What are good flaws...

[TechnOkami]

...for a rogue?

[Legend]

Something that adequately represents the character deficiencies you envision the rogue having.

[FMArthur]

Feeble and either Shaky or Noncombatant.

[Aron Times]

good flaws

good flaws

good flaws

I'm an avid optimizer, but I don't like taking Flaws in D&D 3.5. They're too easy to abuse by picking the ones that are irrelevant to your character, and if you try to go by the spirit of the rules and take flaws that actually hinder your build, they're just not worth it.

That said, we need more information about your character. What kind of rogue are you making? What builds are the other players using? Will your DM let you get away with flaws that don't actually hinder your build? Or will he go out of his way to make sure you suffer from your flaws?

[aart lover]

too greedy, off the top of my head. lol i can't think right now so give me a bit:smalltongue:

[Metahuman1]

I like Hunted as an all purpose flaw. Pick something that you hate and that hates you, and they come after you during periodic random encounters. Doesn't over power, does get annoying but doesn't over power your build.

[Lateral]

Tasty, Pig Bond, Chicken Infested. [/thread]

[Greenish]

I'm an avid optimizer, but I don't like taking Flaws in D&D 3.5. They're too easy to abuse by picking the ones that are irrelevant to your characterOh yeah, that's totally not intended…


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.

That said, even though I think characters ought to have more feats (and more skillpoints!), I'm not a great fan of flaws either. Traits fill a very similar niche, but do it much better.

[HalfDragonCube]

Flaws? Selected correctly, you pretty much get two free feats. If you have a party member with bonuses on Listen and Spot, then the innatentive flaw will be good.

[Hirax]

if you try to go by the spirit of the rules and take flaws that actually hinder your build


What gave you that impression? Narratively I see it as perfectly valid that a shaky person would avoid using ranged weapons. Conversely, I can believe a brawny build could even have the feeble trait, with their character makeup representing work they've put in throughout their life to overcome the body they were born with. Not that flaws aren't utter cheese, of course.

[Divide by Zero]

Oh yeah, that's totally not intended…



That said, even though I think characters ought to have more feats (and more skillpoints!), I'm not a great fan of flaws either. Traits fill a very similar niche, but do it much better.

Yeah, but then they balance it against feats like Weapon Focus (with the equivalent flaw giving -2 to hit instead). So it's still broken.

[Aron Times]

What gave you that impression? Narratively I see it as perfectly valid that a shaky person would avoid using ranged weapons. Conversely, I can believe a brawny build could even have the feeble trait, with their character makeup representing work they've put in throughout their life to overcome the body they were born with. Not that flaws aren't utter cheese, of course.


A flaw must have a meaningful effect regardless of character class or role. That way, a player can't reduce the flaw's importance through multiclassing. For instance, a flaw that only affects spellcasters might seem reasonable-but for nonspellcaster characters, the flaw likely proves meaningless. Even if you restrict the selection of such feats to characters of specific classes, a player can easily select a spellcasting class at 1st level, choose two flaws that apply to spellcasters, gain the bonus feats, multiclass into a nonspellcasting class at 2nd level and thereafter proceed as a primarily nonspellcasting character. The player has sacrificed a level to gain two bonus feats, a tradeoff that appeals to some players.

Flaws are intended to be an actual drawback, as evidenced by the quoted passage. The Flaw system used in 3.5 is a lot like Flaws in the Old World of Darkness.

In the oWoD (let's use Vampire: The Masquerade as an example), you could take up to seven points worth of Flaws. These are bonus points that you can put into your stats during character creation. If you're going to play a character out to exterminate the Sabbat, the Clan Enmity flaws (may or may not be the exact name, as it's been years since I played Masquerade) for the Lasombra and the Tzimisce are basically seven free points because you're going to kill members of either Clan on sight anyway.

Flaws work differently in the nWoD. When you take a Flaw, you don't get any bonus points right away. Instead, whenever you roleplay your Flaw AND you are actually hindered by it, you gain bonus XP equal to the Flaw's point value. If you have a 1-point Flaw, you gain 1 XP each time your Flaw comes up. If your Flaw comes up often enough that you suffer for it, you gain tons of bonus XP.

Here's an example (not an exact example, as I'm away from book): Let's say you're a typical Ventrue Magnificent Bastard. You often make use of the Clan's signature Discipline, Dominate, to get people to obey you. If you have a Flaw like "Noncombatant," which, oh say, is a 2-point Flaw that bestows a -2 penalty on attack rolls, you gain bonus XP from it only if you're forced into combat. No, your mind-controlled minions don't count.

End infodump.

[Hirax]

That's under creating new flaws. To me it implies that all of the existing flaws that don't have pre reqs are general enough to be applied to any character. Otherwise they would also have pre reqs.

