Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7768924" data-attributes="member: 29398">This is a point worth noting.There's a rather significant difference between a) allowing flaws to arise during and as a result of the run of play or b) baking those flaws in as part of the character's mechanics.If a flaw is baked in then a player is reasonably expected to play to it - which is fine - but then is less likely to look any further or allow any other flaws to arise; because the game system has planted the seed of flaws being rewarded with benefits and thus to have a flaw without a benefit is mechanically counter-productive.&nbsp; Further, the GM is somewhat expected to somehow bring this flaw into play at some point in order to make it relevant.But if a flaw simply arises out of the run of play with no mechanical advantage expected or given in return it allows the player the freedom to have the flaw reflect things the character has done or experienced in play (as opposed to off-camera backstory), and to play the flaw however she likes.&nbsp; It also places no burden on the GM unless she specifically wants it to.In D&amp;D (all editions) I'd agree.&nbsp; But if the game system is specifically geared around a flaw-for-benefit mechanic then so be it.&nbsp; I'll just find a different game to play in. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7768924, member: 29398"] This is a point worth noting. There's a rather significant difference between a) allowing flaws to arise during and as a result of the run of play or b) baking those flaws in as part of the character's mechanics. If a flaw is baked in then a player is reasonably expected to play to it - which is fine - but then is less likely to look any further or allow any other flaws to arise; because the game system has planted the seed of flaws being rewarded with benefits and thus to have a flaw without a benefit is mechanically counter-productive. Further, the GM is somewhat expected to somehow bring this flaw into play at some point in order to make it relevant. But if a flaw simply arises out of the run of play with no mechanical advantage expected or given in return it allows the player the freedom to have the flaw reflect things the character has done or experienced in play (as opposed to off-camera backstory), and to play the flaw however she likes. It also places no burden on the GM unless she specifically wants it to. In D&D (all editions) I'd agree. But if the game system is specifically geared around a flaw-for-benefit mechanic then so be it. I'll just find a different game to play in. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification