Topic: Flawed for life?

[DangerMan]

Are flaws for life? Would you allow a character to to rid himself of a flaw, given that the necessary means are within the reach of the character?

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Easiest answer would be "maybe". It depends on the actual flaw itself.

Some could be worked through, others would not. It depends on the flaw, and on the situation....

I once had a character with an extreme prejudice towards magic users lessen the flaw through working with a couple of magic users (he wasn't given a choice, and they nearly killed him because of his mouth and the insults he was always spouting), but by the end of the adventure (several weeks of game time) he could see that they had their uses and could work with them so long as they never cast a spell on him.

[DangerMan]

I once had a character with an extreme prejudice towards magic users lessen the flaw through working with a couple of magic users (he wasn't given a choice, and they nearly killed him because of his mouth and the insults he was always spouting), but by the end of the adventure (several weeks of game time) he could see that they had their uses and could work with them so long as they never cast a spell on him.

Hmm.. Wouldent that be "unfair" to other players, choosing flaws not so easily amended?

I see now that there's a section on this in Talent law, which offers some solutions. Out of the three options suggested I prefer no. 2, in which you may buy one talent point for 1000 XPs. Points can then be used to remove a flaw. But theres a problem with this as well.

XPs are normally exchanged for DPs, so the alternate utility of removing a flaw is a number of DPs. However, the ratio of XPs to DPs will vary according to what level the character is on. Thus removing flaws, or buying talents, will be more "cost effective" at later levels. For some reason Im not comfortable with this.

Maybe 1 talent point could be puchased for, say, 10 DPs?

(Yes, I am aware Im coming of like a stone cold, calculating economist gone power player )

[Hubbaman]

I think the solution of exchanging DP for TP would be unfair for the characters with lower DP development.

A better solution might be that you get 10TP per level. Then it won't really matter how much DP you get per level.

The problem is that DP for TP or 10TP per level favors the low level characters and the solution from Talent Law favors high level characters...

A scenario here is that players will stay at level 4 until they have a lot of TP stored up.

[markc]

 IMO it really depends on the flaw and then I would make them pay x3-x5 to get rid of it by the exp or DP method.
MDC

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

I once had a character with an extreme prejudice towards magic users lessen the flaw through working with a couple of magic users (he wasn't given a choice, and they nearly killed him because of his mouth and the insults he was always spouting), but by the end of the adventure (several weeks of game time) he could see that they had their uses and could work with them so long as they never cast a spell on him.

Hmm.. Wouldent that be "unfair" to other players, choosing flaws not so easily amended?

Actually, now that I think about it some more, that wasn't actually a flaw I paid for, it was something added because of how I thought the other flaws that he did have would interact and combine (he a fear of magic along with a couple of other very anti-social towards magic user flaws -- it has been over 10 years since I played this character).

   oopsey.... Anyways, the point still stands, that some flaws could be reduced over time, through actual play, while others could be bought off in other ways. Don't reject one method of reducing or buying off flaws, allow for multiple options, based on the flaw in question and the circumstances involved.... Buying it off during play could even end up giving him another one (a rival or a foe, etc..).

[JohnK]

Some could be worked through, others would not. It depends on the flaw, and on the situation....

I agree with Rasyr.
Example: In my campaign there is a grey elf with the flaw intolerance against the durinic dwarves. But one time it came that his life was saved by a dwarf of this clan and now this dwarf has become a member of the party. Now the personality of this elf is described as quiet, helpfull, thoughtfull etc. What is the result of all these?
Either we didn't pay enough attention when we were designing this character and in his worldviews there are contradictions (like many people that we know!!!) or there is great opportunity for some roleplaying (from the part of the player) with things that give life to the characters. If the roleplaying comes with some cool ideas and promotes the drama of the game I think that i would ignore the flaw and let the roleplaying part take precedence.

[RandalThor]

I believe that this situation has to be handled both in-game and out of game. Using Rasyr's prejudiced dwarf example (yes, I know he didn't actually have the flaw, but it works here), I would not have let him get rid of the flaw just because of the interaction, he would have had to also spend XP. Actually, as I do a set amount of DPs, probably DP equal to the flaw cost in TP.

Otherwise it would have been explained that while the mages did help, the dwarf would have believed that it would have gotten done better without them (somehow, prejudice not being the most rational of mindsets). The DPs would reflect that the character has undergone "personal growth" and that is not done without effort, experience or no experience. [Take weight-loss for example: we KNOW it is better for us to be in shape and not overweight. Just knowing doesn't make us healthy though does it? So, effort is needed in order to get rid of the flaw: Overweight.]

Ultimately, this is a ROLE-playing game so the impedus (sp?) must come from something in the game, and not something numbers driven. But, as it is a game where things are weighted & measured, there must be some form of bookkeeping in order to keep it as fair as possible. Just my opinion.

[Hubbaman]

I agree that this is the best way to deal with a mental flaw.
But what would you do if someone has one eye or some other flaw that can be easily fixed by a healer?

Should the character be allowed to just go to a healer and fix it?

[markc]

  IMO no the physical flaw should be harder to fix than just a heal spell and if it is able to be healed it should require something very special. Maybe the hart of a dragon or something as well as DP and or Exp.
MDC

[ReaperWolf]

For the sake of game balance, any Flaws taken during character creation cannot be "bought off" or healed. What is permissible is a Flaw can become another equal valued flaw but only if the story allows it.