[Greenish]

Yeah, but then they balance it against feats like Weapon Focus (with the equivalent flaw giving -2 to hit instead). So it's still broken.I never claimed it wasn't, I'm just pointing out that designers fully expected people to choose the flaws least harmful for their character. That they dropped the ball when it comes to the actual flaws is no surprise.

[ffone]

For anyone with rage (such as the inevitable Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1 level dip w/o the Whirling Frenzy variant), there are several flaws which require rage, and have no effect if you just avoid raging. If you only have 1 rage a day (b/c of the pouncebarian dip this is quite common) it provides yet another good, cheesy reason for Pouncebarian-1 dipping: you now pick up a 'flaw magnet' via the dip.

Cowardly is decent for a rogue, especially a Craven rogue. You auto-fail fear saves, which you already had a low modifier for (low track with rogue, and -2 from Craven)...plus, Cowardly says 'if you get immunity to fear, you instead get a regular save' which helps you avoid having Craven get negated by gaining immunity to fear, such as from Mind Blank.

It's certainly not a flaw you can pave over the downsides of, and if your DM is a metagamer he will most assuredly throw enemies with frightful presence against you. But from a Practical Optimization point that's not so bad...it gives the DM a button he can press to make himself feel like he's still the one wearing the pants, and in a way fear is more of a penalty to your allies who *aren't* running away.

Although Cowering can be very dangerous (see the Imperious Command /fearmancy builds which auto-win fights via a swift action demoralize with inducing a 1 round cower, done every round). This would be a really bad flaw for a PvP if your foe knows you'll have it.

Hot-Blooded / Cold-Blooded: auto fail saves vs environmental heat or cold. Then get Endure Elements (the spell lasts a long time, and there's an augment crystal). Taking *both* would be cheesy but effective, if allowed. (Explain it as 'generally temperature sensitive', like a reptile.) This is the sort of flaw that begs the DM to metagame....how often in a normal campaign does your DM actually use environmental conditions...and remember to ask for the Fort saves?

But if he does - possibly just b/c you took this flaw - it's a good 'DM pressure valve', since those saves are often made outside of combat, and so are unlikely to kill you, and you could pave over some of the penalties with Restoration or Cure magic.

[Curmudgeon]

I think Frail (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm#frail) qualifies as a good flaw for a Rogue. Rogues don't have great hit points, and I typically rate CON lower than several other stats (INT, DEX, CHA for a social/UMD role). Choosing Frail means you're dropping down to Wizard-type hit points, and will have to take care both in combat and when dealing with traps.

In contrast, Meager Fortitude (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm#meagerFortitude) is another choice with significant impact on the character, since Rogues have poor Fortitude saves. I rarely choose that, though, because whereas you can limit your risky activities to deal with low HP, you can't really plan around a likelihood of making Fortitude saves; if you fail, you typically are out of action (dead or incapacitated). That ends up being too much of a gamble on loss of fun at the game. :smallmad:

[Tvtyrant]

Flaws? huh. What is it their good for?

[Grendus]

Flaws are not meant to be balanced. They're given by the DM, just like a DM could give a higher point buy, extra rerolls, gestalt, etc. There's a reason it's an alternative system, if they were meant to be balanced they'd be in core as part of the basic rules instead of being listed in Unearthed Arcana with a bunch of other class and rule variants.

They're meant more so the DM can give bonus feats without just flat saying "everyone gets three bonus feats at first level". And even if you pick up flaws that you don't think will come up, they occasionally do - I had a wizard take inattentive because other party members maxed spot/listen, he never once got to act in the surprise round (very important for a malconvoker). Or Murky Eyed vs enemies who like to use displacement/mirror image/blur.

I usually take Vulnerable, and then whatever other flaw suits me. 1 AC isn't that much. Comes up a lot, but it's just damage.

[Thurbane]

They're too easy to abuse by picking the ones that are irrelevant to your character, and if you try to go by the spirit of the rules and take flaws that actually hinder your build, they're just not worth it.
I totally agree here. We've never used flaws in our games (to be fair, we dion't use that many optional rules anyway), but when I see them used in builds, they are pretty much always the same select 2 or 3 that can be slotted into builds to have precisely zero effect on the character...

If you want to houserule in your games that everyone gets 2 bonus feats at character generation, then go for it. But it's a little cheesy to camouflage it as a trade-off for a "flaw" that will never come into effect.

For anyone familiar with the Goblins (http://www.goblinscomic.com/) comic, take a look at Minmax as the perfect example of this, ramped up for comic effect.

Goblinslayer: "You have improved unarmed strike?"

Minmax: "I got it by trading in my ability to rhyme on purpose."

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

My gaming group doesn't allow flaws for the reasons mentioned above, but we give everyone an extra feat at levels 1, 11, 21, 31, etc. to make up for it.

