*
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 24, 2014, 06:18:32 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Search:     Advanced search
275647 Posts in 27717 Topics by 4283 Members Latest Member: - otto Most online today: 62 - most online ever: 429 (November 03, 2007, 04:35:43 AM)
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: "Flaws" in DITV or Afraid.  (Read 1039 times)
PlatonicPimp
Member

Posts: 13


« on: May 21, 2007, 03:37:00 PM »

/b] "

What do you fine folks think of this? Sadly, it will be a while before DITV comes back into the game rotation here, so it will be a while before I can playtest it.
Logged
The Mule
Member

Posts: 18

Citizen


« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2007, 04:48:48 PM »

In character terms, I consider d4s more "complications" than flaws.  As a player, I consider d4s cash money for earning experience.

I'd ask the players if they like having their characters find the weaknesses of the fictional characters, or if, rather, the players like finding mechanical weaknesses in the mechanical opposition.

The difference is this: The fictional characters can have any weakness you want, really.  As my raise I can say "You're way too overconfident in yourself, and I take advantage of that with XXX".  I don't need to look at your sheet at all to do this, and my character has just found and taken advantage of your character's flaw.

This doesn't work so well against other PCs, because they can veto if the flaw doesn't seem appropriate, but still then I get to look at your sheet and see what flaws you *do* think are appropriate, and just use those in my raises.

But why bother, when there's no mechanical advantage to doing all that work while raising?  I'll tell you why!  Because how I raise is what's really important here.  If I want my character to be somebody who finds flaws in his opponents, Dogs is one of the best systems for it, because I'll be able to narrate my character finding flaws all the time.

Now!  On the other hand, we have the possibility that it's not about the characters finding flaws, it's about the players finding mechanical advantages!  That case I can't speak so strongly on, but I think Dog's system is set up to directly relate the mechanical strength of a narration with the narrative strength (die size) of the trait involved.

Your house rule initially seems dangerous, but possibly interesting.
Logged

Raised by wolves.
WildElf
Member

Posts: 47


« Reply #2 on: May 30, 2007, 10:40:34 AM »

What happens if someone takes "I'm a terrible shot 2d10" and get challenged to a duel?  I think defining d4 traits as flaws and restricting them in that way is selling it short.  And whether or not its restricted, using an opponent's dice in your pool is a major win.  And having a flaw is a major downside, so I think you'd quickly find players (maybe even yourself in making NPCs) trying to avoid "flaws" at all cost.

I think if your players like sussing out a weakness, you're making an unnecessary mechanic to allow for that.  They can simply make discovering a weakness as a part of their raise.  They could say "That bum leg hurtin'? I'm gonna catch you easy." Raise 14.  If they can block "Naw, that healed over just fine" or they might have to take the blow, "Bum leg or no, I can still out run you!"

Although, I think The Mule hit upon something.  What probably interests them in flaws is finding mechanical tricks to use to their advantage.
Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Oxygen design by Bloc
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!