Non-cheese town Flaws

[WeeohhWeeohh]

Hello fellas and lady, I was wondering if you would kindly help me out with some non-broken flaws (ie: near sighted: -x to attack with ranged weapons knowing full well I don't plan on using any).

This is for a 2 hander melee PC I'm rolling up for when my DM ultimately kills my rogue.

I was thinking something along the lines of; he is a human sized box of crazy.
Flaw: NOT DEAD YET!
The PC MUST bring the target to -20 (or lower) before he moves on to his next target for fear of them somehow recovering and seeking revenge. Could roll in a fear of undead with him having to take time and lop off some heads or something to that effect.

What do you think? Thanks ahead of time!

[The Glyphstone]

Living creatures die at -10, actually, so that would mean he could never fight multiple enemies.:smallbiggrin:


Just use the printed Flaws rather than trying to homebrew 'flaws', it'll be easier to get by your DM.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm

Things like Weak-Willed, Poor Reflexes, or Meager Fortitude are good flaws for any character, since they'll always have a chance to matter.

[Vladislav]

Reword this into:
If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you must spend your next attack action attacking that creature (or its corpse) again.

[Doughnut Master]

Considering it's a team endeavor, that flaw would likely cause some major headaches and more bookkeeping.

EDIT: Vlad's suggestion is good too.

And shaky isn't that broken. If you don't plan on using ranged weapons, then your combat options have been severely limited. If you're fighting an enemy at range, or an enemy who flies, you might be in a bit of trouble.

That said, I like the thought. My general approach has been to follow the advice of UA and find a feat and double it.

For instance, you could use something like...
Off Balance
PC takes -8 to all Trip checks, whether initiating or resisting.

Now your character gets some extra punch with an additional feat, but you have a pretty big vulnerability that can be exploited by a clever opponent.

[WeeohhWeeohh]

Living creatures die at -10, actually, so that would mean he could never fight multiple enemies.:smallbiggrin:

I understand that living creatures die at -10, but the PC would have to do extra damage over that to make "sure" they were dead.


Just use the printed Flaws rather than trying to homebrew 'flaws', it'll be easier to get by your DM.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm

Things like Weak-Willed, Poor Reflexes, or Meager Fortitude are good flaws for any character, since they'll always have a chance to matter.

I looked through those, and some of them look good, but I wanted a more personal kind of flaw. Thanks for the input!

[Talentless]

Hello fellas and lady, I was wondering if you would kindly help me out with some non-broken flaws (ie: near sighted: -x to attack with ranged weapons knowing full well I don't plan on using any).

This is for a 2 hander melee PC I'm rolling up for when my DM ultimately kills my rogue.

I was thinking something along the lines of; he is a human sized box of crazy.
Flaw: NOT DEAD YET!
The PC MUST bring the target to -20 (or lower) before he moves on to his next target for fear of them somehow recovering and seeking revenge. Could roll in a fear of undead with him having to take time and lop off some heads or something to that effect.

What do you think? Thanks ahead of time!


Flaw's are more or less a purely mechanical feature to earn bonus feats, with a side of some roleplay potential.

The way the system works, it is entirely possible to get a set of flaws that NEVER come up in game (which is i guess your view on flaw cheese). Because of that, they can roleplay how they want more or less.

The thing is, you don't HAVE to have the flaw Coward(or whatever it is) to act like a coward in game, all the flaw does is give the DM options to smash you when you break character because you got a bonus feat for taking it.

So if you want to play someone who always Coup de Grace the opponents, go nuts, you don't need a flaw to do it.

[Big Fau]

I wouldn't bother with flaws at all. Just give them two bonus feats at 1st level.

[WeeohhWeeohh]

Flaw's are more or less a purely mechanical feature to earn bonus feats, with a side of some roleplay potential.

Indeed. I see flaws as a way to flesh out your PC a little bit via roleplay AND you get a bonus feat!


So if you want to play someone who always Coup de Grace the opponents, go nuts, you don't need a flaw to do it.

My thought was that you would consider a target as having an extra 10+ HP to get through before you move on. So if you hit a wounded foe with, lets say 20 hp, and do 30ph with of damage, you still have to hit him for 10 more before you can move on. Now, in the same situation, you hit said foe for 40, the targets head pops off and the PC is secure enough to move on.

Just tryen to get some homebrewy flaws to make my PC quirky. The DM likes quirky hhahahah.

[Doughnut Master]

Again. Bookkeeping.

And I'd say a character that spends an extra round hacking at an enemy who is clearly dead is pretty quirky. Actually, the more I think about it, the more it makes me smile.

[Talentless]

Indeed. I see flaws as a way to flesh out your PC a little bit via roleplay AND you get a bonus feat!



My thought was that you would consider a target as having an extra 10+ HP to get through before you move on. So if you hit a wounded foe with, lets say 20 hp, and do 30ph with of damage, you still have to hit him for 10 more before you can move on. Now, in the same situation, you hit said foe for 40, the targets head pops off and the PC is secure enough to move on.

