12 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

In der Beschränkung zeigt sich erst der Meister - Goethe.

Nice spot on the Goethe, though I think his focus on mastery (like Welles' on art) does muddy the waters a bit. The point I was trying to make was not to put the character creation as presented on an art pedestal but rather that the very restraints which we see bemoaned in this thread can also be viewed as enhancing creativity (and not just the creativity of artists or masters either).

2 minutes ago, blut_und_glas said:

Nice spot on the Goethe, though I think his focus on mastery (like Welles' on art) does muddy the waters a bit. The point I was trying to make was not to put the character creation as presented on an art pedestal but rather that the very restraints which we see bemoaned in this thread can also be viewed as enhancing creativity (and not just the creativity of artists or masters either).

The fact that you can create your own unique advantages and disadvantages is an opportunity for creativity. The fact that you have to take a prescribed number of them, with mandatory types, is not. Players can (and some will) just go down the list and pick whatever they have to pick simply because they have to. And they have to, because the system requires it to work.

3 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

The fact that you can create your own unique advantages and disadvantages is an opportunity for creativity.

And, as at least one person stated up thread, this creation of unique advantages/disadvantages is greatly aided in the beta rules by the very rigid template (i.e., the limitations) of the defined types of advantages and disadvantages.

(Which obviously is not to say that you cannot create unique advantages and disadvantages outside those templates or in other rules systems without such rigid templates, just that this template can be a useful tool in exerting one's creativity.)

23 minutes ago, blut_und_glas said:

And, as at least one person stated up thread, this creation of unique advantages/disadvantages is greatly aided in the beta rules by the very rigid template (i.e., the limitations) of the defined types of advantages and disadvantages.

(Which obviously is not to say that you cannot create unique advantages and disadvantages outside those templates or in other rules systems without such rigid templates, just that this template can be a useful tool in exerting one's creativity.)

Honestly, either there’s a clear template to use or the GM gets thrown under the bus. Having to be the final arbiter of something where at least in theory the sky is the limit is a pain.

On 10/22/2017 at 2:23 AM, tenchi2a said:

All I hear Is my players have learned to game the system. That's not something to be proud of or a good sign for the game.

My other group, last night, had 4 rolls in session, failing only 1, but only got through investigating the room... but that was by using entire

Gaming the dice is EXPECTED. It's a part of the standard for many storygames.

What it means, however, is that the difficulties are not well calibrated.

6 hours ago, blut_und_glas said:

And, as at least one person stated up thread, this creation of unique advantages/disadvantages is greatly aided in the beta rules by the very rigid template (i.e., the limitations) of the defined types of advantages and disadvantages.

(Which obviously is not to say that you cannot create unique advantages and disadvantages outside those templates or in other rules systems without such rigid templates, just that this template can be a useful tool in exerting one's creativity.)

The mechanics aren't "ridged," they are simple. Simple means that they are easy to use, but they can still do essentially anything you want.

If you want a character without an anxiety, give them something narrow like Sea Sickness. While the mechanics are simple - You decide your level of involvement. Is this going to be something that comes up all the time? (blind, lame) or is it something that is only going to come up in certain situations (whispers of treachery) or will it be extremely rare (sea sickness). You pick what you want it to be so if you don't want it to be a thing, you don't have to let it be a thing.

That said - I have a real hard time believing someone is genuinely upset about having any of these things as part of their character. I feel like you're really reaching when you say having to take advantages and disadvantages are bad things, considering its one of the most desired aspects of an RPG. Its so desired it was typically a problem with previous L5R versions was players racking up 5+ disadvantages just taking what is appropriate for their character even if they won't ever have an impact on the story (basically making them free xp for chargen), or worrying endlessly about which advantages they'll actually need. Having a more guided 2x2 choice with simple mechanics for these features keeps things manageable, and usable.

5 minutes ago, shosuko said:

That said - I have a real hard time believing someone is genuinely upset about having any of these things as part of their character. I feel like you're really reaching to say "I have to have advantages and disadvantages" as a bad thing considering its one of the most desired aspects of an RPG. Its so desired it was typically a problem with previous L5R versions was players racking up 5+ disadvantages just taking what is appropriate for their character even if they won't ever have an impact on the story (basically making them free xp for chargen). Having a more guided 2x2 choice for these features keeps things manageable, and usable.

I don't think the issue is "I have this disadvantage", I think it is more "I must take a disadvantage because that's how character creation works". It doesn't bother me, but making Adv/Disadv mandatory seems to annoy some folks. To eache their own.