[Curmudgeon]

We've never used flaws in our games (to be fair, we dion't use that many optional rules anyway), but when I see them used in builds, they are pretty much always the same select 2 or 3 that can be slotted into builds to have precisely zero effect on the character...
Flaws, as with most parts of character development, need to be approved by the DM. And here I point to page 176 of the Dungeon Master's Guide:
Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM.
If the DM thinks a flaw has insufficient impact on the character, or a prestige class just isn't right for the game, they should simply say no. Flaws are useful tools for creating characters, and as a DM I like them because they give me ideas for enemy tactics to leverage (once they've had an opportunity in the game to figure out PC vulnerabilities, of course). If every one of the PCs has the Shaky (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm#shaky) flaw, you can guarantee their enemies will attack from maximum effective distance. :smallbiggrin:

[thompur]

I had a low Wisdom Warlock with the inatentive feat. I always went last in combat. Initiative rolls of -3 and -4 will do that.:smalltongue:

[Greenish]

I had a low Wisdom Warlock with the inatentive feat. I always went last in combat. Initiative rolls of -3 and -4 will do that.:smalltongue:Wisdom has nothing to do with initiative. :smallconfused:

[thompur]

Wisdom has nothing to do with initiative. :smallconfused:

Ooops! You are correct, Sir! It wasn't -3 on init. It was -3 on spot checks. Which meant I didn't see the 30' tall ELDER TITAN coming until he was 30' away! It was O.K.though. In the second round of combat I hit him with a Word of Changing(Baleful Polymorph). He needed to roll a 2 or better to save... well you know. What was supposed to be an epic battle ended rather anti-climatically.:smalleek:

[marcielle]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/DnD_Flaws
Tons of fun and flavorful flaws for actual CHARACTER CREATION ( as opposed to simply putting feats and classes together to make the biggest numbers). Homebrew but since flaws literally have to be OKd by the DM in the first place, might as well go for it. For example, I multiclassed into psionics and took dark premonition cos getting psychic nightmares as a psionic is actually pretty awesome.

Aurophobia would be hilarious on a rouge. However, you'd have to carry a ton of silver everywhere.
Claustrophobia could make you do anything to avoid being sent to jail. ANYTHING.
Daredevil, Traplover, Kleptomania, Hopeless Collector and Estranged can all make for interesting characters.

If your DM doesn't like homebrew, then: http://www.realmshelps.net/datafind/feats.shtml
Just click flaws and search and you will get all wotc flaws.

[classy one]

When it comes to the discussion of flaws, I am always surprised that everyone forgets Excoriate from dragonmarked. The drawback is that you can the services of a dragonmarked house. Its a flaw that is purely there for RP and fluff and has no mechanical penalties at all.

That said, you don't want to pick a house like Cannith, Ghallanda, but one of the useless houses like Deneith. Better yet, pick either House Thuranni or Phiarlan and get services from the competing house since both houses provide the same services.

[balistafreak]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/DnD_Flaws
Tons of fun and flavorful flaws for actual CHARACTER CREATION ( as opposed to simply putting feats and classes together to make the biggest numbers).

You see "fun and flavorful"? I see "pants on head retarded". We have strictly flavorful things for a free feat... or on the flip side, massive, impossibly debilitating debuffs... some things that force the DM to feed you material (your mentioned "psychic nightmares", and then some that might even be interpreted as buffs.

And then there are some things that just make me say "what". Seriously. "Compulsive Skinny Dipping". Something tells me that that's not meant to be serious. :smallamused:

[Asheram]

Define good.

Good as in "enhances the roleplaying experience"
or
Good as in "Hay, I gets them free feats for nothin'! But naow I talk like a hillbilly, is terrified of them duckbilled beaver thingys and has my pockets full of chickens"

[Curmudgeon]

When it comes to the discussion of flaws, I am always surprised that everyone forgets Excoriate from dragonmarked. ... Its a flaw that is purely there for RP and fluff and has no mechanical penalties at all.
Well, you are denied access to the Favored in House feat. :smallamused:

[Ormur]

I had a roguish character that took coward as a flaw and craven as a feat, fits nicely thematically and it's a real drawback that doesn't directly hurt what you're trying to accomplish with the build. Even if I get immunity to fear somehow I'll still have to make rolls, at -2 or -4 I think (and won't loose craven).

The character has run from battles two or three times so it's not just an extra feat. On the other hand it doesn't fit every character concept, hard to refluff for someone that wants to play a courageous and composed character.

[marcielle]

He was actually kinda thankful for psychic nightmares cos it gave him a way to slightly coral the group( who basically, in the middle of chasing down a slaver boss, went 'screw this lets go have a sea adventure' and went off to sink pirates at random) but yeah, most of them ARE pretty retarded. You'd have to admit, kelpto and traplover are actually quite good for a rouge and besides, even core flaws have to be given the once over by DMs and no sane one would allow skinny dipping. Though I do know one or two insane ones who'd probably think it would be hilarious.