RPGnet Columns
04-02-2005, 10:27 PM
Post originally by Jim Bob at 2005-04-02 21:27:37
Converted from Phorums BB System
It was written,
"*A note on the term "Disadvantage", I dislike it. Disadvantage expresses that these flaws, hooks, or liabilities are always purely negative. I think that this is technically a bunch of "hooey" and should be exterminated from the lexicon."
I disagree. An "advantage" is an advantage for the character, a "disadvantage" is a disadvantage for the player. Why? Because disadvantages all restrict the player's freedom of action with the character. For example, consider the following disadvantages,
"Pacifist" - restricts player's freedom to kill without conscience
"One arm" - restricts player's freedom to have the character do things that require two arms/hands.
"Poor" - resticts player's freedom to have their character choose any gear they want
"Truthful" - restricts player's freedom to have their character lie when they want to.
Etc.
Though a disadvantage may contribute to the story, from the player's point of view it's a restriction on their character's freedom of action. That's why most systems have you get more points to spend on advantages, skills, etc if you take a disadvantage. It's a little deal between player and GM.
Player: "I want MORE POWER."
GM: "Okay, you can have power, but it has to have some limits. So if you abuse your power, I can at least rein you in with the limitations."
Of course, if you feel this is all bollocks, and that between the "balance" aspect of disadvantages being negative, and the "helps the story" aspect, which looks positive, if between those two you consider the "story" aspect far more important, then I recommend to you FATE, http://www.faterpg.com
Converted from Phorums BB System
It was written,
"*A note on the term "Disadvantage", I dislike it. Disadvantage expresses that these flaws, hooks, or liabilities are always purely negative. I think that this is technically a bunch of "hooey" and should be exterminated from the lexicon."
I disagree. An "advantage" is an advantage for the character, a "disadvantage" is a disadvantage for the player. Why? Because disadvantages all restrict the player's freedom of action with the character. For example, consider the following disadvantages,
"Pacifist" - restricts player's freedom to kill without conscience
"One arm" - restricts player's freedom to have the character do things that require two arms/hands.
"Poor" - resticts player's freedom to have their character choose any gear they want
"Truthful" - restricts player's freedom to have their character lie when they want to.
Etc.
Though a disadvantage may contribute to the story, from the player's point of view it's a restriction on their character's freedom of action. That's why most systems have you get more points to spend on advantages, skills, etc if you take a disadvantage. It's a little deal between player and GM.
Player: "I want MORE POWER."
GM: "Okay, you can have power, but it has to have some limits. So if you abuse your power, I can at least rein you in with the limitations."
Of course, if you feel this is all bollocks, and that between the "balance" aspect of disadvantages being negative, and the "helps the story" aspect, which looks positive, if between those two you consider the "story" aspect far more important, then I recommend to you FATE, http://www.faterpg.com