The flaw rule is the one that we've changed the most, IIRC. Originally, we wanted to reward the player who takes a flaw for their character for having done so in play (rather than in chargen where it usually happens). So, originally we gave them a coin reward whenever such a trait was activated (or whenever any trait was activated in a "negative manner").

With the removal of PCs, there is no longer a problem with an incentive for players to purchase flaws. So, the theory is that a flaw is just a trait like any other. If you activate that trait to get Story Power, you can use it just as you would any Story Power, to say something related to that trait. The incentive to purchase traits remains the leveraging power of the trait.

This has some neat benefits. Other than being simpler (no Flaw/Trait dichotomy), no negatives or "misfortue" points, this also has the advantage that you never have to decide whether a trait is being used positively or negatively. If a player is using a trait to generate story inappropriately, then, as always, it should be challenged.

Does this make sense, or are specialized Flaw mechanics something we shouldn't be rid of?

Mike

I totally agree with this idea, even if you leave in player-characters. Even speaking as an old-timer Champions guy, I have become convinced over the last few years that there really is no reason to have "advantages" and "disadvantages" in the classic way. Much more interesting to have a list of neat things, and to use both their negative and positive consequences in play.

In Hero Wars, for instance, one may have Flaws, but I like to think of them as "abilities that act against you most of the time," reserving the possibility that a Flaw might be used in your favor at some point.

Best,
Ron

I agree with the idea. In my own systems, I used to have separate Gifts and Flaws, but now I ask my players to just write them all in one column, labeled "Gifts & Flaws". Privately, I'm thinking of calling these things "Vantages", based on "advantages" and "disadvantages". It's also closely related to perfect descriptors and imperfect descriptors, but I'm still thinking about infinities at this moment.