13 minutes ago, JorArns said:

I don't think the issue is "I have this disadvantage", I think it is more "I must take a disadvantage because that's how character creation works". It doesn't bother me, but making Adv/Disadv mandatory seems to annoy some folks. To eache their own.

And I think they are reaching when they say they don't like it. I feel like they are creating a mountain out of a mole hill. I have never had a single player ever consider making a character without both advantages and disadvantages when we use a system that includes them. Its one of the better parts of character creation because it makes the characters much more "in character" for how the player perceives them. Any experienced role-player is going to quickly define these traits for their character. Any new one will likely appreciate the prodding as they're character will have things about them that make it easier to RP than if they just had a list of stats and skills... That personality is important even for mechanical, gamey sessions as it helps define how your character acts, and what makes them shine next to the other players.

1 minute ago, shosuko said:

And I think they are reaching when they say they don't like it. I feel like they are creating a mountain out of a mole hill. I have never had a single player ever consider making a character without both advantages and disadvantages when we use a system that includes them. Its one of the better parts of character creation because it makes the characters much more "in character" for how the player perceives them. Any experienced role-player is going to quickly define these traits for their character. Any new one will likely appreciate the prodding as they're character will have things about them that make it easier to RP than if they just had a list of stats and skills... That personality is important even for mechanical, gamey sessions as it helps define how your character acts, and what makes them shine next to the other players.

While I may agree, it is important to remember that our experiences are subjective. Not every GM or player is the same or wants the same thing out of an RPG.

35 minutes ago, shosuko said:

And I think they are reaching when they say they don't like it. I feel like they are creating a mountain out of a mole hill. I have never had a single player ever consider making a character without both advantages and disadvantages when we use a system that includes them. Its one of the better parts of character creation because it makes the characters much more "in character" for how the player perceives them. Any experienced role-player is going to quickly define these traits for their character. Any new one will likely appreciate the prodding as they're character will have things about them that make it easier to RP than if they just had a list of stats and skills... That personality is important even for mechanical, gamey sessions as it helps define how your character acts, and what makes them shine next to the other players.

Like I said earlier, I’ve seen players do pretty much everything regarding advantages and disadvantages, anything from taking none to going over the maximum points they were allowed to earn. Why is it so hard to believe having to take exactly five is off-putting? Of course, it doesn’t help that the reason that you have to take them is that they tie into the Strife system and Strife is something a lot of players are dubious about in the first place. It’s too metagamey for some.

8 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

Of course, it doesn’t help that the reason that you have to take them is that they tie into the Strife system and Strife is something a lot of players are dubious about in the first place. It’s too metagamey for some.

This may be the crux of the issue here.

4 minutes ago, JorArns said:

This may be the crux of the issue here.

Maybe, but given that Strife feels like railroading to some I’m not sure the distinction matters. It’s a similar problem: being forced to do something they don’t want to. And we get the point of that all, to an extent at least, but that is not necessarily a reason to like it better.

It also doesn't help that strife builds up far too quickly, shattering any illusion that you're playing a member of an elite warrior caste and instead babysitting an angsty teen who often decides to do their own stupid thing.

2 hours ago, nameless ronin said:

Like I said earlier, I’ve seen players do pretty much everything regarding advantages and disadvantages, anything from taking none to going over the maximum points they were allowed to earn. Why is it so hard to believe having to take exactly five is off-putting? Of course, it doesn’t help that the reason that you have to take them is that they tie into the Strife system and Strife is something a lot of players are dubious about in the first place. It’s too metagamey for some.

Its hard to believe because it sounds unbelievable. Odd behavior like that typically comes from someone not understanding how the game works, how rp'ing works, or just trying to do something dumb. New players should be guided into this, and chargen does it well. People trying to do dumb things can do all the dumb things they want, I don't care - and neither should FFG.

I don't have to believe something just because you've said it. I've never seen - anyone - back away from the character building of advantages or disadvantages - ever - It is literally the best part of chargen for most players. Its so important, and entertaining that I really believe you are simply making a big deal out of the "forced advantages" just to cast shade.

Even in the thread where someone bashed on Giri/Ninjo because they wanted to be some souless psychopath - in that thread I even showed how Giri and Ninjo can be used for this type of character. The argument against these things stems from either inexperience with building an actual character, or a desire to play a miniatures game.

