What about Willpower? Or Merits (If we decide they have value enough to be purchased..)?

I'll sign on to this one.

Also, damn you, Lily, for your stupid, sexy Flanders Alyson Hannigan icon.

The amendment on the table is just for skills and Backgrounds, since they seem the most often neglected elements of characters. There's room for negociation, there, if there's a strong sentiment to allow them for Willpower or Attributes.

I'm down with this too.

If they are really going to be bonus points I would think the rule of simplicity says use them like regular bonus points. Just not for Quantum, which is what you are trading them in for and to then spend 7 on another Quantum would just be silly...

I still don't see what everyone has against Meris and Flaws. We can get rid of the broken ones, set a limit of 4 or 5, and let it be. Trying to devise an entirely new system of bonus point allocation seems such a hassle. The simplest way would be to allow limited merits/flaws, and be done with it.

I don't really understand the objection. No one has yet made a valid argument against using them.

its a case of the people who feel that roleplaying is enough and you shuoldnt get anything for your trouble if you want to play a cripple, or have flashbacks, or some kind of obsession or neurosis.

DFlaws have always been a point of contention. I think here its mostly because people feel like they arent going to be played well or something. Ive always liked flaws myself. A flawed character is a more human one in my opinion. Kryptonite makes superman more interesting. IMHO.

Me too. I always saw flaws as something that separated one character from another (pre-eruption of course). If there is nothing to gain from being fucked up, I will play a flawless human who had no issues to contend with in real life. He will be a cookie-cutter joe, with a cookie cutter life. I guess for some, that kind ot thing would be fun to write about. To me, it sounds bland.

We are talking about personal choice here. If you don't want your character to have flaws, then don't give them any. Why should anyone care if someone takes a character with a few flaws, and gets a few bp to help round out their character?

Because the flaws that provided you with the BP advantage rarely are played to the disadvantage they are meant to be. Thus you are given extra points without being inconvenienced by them as you would if this were a TT game and an ST would be there to enforce them.

I've no problem with Merits and Flaws. Allowing them would require a bit more peer review in the character submission process, but I don't see that as a weakness.

That said, I don't really have a strong attachment to them either, since I don't have a book that lists them.

I agree with all of this.

Standard rules say 30 NP and 15 Bonus (half the nova point value).
If we're going to 50 NP then just up the bonus to 25 (also half) and be done with it.

I have to say I don't understand this entire "the people who want a higher Q must be given a helping hand". If we're going to give different amounts of nova points to different characters, just admit this is what we're doing and move forward with that. Otherwise, give everyone the same number.

The same could be said for taint. Yet that is being allowed.

After Aberration sets in, I would say there is truth to your statement. The social penalties are more often than that, not RP'd as much as they should be.

The key is to not view flaws as things you get for points. They are things that define the character. Brickman doesn't view his being Lusty as a disadvantage, etc.

If you acknowledge that my point has merit, then why not disallow aberrations?

Once again: I have not heard a valid arument for scrapping the Mertis/Flaws system.

The 'people might not play the disadvanges' argument, is paternalistic. It implies that we are children who are incompetent or lack integrity.

You don't see us as children, do you?

Although I'm not the developer of 200X, I might say that M/F are an optional system and not part of the core rules. Therefore, if they are omitted from the 200X Bible they aren't being scrapped so much as the decision was made not to include them.

Tait is a core conciet of the game and setting. If you remove aberrations and taint, you effectively change the game/setting.

Merits and Flaw are an optional system tacked onto game as a form of character customization. As such their incusion is entirely optional.

My suggestion is a compromize. Either limit the number of bonus points you can get from flaws to, oh I don't know, say 5? Or alternatively we can limit the number of flaws you can take (3 perhaps) regardless of how many bonus points they give.

Does that seem like a reasonable compromize?

Oh and as an addendum; If the general troupe consensus is you aren't representing your flaws properly (or at all) then rule 1 comes into play (you are being a dick...). Sound fair?

But WHY? If the developer doesn't like them, she doesn't have to use them. What reason is there to restrict others from doing so?

I'll make and analogy using meat. (which is optional in a diet).

