Hi!

Ah. I had actually been creating characters in the same way as in GURPS, and
wasn't very satsified, so your explanation that it isn't supposed to work that
way makes sense. Your second point is probably right, though -- even if the
defects were revalued, players will still take as many as they can.

Thanks,
David.

--- In tekumelrpg@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph M. Saul" <jmsaul@...> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 May 2009, David wrote:
>
> > I don't know if there aren't enough defects, but the defects have
> >always seemed undervalued (at least to me). For example, taking a defect
> >of being blind is worth only two BP. There thus seems to be a lack of
> >"reasonable" defects (i.e., defects you can take without the defect
> >totally defining the caharacter). But maybe that's just a reflection on
> >my style of play.
>
> It was a design decision on our part to avoid encouraging the GURPS-style
> character builds where the majority of character points are paid for with
> a litany of defects. (I'm not slamming GURPS here, I like the game, but
> if you've played it you know what I'm talking about.)
>
> I'm not sure it works, in the sense that a lot of PCs I see have at least
> five 1-point defects, and if the defects were worth more they might focus
> on one or two. Then again, they might still have five defects, but get a
> ton of points for them.
>
> If we were doing it over again, I might argue for a cap on how many
> defects you can take (GMs are of course free to impose one anyway) and
> *might* make some of them worth more.
>
> -- Joe
>