[3.5] Flaw: Insecure (PEACH!)

[SpikeFightwicky]

So I may finally be able to play in a 3.5 (after having DMed more of my 3.5 career), and the DM is letting everyone take up to 2 flaws. I check out the flaws, but none of them seemed very interesting. I asked the DM about it, and he said that he'd accept homebew flaws IF (and it's a big if) they were properly balanced. I thought up a couple, and decided to ask the forum what they think.

So, is the following Too little a flaw, too big a flaw, balanced compared to the other flaws (and what can I do to improve it):

Insecure
Desperate to gain acceptance, you try a little to hard to get on people's good sides, and it shows.
Effect: You suffer a -2 penalty on all Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information and Perform skill checks.
Special: You must have have 4 ranks in at least 2 of the skills affected to take this flaw.

[Zom B]

It looks just right to me. Remember,


Flaws are generally bigger in magnitude than feats. That's because players always choose flaws that have the least impact on their characters, while taking feats that have the most. For example, while a feat affecting skills grants a +2 bonus on two skills, its counterpart flaw might impose a -4 penalty on two skills.

So since your average multi-bonus feat like Negotiator adds +2 to two skills, yours subtracts 2 from four skills, which looks to be on par.

[SpikeFightwicky]

It's mostly luck that I picked 4 skills (the other CHA based skills don't fit into the whole 'insecurity' thing very well... maybe Handle Animal, depending on who you ask). Either way, thanks for the feedback! I've never used flaws before so I wanted to be sure this was alright.

[Ashtagon]

Insecure
Desperate to gain acceptance, you try a little to hard to get on people's good sides, and it shows.
Effect: You suffer a -2 penalty on all Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information and Perform skill checks.
Special: You must have have 4 ranks in at least 2 of the skills affected to take this flaw.

I know on paper it is balanced, but I honestly do feel it is overpowered.

* Perform: unless you are a bard, it is absolutely irrelevant to anything.
* Gather Information: This depend strongly on how the DM is planning to run the campaign. Unless the campaign involves a lot of intrigue, courtly action, or spying, it is mostly irrelevant.
* Diplomacy: Outside diplomancer stuff, this has identical issues to Gather Information. If you are optimising this for diplomancer, a -2 penalty is nothing. A sensible DM will not let diplomancer stuff be done anyway.
* Bluff: This is probably the only skill on the list there that can expect to see decent use in any campaign. Outside social stuff, it's quite important for combat feints.

Also, while -4 on two skills may be balanced, making it -2 on four skills doesn't necessarily give the same balance, just as -1 on eight skills doesn't either.

[Human Paragon 3]

Make it -4 to Diplomacy and Bluff? I'd get rid of the skill requirement, too. All flaws are only usable if it will effect the character in some way.

[SpikeFightwicky]

I did have a Bard in mind when I created the flaw, but I suppose it should be universally balanced. Do you have any suggestions on improving it?

[Reluctance]

It's still a bad flaw. Any character who is not the party face can take it with zero repercussions. Inattentive is an exception (nobody likes being surprised, and nobody can make your surprise roll for you), and an iffy one at that, but Feeble or Pathetic should be a closer benchmark for any skill flaws you may care to have.

Insecurity as a character drawback is best expressed as a low charisma, although that's not really viable if you're playing a Cha-based caster. Probably the best flaw I can think of that wouldn't decimate your effectiveness would be a -2 to all Charisma checks, Charisma-based skill checks, and Sense Motive checks. I'd still be wary of this one, but this at least feels like a flaw as opposed to a no-brainer.

[SpikeFightwicky]

It's still a bad flaw. Any character who is not the party face can take it with zero repercussions. Inattentive is an exception (nobody likes being surprised, and nobody can make your surprise roll for you), and an iffy one at that, but Feeble or Pathetic should be a closer benchmark for any skill flaws you may care to have.

Insecurity as a character drawback is best expressed as a low charisma, although that's not really viable if you're playing a Cha-based caster. Probably the best flaw I can think of that wouldn't decimate your effectiveness would be a -2 to all Charisma checks, Charisma-based skill checks, and Sense Motive checks. I'd still be wary of this one, but this at least feels like a flaw as opposed to a no-brainer.

I had put in the Special requirements to make sure a fighter, wizard, etc... couldn't benefit from it. So should I go back to the drawing board?

[DracoDei]

I concur that the 8 skill points are a real cost. They may or may not be big enough, but they are a non-negligible thing.

[Mangles]

There are heaps of non core flaws out there. This site has a lot of them on it

http://realmshelps.dandello.net/datafind/feats.shtml

That being said I think this is balanced as you have to spend 8 skill points on it and than loose 8 skill points. So to take this feat you either waste 8 skill points in an area your not going to use. Or you put 8 skill points into something you actually want to use and than loose out on its effectiveness. This leaves you with a max of 1+ level in the skills instead of 3 +level. Not that big a deal later on but it is early in the game.

[imp_fireball]

This is perfectly balanced. Doesn't matter if none of the skills see much use, forcing the player to make a skill point sink on them evens it out.

Also, they all relate to people while 'handle animal' does not, so it suits insecurity.


Insecurity as a character drawback is best expressed as a low charisma

No. Some people are totally stoic and don't give a rat's ass what others think of them. There's plenty of those hero archetypes out there.


and Sense Motive checks

Sorta makes sense, considering some insecure people believe 'why would they ever fault me?'.

[SpikeFightwicky]

So if I add Sense Motive to the affected skills, would that help even it out? (Should I maybe also add a 3rd skill to put 4 ranks into in the 'Special' section?)


There are heaps of non core flaws out there. This site has a lot of them on it

http://realmshelps.dandello.net/datafind/feats.shtml

That being said I think this is balanced as you have to spend 8 skill points on it and than loose 8 skill points. So to take this feat you either waste 8 skill points in an area your not going to use. Or you put 8 skill points into something you actually want to use and than loose out on its effectiveness. This leaves you with a max of 1+ level in the skills instead of 3 +level. Not that big a deal later on but it is early in the game.

Wow! Are these RAW flaws, or homebrew? My DMs REALLY iffy about homebrew stuff (hence why I'm here), but if those flaws are already balanced, that's just gravy. (Thanks for the link!)

[Mangles]

They are raw but some are dragon mag and other commonly banned material so make sure you check out where it comes from and what your DM allows. Some of them also are less balanced than others if you pair them with certain abilities. Like there is one that halves positive damage (ie healing) affects to you, which if you are undead is actually a good thing.