-There are some (vegetarians), who don't eat meat. That's fine, that is their CHOICE. But in telling others that they can't have meat, they taking away choice.

How about another: Abortion (of which I am pro-choice)

-There are some who would never have an abortion. That's fine, that is their choice. But when they tell others they can't, they are taking away other's choices.

Choices and freedoms are the same thing.

How restrictive is this forum going to be? Are we going to have a choice in what we write, or say, or with whom we interact? Do we get banned for an offensive word or statement? Will our postings be deleted if the developer doesn't think it fits with the vision of the forum.

It's all starting to sound a little controlling. Doesn't that worry anyone?

Jordan: I was trying make a compromise. I said 3-5 bonus points. No one was paying attention.

It sounds to me like your taking this to extremes to try and prove your point.



This is little melodramatic. Yes, by curtailing (or outright denying) the use of M&F choices are being limited. Why? Because in the past they have been abused here. It's an attempt to stop that abuse.

And yes some people that come here are immature fucktards that don't understand the concept of "shared fun." To put a point on it, if your fun (using "your" in the generic sense) comes at the price of the fun of the rest of the community (or even a significantly large portion of the community) then you are being a selfish dick and need to revisit rule 1.

By banning M&F some of the abuse is being nipped in the bud. Please note that this is not my endorsement of banning M&F, merely an attempt to explain the reason for it as I see it.

Who makes that decision? What sort of things ruin the fun of the community? It might help to know ahead of time.

It also sounds a little collectivist for my tastes. But I will probably still give it a try.

The community as a whole makes that decision. In the past it's happened naturally.

As an example; When Dreamer first showed up here with her/his very first Mary Sue, he was running around claiming the Proteus was no more and that his character had personally killed Thetis. Needless to say this caused an emmediate reaction and Dreamer got slapped down hard, yet still he went down kicking and screaming and generally made the boards an unfun place for quite a while. This is just one example of this, there are plenty of others but I'd rather not make a giant post dredging up a host of unpleasant memories.

By enacting rules everyone who participates knows what can be expected from the get go and cannot feign ignorance later. Well....they can but then they are just being a dick and thus subject to rule 1 anyways.

Personally I'm not totally against Merits and Flaws but there is potential for abuse and dickish behavior so I understand people's reluctance to allow them. I know you say we are all adults here but history has shown at least me that no, we are not all adults and some people need to be babysat to make sure they play "nice".

I will be creating my character in the vision of what I want my character to be. I will use all methods at my dipsosal to create a background, write up, skill set, and a power scheme that mix with my vision.

I will not be power gaming, I will use 50 nova points and 15 background points starting at quantum 1, it's all I need. The moderators may or may not see things in my character (which will be submitted to them prior to my submitting him to the boards) that they don't agree with. If this is a the case I hope the write up and backstory I provide are good enough to prove why I designed my character in that fashion. I may use a weakness, I may not. A strength might get used if I feel it fits the design. Merits and flaws will be on the sheet for RP purposed, no points will be gained or lost for my selection. They are only there as an RP foot note (Refer to Solstice in 2010 for an example). Careful thought is going into this project and I'm not just slapping dots on a page. I hope those who moderate this project will see and respect that as they review my creation.

Two weeks of bickering has so far produced very little besides progress which has devolved into more bickering. I'll admit that some have slowed the proccess more than others but I won't name names (Overload). Nova deserves better than this, as do the mods who are trying their best to please everyone (which is a mistake IMO). I think for myself. I am an intelligent, and imaginative individual, and feel that I can create and 'play' a character that can be productive as well as interactive in the 200X world without harming any of the obviously frail egos possesed by some of the other players.

Best of luck to everyone, I hope you all come to some arangement soon. Meanwhile, I'm going to be trying to get a fiction or something started. Even if this falls flat, at least I'll get a nice AU story out of it.

I love you!

...

Can I hump your leg?

Flaws already have a limit. The rules state they are limited to 10. In oWoD this limit was set at 7.