Take a high level game. Load up on every crippling Flaw you can and during the first few minutes have the channeling healer wipe away the Flaws; free points! This kind of optimization play will probably lead to an arms race at the table and the game will suffer.

Flaws exist to give characters depth in exchange for a few more points for skills and such. Quoting a HERO/Champions axiom: A disadvantage without consequences isn't a disadvantage, the same holds true here.

If a player rankles at playing up a flaw or objects to the consequences of that flaw, the player can expect his or her session XP award to reflect a poor in-game performance.

>>ReaperWolf

[RandalThor]

I agree that this is the best way to deal with a mental flaw.
But what would you do if someone has one eye or some other flaw that can be easily fixed by a healer?

Should the character be allowed to just go to a healer and fix it?

I agree with markc here. The flaw would be traded for another, say obligation, or something else like that. But, I still think they should be charged DPs. Think about it: they have lived their entire life with only one eye (or at least a significant portion of their life, I would imagine) and would have to train themselves to use binocular vision, something they have never had before. The DPs represent the "retraining."

[markc]

 Also it is up to your GM how to handle it. Some may love the option about buying off flaws and some may hate it.
 So if you are the GM it is good IMO to talk it out with your players on how they would like to handle the buying off flaws.
 But you may also just want to think about starting at a higher level if all you are doing is just pumping up skills or stats. If you are trying to buy the special "special" abilities there is generally a reason they do not give you points to buy more than one or two.
MDC   

[providence13]

Buying it off during play could even end up giving him another one (a rival or a foe, etc..).

One of the characters has a common, but only seasonal allergy. IMO, medication could alleviate those symptoms, but maybe give them a penalty to Observation/Awareness... because of that "groggy feeling". Listen to commercials list common side affects of various medications you can take to off-set common "flaws" in today's world.
Sure you can off-set the penalties! But the solution is likely to give you a penalty that is at least as bad on something else!

And if a character did only have one eye, but then it was regen'd, no problem. The healer has now asked you to look out for her son..."he's always getting into trouble.."

[TerryTee]

As time passes a character gains power in various ways: wealth, artefacts, political power, skills, spells, talents. (An abstraction of some of these powers is called level.)
One way to gain power is to remove something that hampers the character, like a flaw.

Personally I would rule that any flaw that can be removed with available means can be removed in game. That does not mean that a player can go ahead and arrange matters himself, it must all go through the GM. It's up to the GM to rule if it possible at all, possible at this time etc.
E.g. the player cannot remove a mental flaw just by paying a physiologist some cash, but I'd still let psychological treatment be an option that could remove a mental flaw in-game as controlled by the GM.

I'm not a fan of rules and mechanics that are aimed at game balance in-game. I'm happy to force balance during character generation, so I'd easily disallow a flaw I know another party member could heal once the new character start the game. The rules representing the world the characters live in should not refer to meta gaming (game balance is meta gaming IMO) but it is rather up to the GM to maintain balance through storytelling.

-Terry

[damilano]

Some could be worked through, others would not. It depends on the flaw, and on the situation....

In my campaign there is a grey elf with the flaw intolerance against the durinic dwarves. But one time it came that his life was saved by a dwarf of this clan and now this dwarf has become a member of the party. Now the personality of this elf is described as quiet, helpfull, thoughtfull etc. What is the result of all these?

My, oh my but isn't that a juicy one?

As a GM, my impulse would be to forego part or all of the xp cost to rid oneself of the flaw if the elf would agree to do something important for some Longbeards.  During this interesting side-adventure, the elf would get to experience the same kind of race prejudice he had had against the Dwarves, only in spades.

I'd work it in subtly and crescendo it until it was really, really oppressive.  If the elf could make it through all of this without any killing, and was able to complete the "sub-quest", I'd let him buy that penalty off cheap.

As an advantage to offset the inevitable "But of course my character would shoot him, because he hates Longbeards!", I might throw something in there at the start where the dwarf character on staff could something big for the elf -- like sticking his beck (beard?) out to defuse an ugly situation, or take some punishment on himself to save the elf the indignity...  it would be the dwarf's choice, of course, and an interesting one at that!

Of course, it COULD go the other way, with the elf completely submitting to racial hatred and mucking things up BADLY.  If he survived, you could INCREASE the ep required to lose the flaw.

I feel that this is the stuff that game-reminiscences are made of.  Call me crazy.

Drama, baby, drama!

[Grinnen Baeritt]

I would allow the character to spend DP to "buy off" a mental flaw. However, this would be dependant on the opportunity to do so... as the character gets more "experienced" the cost time-wise takes longer, relatively speaking... the character being more set in their ways (teaching old dogs..). This cost perhaps being spent over multiple levels and the penalties associated with the flaw being gradually reduced, rather than an "Instantaneous healing"

The problem is what cost in DP would you allocate per point of flaw removed?

[providence13]

This is why I so glad RM doesn't have Alignments.

The "Flaw for Life" discussion reminds me a lot of old D&D Align arguments.
Are Flaws meant to be straight jackets, confining and defining characters?

Should each "wound" (Mental, Physical, Spiritual..) incurred by a Flaw have to have "super duper special" healing as opposed to normal magic healing needed for the same event occurring after chargen?

For buying off Flaws.. isn't there something in Talent Law about that.. hmmm.

Nothing but questions today.