Just tryen to get some homebrewy flaws to make my PC quirky. The DM likes quirky hhahahah.

There is quirky... and then just plain stupid.

-10 HP tends to be described as gaping holes in the chest, decapitations, etc.
At that point, you are just kicking a corpse, with a side of absolutely NOT achieving anything meaningful.

DnD is a world of Ressurections and Raise dead, that extra damage you deal to a corpse? doesn't matter at all.

all the non-homebrew flaws can be tweaked around to fit more in line with the idea you want, without entering the stupidly crippling territory.

[WeeohhWeeohh]

There is quirky... and then just plain stupid.

Just to makes things absolutely clear, the PC in question was raised by a group of odd gnomes who worship Farl Glitterbutton. He is the half brother of Garl Gittergold. The PC also has 14 ranks in Craft (buttons) which he uses to gain favor of his god. Who is stupid now? Also, DnD is a game of make believe.


-10 HP tends to be described as gaping holes in the chest, decapitations, etc.
At that point, you are just kicking a corpse, with a side of absolutely NOT achieving anything meaningful.

DnD is a world of Ressurections and Raise dead, that extra damage you deal to a corpse? doesn't matter at all.

I guess the wildlings didn't find anything meaningful after they burnt the corpses of the fallen. Winter is coming.

[Talentless]

Just to makes things absolutely clear, the PC in question was raised by a group of odd gnomes who worship Farl Glitterbutton. He is the half brother of Garl Gittergold. The PC also has 14 ranks in Craft (buttons) which he uses to gain favor of his god. Who is stupid now? Also, DnD is a game of make believe.



I guess the wildlings didn't find anything meaningful after they burnt the corpses of the fallen. Winter is coming.

Sorry, what I meant with the stupid comment was that creating a flaw to act out a character concept isn't really necessary, and it arbitrarily locks you into an action that is, in the grand scheme of things, pointless.

Not to mention, when it comes down to it, it isn't even a very damaging flaw. Asside from taking a standard action to attack an already dead enemy (which, unless the others are in range for a charge, what else are you going to use that standard action for) isn't a very flaw like penalty. So it honestly feels more cheese like than taking far-sighted when you won't be a ranged combatant.

As for the wildlings, burning a body to get rid of it is a good idea. What you are describing is just hitting the corpse with your sword again after they died and calling it a day. Apples to Oranges my friend.

Besides, not even cremation matters if the DM REALLY wants to bring the guy back. Two Words. True Ressurection.

[candycorn]

Flaws that aren't cheese are flaws with actual penalties.

Things like:

Murky Eyed: (amended) - All creatures receive concealment vs you. If concealment normally exists (such as shadowy illumination), then that creature has total concealment.

Timid Heart: Whenever a foe charges, makes a full attack, or casts a spell, you must make a will save (DC = 10+CR of enemy) or be shaken for the duration of the combat (or 10 minutes, if not in combat). Multiple failures stack. You may not take this flaw if you have a racial bonus vs fear or an immunity to fear. As long as you possess this flaw, you may not gain a bonus to saves vs fear or immunity to fear from any source.

[Terazul]

Hmm. There were a bunch of flaws printed in Dragon that might work?

Glory Hound makes you have a -2 to AC in combat until you drop a foe.

Implacable gives you a -2 to Attack Rolls, Skill Checks, and Saves if you move out of melee combat LIKE A COWARD.

There's some other weird ones too, I think.

[Yora]

Flaw: NOT DEAD YET!

That actually sounds like a cool trait. When dropping under 1 hp, you are disabled but stay conscious and can talk until -10 hp.

It's also a prerequisite for "I think I'm getting better!"

[WeeohhWeeohh]

Sorry, what I meant with the stupid comment was that creating a flaw to act out a character concept isn't really necessary, and it arbitrarily locks you into an action that is, in the grand scheme of things, pointless.

Not to mention, when it comes down to it, it isn't even a very damaging flaw. Asside from taking a standard action to attack an already dead enemy (which, unless the others are in range for a charge, what else are you going to use that standard action for) isn't a very flaw like penalty. So it honestly feels more cheese like than taking far-sighted when you won't be a ranged combatant.

Interesting points. I'm not saying that I was dead set on that one in particular, but it seemed interesting enough to bring to the boards. I just didn't want to take a flaw to shamelessly grab and extra feat. Going to work with my DM and see what ideas he has. Thanks!


As for the wildlings, burning a body to get rid of it is a good idea. What you are describing is just hitting the corpse with your sword again after they died and calling it a day. Apples to Oranges my friend.

HAHAHAH indeed. Good thing they made "sure" they wouldn't come back...


Besides, not even cremation matters if the DM REALLY wants to bring the guy back. Two Words. True Ressurection.

Agreed.

