08-24-2019, 06:12 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Dec 2012
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
That I could see.
__________________
Warning, I have the Distractible and Imaginative quirks in real life. "The more corrupt a government, the more it legislates." -- Tacitus Five Earths, All in a Row. Updated 12/17/2022: Apocrypha: Bridges out of Time, Part I has been posted. |
08-24-2019, 06:30 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
For it to be a disadvantage worth points, there needs to be some sort of ingame consequence for the character with the disadvantage. Unless romantic relations are important to the campaign, I'd require some additional effect like a ban on permanent Allies, Contacts and Patrons, a limited Reputation or something similar or deem it only worthy of being a Quirk.
|
08-24-2019, 06:36 AM | #13 |
Join Date: Jun 2006
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Maybe. Though that assumes Kirk is even looking for a long term relationship. The writing is seems fairly inconsistent about that and how much it bothers him to fail at it.
You only get points from a negative Destiny if it forces something you want to avoid, or thwarts something you actually want. It's certainly possible to come up with character concepts where exactly the same Destiny might be an advantage for one and a disadvantage to the other.
__________________
-- MA Lloyd Last edited by malloyd; 08-24-2019 at 07:13 AM. |
08-24-2019, 07:39 AM | #14 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Quote:
* Baring something a Player isn't going to take anyway isn't worth points. Which is why I don't allow the Incompetence 'anti-Talent'. |
|
08-24-2019, 07:48 AM | #15 | |
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Quote:
A ban on Allies/Contacts/Patrons would also be a ban on getting them as a reward later in the campaign. Which is only worth points if that is a realistic expectation and something players would actually benefit from having/earning. |
|
08-24-2019, 09:10 AM | #16 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Quote:
If I make a Character with a Disad that limits me from taking certain Skills and Advantages it is because having those certain Skills and Advantages is not a part of the Character I invision. So... why should I get extra points for limiting myself from those certain Skills and Advantages? In other words, I decide I'm not getting into the Ally/Contact/Dependent/Minion/Patron part of the game*, it doesn't interest me for this Character†, why should I get more than a Quirk for limiting myself from such a niche* activity? * Presuming it is niche. Otherwise, if it is an important and/or major portion of the game, why am I being allowed to partition my Character off from it? † Yes, there is also an interesting discussion to be had about other Disads that such limit Characters from niche activities or activities that never come up despite the presupposed genre intentions; say a DF game where Social Stigmas have little to no impact on the Character because Town activities are extremely limited and the whole looting/selling/buying minigame is largely absent; why should the PC get points for the disad? Last edited by evileeyore; 08-24-2019 at 09:15 AM. |
|
08-29-2019, 05:34 PM | #17 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Some thoughts:
The PC is from a tribalistic society that places great prestige on reproducing. Not having a mate is a slur on ones virility or femininity (anyone remember those pitiful barren women in the Old Testament or Mrs Bennet's fanatical matchmaking)?. The character is cursed by Fair Folk. In that case unluckiness in love is Cursed or Jinxed or both. It might even be a Gaes. In fact if you make it a Gaes you can play with it a lot. "No children will come to you if you draw a weapon in battle". Maybe there can even be a way to get rid of the curse. Something equiv to stealing the jewels from Morgoth's Crown?
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison Last edited by jason taylor; 08-29-2019 at 05:43 PM. |
08-29-2019, 05:49 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: Dec 2012
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Quote:
... stealing the Silmarils tends to make one's fate worse, IIRC.
__________________
Warning, I have the Distractible and Imaginative quirks in real life. "The more corrupt a government, the more it legislates." -- Tacitus Five Earths, All in a Row. Updated 12/17/2022: Apocrypha: Bridges out of Time, Part I has been posted. |
|
08-29-2019, 09:20 PM | #19 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Yes but you get to marry the World's Most Beautiful Woman and be father of several empires.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
08-30-2019, 01:10 AM | #20 |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: [Basic] Luck/Unluckiness limitation: Long-Term Relationships cost?
Destined to die alone. But really long term relationships weren't even an option. Sure three of his many flirtations died, but even if they hadn't died, it wasn't like Kirk was actually going to stay with her. That's not unluckiness or destiny. It's just the natural consequence of his lifestyle. If you want a real example of "unlucky in love" go with Ms Tree. All of her boyfriends turn out to be murderers or murder victims.
Last edited by David Johnston2; 08-30-2019 at 01:14 AM. |
Tags |
limitations, luck |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|