Way back when we used to have a thing we would do in our TT games (before we ever heard of WW) where you would take a merit and a flaw to define your character. Essentially it was there to probe their weak spots but you also had a strong point. Mostly this was for personality. I like Merits and Flaws because you don't have to take them if you dont want to. Also I think the list in the APG is too small. I have 2 shelves of white wolf books with a much more comprehensive assortment. Sometimes as in 2010 I found ones I liked and submitted them for approval. They were approved.

They aid immensely in roleplaying. Honestly I never understood why people didnt roleplay their flaws...that takes away the fun of them!

On the other hand I have seen STs who are too harsh with them, constantly throwing 1 or 2 point flaws (which are suposed to be minor) in the face of the player.

IE if one has a Dependant in can be great for roleplaying but that shouldnt have to be an aspect of *every* story. Ditto for taking enemies. Awesome for roleplaying but they shouldn't come around every time or it numbs their effect...

See how that statement had a dick-ish flavor. Keep those jibes coming! If you havent noticed I have been being more cooperative but if you want to fan flames by all means!

You'll have to ask Velvet first, but hey, if she's cool with it, I am.

*shrugs*

I think our proposed setting doesn't *disallow* flaws. We just disallow points for them. Given the number of nova points being thrown around I don't see a problem.

There are a flaw or two I consider core to some of the PCs I run. Those PCs can still be built, and built extremely well on 50 NP. Ergo no points for flaws doesn't have any impact.

Ease back down into your chair, Hoss. Everything you post goes into the overall assessment of who you are. Cooperative in one thread while being dickish in another results in a net assessment of "dick". You want to be cooperative then be cooperative.

Okay. So what I'm hearing, so far, is that the net objection to the Quantum 3 amendment is "Why don't we just give people overall more bonus points"?

The answer, based on the compromise that V and I worked out, was that we wanted to reduce the amount of rules-twisting and optimization that would be done with that. Rather than putting ourselves in the position where everyone's rushing about juggling for more efficent uses for points, we just set the Quantum default to 3 (which is where it usually winds up before Nova points are spent, thanks to the "dump 14 bonus points into Quantum" tactic) and let people decide where in the Quantum range they want to fall from there. It gives us more variety in the powers people have access to to write with, and people who decide to go under that level of Quantum get a consolation prize of bonus points to keep them from feeling as though playing a low Quantum concept is being penalized.

Clear? New objections? Commentary?

To be honest, this idea still doesn't really thrill me or grab me. I still don't see what is wrong with building a character through the standard rules. 50 NP goes a long way.

Just as an example I've rebuilt a massively powerful character (originally had Q7 and Quantum Mastery) to fit the Q5-50NP mold and he seems to hit all his major points while still having lots of room to grow.

You build to a different standard. I appreciate that but recognize not everyone uses that standard. If it helps, think of this as a compromise situation of sorts. It allows the people that wouldn't game unless they could play a powerhouse to do that without handing them the keys to the kingdom and watching as they set out to destroy cities.

I support your amendment WarGear even though it doesn't help my initial concept one bit.

But we're still allowing bonus to be spent on Q, right?

I like the suggestion of starting with Q3 and if you decide to start under that you get bonus Bonus points.

Part of the reason I like that is that personally, I don't believe it's right to use bonus points to buy dots of quantum. For some reason, I always looked at making a nova differently from making a vampire/garou, etc... Perhaps it was just the way that the instructions were written. The WOD setup was "You're making a *fill in the supernatural*. When I read the Aberrant creation instructions it was -- You're creating a person...AND THEN only when that's done do you create a nova.

The concept of dumping 14 of the 15 BP in the create your human phase of character creation never occurred to me and I never allowed it during any game I ran. The first time I ever saw it was when I came back here a few years ago & someone said they could start with 4 Q just from flaws & bp.

I still don't like it, obviously others do.

While I'm not proposing a revision, I think it would be perfectly fine to say.

You start with Q3, if you get less you get +5 BP per dot of Q you don't take and you may not spend BP on Quantum. Were I to suggest it I'm sure it'll be shot down before I get back to work (I'm on lunch break right now).

So mark me in favor of the <Q3 with bonus BP iff you don't take Q3> rather than any alternatives.

iff = if and only if

I keep hearing this and keep thinking of Neil Preston. Q:6 and he didn't want to hurt anybody, much less destroy a city.