means the player can expect to be able to get rid fo the flaw after game start. And then he gets to keep the advantage it bought? That's not good.

Indeed. We run into the "disad that's not a disad" problem. HERO, e.g., handles this by requiring you to "buy off" the disad with points. D&D, not being point-based, makes this more difficult. Do you lose the advantage you "bought" with the disad? Do you have to pay XP to get rid of the disad? Are you required to keep the disad for X levels before getting rid of it?

Hmm... You could maybe look at it like race design. If the PC is weighted heavily with "advantages" they get a Level Adjustment. They can negate the LA by taking disads. If they contrive (or in the course of play) "fix" their disads, the LA comes back.

I guess I just answered my question: they left them out because fitting them in was a PITA.

 

[hong]

Now, I can sort of answer this question myself, in that all D&D characters have a really big flaw: they start the game at 1st level.

Mine don't.

Games with ads/disads seem to start PCs at the D&D equivalent of 5th-10th, ergo they balance things with a system for flaws.

Still, I wonder why 3e skipped over this concept completely. Is it just "not very D&D"? Thoughts?

Other people have already mentioned that flaws are often too easy for a determined powergamer to exploit.

If you like, flaws can be thought of as integrated into the class system. If you're a fighter, you have the implied flaw "can't cast magic spells". Similarly, if you're a wizard, you have the implied flaw "doesn't know how to swing a sword".

The _other_ use of flaws/disads, to round out a character personality-wise via things like codes of honour and whatnot, would be rather incongruous in a game that's as centered around killing monsters as D&D is. The orcs don't really care that you've sworn never to love again, or are looking for a six-fingered man. The only flaws that really fit into D&D's design philosophy are those that impact your ability to kick butt and take names.

 

[Geoff Watson]

It's not that hard to get rid of most disadvantages anyway. All a 'Blind' character has to do is find a 5th level Cleric and beg for a Remove Blindness/Deafness spell. At standard prices, that only costs 150gp, easily affordable at low level. If you'd allow someone to buy an extra feat or ability for 150gp in your campaign, I'd be surprised.

Most disadvantage systems are too easy to abuse, taking advantages that don't adversely affect your character too much.

Geoff.