[Basic] Disadvantage of the Week: Indecisive

[johndallman]

Indecisive [-10*] is a mundane mental disadvantage with a self-control roll. You aren’t good at choosing a course of action from alternatives, and tend to dither. This disadvantage appeared during the 3e period, but I’m not sure just where.

As long as there’s a clear right thing to do, you’re fine. If there are several plausible actions, you need to make a self-control roll, penalised by the number of choices: -2 for two choices, -3 for three and so on. This means that self-control rolls are always penalised, which is unusual. If you don’t succeed in controlling yourself, you do nothing. You get to re-roll every second in combat, or similar high-stress situations, but only every minute under calmer circumstances. Once you make your roll, you can act normally, until you next face a choice. Avoid multiple-choice exams and dungeons based on game shows.

This disadvantage goes especially badly with Confused. With both, you have to roll for Indecisive to make decisions, and then again for Confused to act on a decision. Like Confused, this disadvantage is very suitable for use in place of attribute loss for failed ageing rolls.

Indecisive isn’t much used on published templates, probably because it tends to slow down action. Where it is an option, it tends to be for ivory-tower scholars and scientists. It’s a possible side-effect of Freakishness in AtE, and of genetic engineering in Bio-Tech, which can also treat it with nootropic drugs. High-Tech and Horror psychiatric drugs can cause Indecisive, as a side-effect of treating other conditions; Madness Dossier technology can, of course, cause it deliberately. Locations: Worminghall makes it characteristic of Water personalities, and Powers uses it in the Awe and Confusion table. Psionic Powers has a Steal Dreams technique that can cause this, and Steampunk uses it in the Shocking Revelations table.

I’ve never used this disadvantage as a player, nor as a GM that I can recall; it would tend to burn up precious gaming time. How has it affected your games?

[a humble lich]

I've never seen a character with this that I recall, but I think the majority of my players have this. I mean, really, how long does it take to decide whether to break into the villains house via the front door or the back door.....

[RogerBW]

I've run NPCs who have behaved this way, but I don't think I've ever formally statted them up. I could only really see myself using it with a Mitigator (particularly "under stress", which is one of the ways in which people who seem good for a job can turn out not to be).

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by a humble lich

I've never seen a character with this that I recall, but I think the majority of my players have this. I mean, really, how long does it take to decide whether to break into the villains house via the front door or the back door.....

Oh, hell yeah. Combine that with a tendency to over-analyse and over-plan, and "Do we go left, or right?" can take half a session. Thank heavens for the player with the Impulsive character.

[malloyd]

The fundamental problem with Indecisive is the mechanic is broken. It's rarely possible to actually *count* the number of choices you have in any particular case, even if you limit it to realistic options and count similar ones as one case - sure you could go right or left, or you could stay here, or turn back, or throw a light down one first, or convince somebody else to scout one, or the other, or both, or one person to scout one and one the other at the same time....

And it utterly fails to scale with the magnitude of the decision in a sensible way. It takes you a couple extra minutes to decide what you should wear today. It takes exactly the same couple extra minutes to decide who you should marry. And you apparently don't reconsider - you've already decided on this assassination plot, no need to hesitate during the course of it. Unless there's an unplanned fork in the hallway on the way I suppose.

It feels a failed attempt to mechanize something that really ought to be roleplayed. Compare it to it's more or less opposite Impulsive, or even Overconfident, which actually has a mechanic but leaves it quite flexible.

[Donny Brook]

I am very ambivalent on how I feel about this disad.

[Celjabba]

On one hand, it is a disadvantage that reflect how a lot of players actualy behave in play. So, a good choice for a disadvantage that will be roleplayed.

On the other hand, it will slow down the game if used as written.
Technically, given the number of possible choice choice in a combat round (Attack ? AOA ? , AOD ? Move ? ... There are about 22 basic choice counting the combat cards, then you have deceptive attack, fp expenditure, techniques ... rolling at -30 or so, a player will always do nothing in combat.

On the third hand, get an impulsive PC and an indecisive PC in the same group and just watch the sparks fly - fun for the GM.

On the fourth tentacle, get an impulsive PC and an indecisive PC in the same group and group cohesion is more or less doomed.

I am really unsure wether to use it of not.

I could houserule it, or I could forbid it, or I could allow it ... I don't know.

More seriously, I had two player take it, and I made clear that for me, it only apply to story choices, not mechanical choices. I would require a roll to decide wether to attack a guard or sneak past it, I may require a roll to decide wether to subdue or kill him, but I don't want players to roll on the choice between knife or garotte, or evaluate or not, or ...

One PC played someone who just follow orders and take no initiative, and it was fine, since he almost never had to make a choice. Whenever he found himself alone, he would freeze with indecision. It was fine.

The other time was a one-shot with pre-rolled characters and the player was a natural leader and dominated the group. Except his character would have had to roll every time they did something... And since he was experimented, he roleplayed it to the hilt. After 20 minutes of play, I asked him to drop the disad.