30 minutes ago, shosuko said:

Its hard to believe because it sounds unbelievable. Odd behavior like that typically comes from someone not understanding how the game works, how rp'ing works, or just trying to do something dumb. New players should be guided into this, and chargen does it well. People trying to do dumb things can do all the dumb things they want, I don't care - and neither should FFG.

I don't have to believe something just because you've said it. I've never seen - anyone - back away from the character building of advantages or disadvantages - ever - It is literally the best part of chargen for most players. Its so important, and entertaining that I really believe you are simply making a big deal out of the "forced advantages" just to cast shade.

Even in the thread where someone bashed on Giri/Ninjo because they wanted to be some souless psychopath - in that thread I even showed how Giri and Ninjo can line up with this type of character. The argument against these things stems from either inexperience with building an actual character, or a desire to play a miniatures game.

Just so we’re clear, which is the odd behaviour? Taking no ads/disads? Taking only one but not the other? Maxing out both?

23 minutes ago, nameless ronin said:

Just so we’re clear, which is the odd behaviour? Taking no ads/disads? Taking only one but not the other? Maxing out both?

The odd behavior would be trying to completely pass on either, or both, when they are central to role play and character development. Without advantages and disadvantages you are bland, and uninteresting. Its hard to even describe, because even being bland, or being mechanical actually comes with advantages and disadvantages. Even being an NPC comes with them... I would challenge that there is no character type made better by not having either of these.

And please - answer that challenge - what type of character do you think is honestly better having no advantages, or disadvantages. You can't! Because anything you give me, I can flesh out by adding these details.

45 minutes ago, shosuko said:

The odd behavior would be trying to completely pass on either, or both, when they are central to role play and character development. Without advantages and disadvantages you are bland, and uninteresting. Its hard to even describe, because even being bland, or being mechanical actually comes with advantages and disadvantages. Even being an NPC comes with them... I would challenge that there is no character type made better by not having either of these.

And please - answer that challenge - what type of character do you think is honestly better having no advantages, or disadvantages. You can't! Because anything you give me, I can flesh out by adding these details.

While I do agree that passions ans anxieties are a good idea for fleshing out characters.

I have to say that the idea that all characters need advantages, or disadvantages to be playable is just an opinion.

Yes you flesh out any character by adding these details. But that's your idea of the character not his.

This for all the words you wrote boils down to "my opinion is better then yours, so I'm right".

Any English teacher will tell you that this is not a valid argument.

I have players that like to flesh out their PCs with advantages and disadvantages.

I also have players that don't. This is a players choice, and in my opinion this should be the players choice not the games.

I really don't see the issues you have here as if they left it to the player you could use them and he doesn't have to so you both get what you want.

while if they force it you get what you want and hes out of luck.

This just seems vindictive to me, but that's just my opinion

2 hours ago, shosuko said:

And please - answer that challenge - what type of character do you think is honestly better having no advantages, or disadvantages. You can't! Because anything you give me, I can flesh out by adding these details.

The specific character I decide I want to play, which is not the character you want to play.

6 hours ago, shosuko said:

The odd behavior would be trying to completely pass on either, or both, when they are central to role play and character development. Without advantages and disadvantages you are bland, and uninteresting. Its hard to even describe, because even being bland, or being mechanical actually comes with advantages and disadvantages. Even being an NPC comes with them... I would challenge that there is no character type made better by not having either of these.

And please - answer that challenge - what type of character do you think is honestly better having no advantages, or disadvantages. You can't! Because anything you give me, I can flesh out by adding these details.

I’ve had players who wanted their characters to have flaws and discerning traits, without those necessarily being a mandatory mechanical effect. A womanizer without having Lechery. A functional alcoholic without that being a Consumption. Things like that. Of course, there are some issues with that in previous editions too: Bayushi Courtiers hate this, for instance. But the notion of giving your character character, making him stand out in certain ways, without that being an absolute effect regardless of circumstances is perfectly understandable to me. Especially since most characters I can remember that did have advantages and/or disadvantages had some extra foibles or good qualities on top of those.

11 hours ago, tenchi2a said:

I really don't see the issues you have here as if they left it to the player you could use them and he doesn't have to so you both get what you want.

It isn't about what I want, or what he wants - the game is a system, and the system is designed to use these.

Narrative systems require these features of a character almost more than they need stats like str, dex, and hit points.

This game is a narrative system - if you refuse to play narrative then this won't be the system for you.

The only reason to refuse to add advantages and disadvantages is because you don't want a narrative game anyway.