Perks and Flaws

[kluu]

I agree this is the way it should be done though I dont like all you have there. Bu the idea behind it is good.

In general anyone should be able to jsut take the ting like the cleric and have theri levels cost more % to go up. I think 20% is good 25 seems too much.

For the cleric, we would need somethign else.

Suggestions for what things could represent a lesser of type should be gotten. Then we should take all those that seem equal for each class of specific. With any class taking 20% more XP to level only those classes that are more SP espensive should have alternatives.  Perhaps though instead of a % of xp per level it should jsut be a standard amount x level added, then it is the same for everyone. Say +250 xp x level extra.

This could be for say a 3 point flaw. THen have specifics for other classes for another +2 to +3 points. Thieves could be -20% starting skill and -10 points per level. Mages could have -15% to research and learn spells.  Fighters couldnot be able to specialze. (I like that one.) Bards could pick between reduced thief, or magical ability.

Some classes should be immune to this Druids and Paladins should not be weakend by class opther than the XP addition.

I like the flaw but I think it needs work.

If we are going to change the perks and flaws we should do it before they get the new site character generator done so they can incorporate the changes. So lets buckle down and do it. Put this onthe top of our For Thardferr to do list maybe.

[Suleidan]

Ok the difference between never being able to specialize (and losing ONE weapon profficiency) is NOTHING compared to having 25% more costing levels.. :0 sheesh

[Suleidan]

To try to make that last comment a bit more constructive... What about some sort of .. stunted growth spiritually that resulted in them receiving -1 spells per level until they were 2 spell levels above it.. (( with a minimum of 1 spell of a given level))

so say you could cast lvl 2 spells, you would have -1 spell (memorization) for lvl 1 and lvl 2 spells.. when you reached level 3 spells you would finally gain your full realization of lvl 1 spells and get your -1 taken away, however would have -1 to lvl 2 and 3 memorizations..

it is an idea.. still definately hampering.. but not so extremely...

[DM Rithas]

well if it's a % of XP cost increase, then I think the points of it should be different depending on the XP chart. I mean, 25% extra XP required would be a HUGE penalty for a paladin, and much less so for a thief or bard.

If it's a set XP increase like +250 XP or something, then I'd say same cost for every class.

As for it affecting each class seperately...I think that might be a bit to much work to balance and write up for it's worth. I'd personally rather have it just affect one aspect that affects every class, such as WP or NWP's, # of languages, initiative, etc.

Not suggesting those exact things, just using them as examples

[AngelDM]

Well.. was just brain storming...

but consider this... never being able to specialize... and one less profficiency slot is like giving fighter -1 level(or -2), mage penealty is self explanatory.... thieves too....


In the end.. Cleric simply would ended up having -1level as it is...   if you consider how exp is awarded in Thardferr. Cleric with this penealty and with this penealty would probably differ only by one level when raching level 5-6. While having all abilities instead of permamently lossing some ability((like specialization, which gives +1 to hit for fighter(and plus 2 damage), and 1 Thac0 for fighter is like one level))

I tihnk it would end up the same((tho, perhaps -20% would be easier than -25%))...


Anyways.. it was only idea.

[kluu]

I said that the over all would be a xp increase for anyone taking the flaw, the other things (like not getting a speciality) would be extra and so worth more flaw points. In other words everyone taking the flaw would have anincreased XP cost while certain classes could have other additional limitations to gain more points.

I think it shoud be a standard +250 xp per level and not a percentage, that way it is equal for any class. I am not sure how many points this is worth. 3 seems ok to me though.

Then each class can have another limitation specific for more points, another 3 pts but it would be on top of the extra xp.

Probably easiest to jsut forget about it. I don't see too many people taking this flaw so whay bother creating it.

[Harlan]

We have a flaw that impairs vision, what about one that impairs hearing, touch, smell, taste, or even the vocal chords?  

I thought I would be kind of fun to roleplay a mute character.

[DM Rithas]

if done right, a mute is excellent fun. Helpful Elf (dunno if he still lurks around thardferr) played a mute elf named Rokin, back in the day...


good times

[kluu]

other than sight and to a lesser degree hearing , have little to limit a person in the game mechnics.  I thin they coud be incorporated as a USF, or maybe as part of a mental problem but shouldn't be wroth points themselves alone.

Mute could really mess you up if you are a mage but then again a mute wouldnt' become a mage.  

I would take it as a USF and then suggest the problem to a DM and see if they allow it and deside the points for it.

[AngelDM]

Hmmm...

flat +250 exp per level, imho, is a joke... especially if DM(as most do) simply assign exp as per hour per level way... there ain't many that go by DM Guide and then make sure it fits in the under above limit.


+250 exp would be a slight pain for lower levels((really inconsequential)) and for higher.... that would be about 20 minutes of game time or less ((especially if a player could achieve 600+ per hour))

[Ranak]

Here is a thought that will affect everyone equally

If you use the formula;

1 to 100 x level x hours of role play

the only calculation the DM makes is the first section (based on 1-100).  Perhaps this is where you impose a -10 for every point you add.

ie -10 = 1 pt, -20 = 2 pts, -30 = 3 pts

The impact it has is universal, independant of the levels, and is much easier to calculate than to add percentages after the formula. In fact the additional 10% bonus XP for PC's with the right stats makes it complicated enough. IMO the easier you make this, the more inclined DM's will be likley to use it.

Anyway, if the above formula is too harsh, then make it -10=2 pts, -20 = 4 pts, -30 = 6pts.  In any case I would keep away from multiples of 5, again keeping with the make it easy theory...

[DM Rithas]

Another thing...Code of Honor flaw is unbalanced as it is.

2 points, you require 4 codes.
3 points, you need *10* codes.


Seems like quite the leap for just 1 more point.... I'd suggest it going up 2 codes per point up to 5 point flaw, 10 codes.

[Gibreel]

Is this going to cause grandfathering arguements again?

[Suleidan]

yes of course it will... however we have exacting grandfathering rules in place now... The minute something is changed you have XX days to comply...

Furthermore.... The code of honor flaw I do not believe should be worth 5 points for 10 'rules'... the reason it is 3 now is because if it was 5 everyone and their brother would tack it on their character for 5 'free' points...

[DM Rithas]

then 2 points should have more codes, because that is quite the unrealistic jump from a 2 to 3 point flaw as it is now.

And I disagree that it'd be 5 "free" points. A DM should make sure the code is something that makes sense for the char.