Edit:
Wonder if the Red Witch has some sort of True Resurrection that starts off book 6....though I have a sneaky suspicion she wont need it.

[Doughnut Master]

That actually sounds like a cool trait. When dropping under 1 hp, you are disabled but stay conscious and can talk until -10 hp.

It's also a prerequisite for "I think I'm getting better!"

You can finish the series with "It's just a flesh wound!"

[Elfinor]

{Scrubbed link to copyright infringing site}

The whole website is a quality resource, though I'll get around to e-mailing the owner over the incomplete ceremony feat categorisation one day. It doesn't provide some background minutae on feats/flaws (reference site: it would be illegal if it did) but that probably isn't an issue for most flaws.

Arbitrary warning about balance of Dragon content here - but you seem sensible enough, though I wouldn't have guessed it from your name:smalltongue:

[Golden Ladybug]

{Scrubbed the link, scrubbed the reference.}

Currently, I am playing a Wizard that took the flaws Insomniac and Meager Fortitude, along with a penalty to constitution, and didn't grab feats in return. Her Fortitude save is abysmal, and she needs to role 18 or better just to be able to sleep each night. Mechanically, its completely retarded, but its fun to play the game with that penalty attached. It adds another level of challenge to an already challenging game.

[Leon]

I understand that living creatures die at -10, but the PC would have to do extra damage over that to make "sure" they were dead.

I find beyond -10 good for extremely gory descriptions



They follow the same trail that the other 2 took and eventually come across the long red smear that was the sorcerer (they worked it via the shredded gear scattered about) and then a lil futher up found the ragdoll monk.

[Flickerdart]

The PC MUST bring the target to -20 (or lower)
Impossible to meet in normal circumstances - a creature can only be reduced to -10 before it is dead, and a corpse counts as having -10 HP regardless of what you do.

[panaikhan]

The PC MUST bring the target to -20 (or lower) before he moves on to his next target

Easier to change this to "Target must be immobile and missing one (or more) limbs and/or head before PC can move onto his next target"

[Flickerdart]

Easier to change this to "Target must be immobile and missing one (or more) limbs and/or head before PC can move onto his next target"
Impossible requirement to meet against oozes and other amorphous creatures.

[The Glyphstone]

Impossible requirement to meet against oozes and other amorphous creatures.

So give them an exception? Things like the Vow of Peace explicitly don't apply to undead or constructs (or is it the Vow of Nonviolence? I don't remember).

[noparlpf]

Could roll in a fear of undead with him having to take time and lop off some heads or something to that effect.

I would have that flaw, definitely.


Reword this into:
If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you must spend your next attack action attacking that creature (or its corpse) again.

I think this is probably better. Just change it to "your next action" and have it be a coup de grace-type action to remove the head.

[Big Fau]

So give them an exception? Things like the Vow of Peace explicitly don't apply to undead or constructs (or is it the Vow of Nonviolence? I don't remember).

Yeah. Oozes and other amorphous creatures must be turned into flan (http://www.mojvideo.com/video-courage-the-cowardly-dog-king-of-flan/d33007458419c5810a65).

[herrhauptmann]

Rather than homebrewing some flaws, you could just roll them randomly and keep whatever comes up; even if it really is a bad one that greatly impacts your character.

Such as shaky on a wizard who specializes in ray spells.

[Diefje]

I'd add an "or else" clause to mechanically force you to Coup de Grace (or alternatively, perform another attack if you don't want to deal with the fullround and drawing AoO and things not being CdG-able). Like "must make sure a dropped enemy is dead, or suffer a -2 penalty to attacks and damage". Let it stack too for extra fun.

[noparlpf]

Rather than homebrewing some flaws, you could just roll them randomly and keep whatever comes up; even if it really is a bad one that greatly impacts your character.

Such as shaky on a wizard who specializes in ray spells.

Why would somebody who has terrible aim ever go out of their way to use things that require good aim? I realize that flaws should have some impact, but it simply does not make sense to do something like that. Take me, for example. I am aware that my aim is terrible, so when preparing for combat, I would select melee weapons rather than thrown or ranged weapons.

[herrhauptmann]

Why would somebody who has terrible aim ever go out of their way to use things that require good aim? I realize that flaws should have some impact, but it simply does not make sense to do something like that. Take me, for example. I am aware that my aim is terrible, so when preparing for combat, I would select melee weapons rather than thrown or ranged weapons.

I don't know. You ever meet someone who loves to play basketball but can't dribble to save their life?

What else is there? Someone takes a flaw that has NO impact on their character (shaky for a melee fighter). Moderate impact (reflex penalty when they take a lot of classes with a good ref save). Or Big impact (ray specialist with shaky).
As is, most people take the first choice. And it's something the OP wants to avoid.

[Drazik]

i don't mind what other people say, i LOVE this flaw and will be using it in the future, if thats ok with you.

[The Glyphstone]

Just make sure you word it right. Most of what people have been saying about it is that as it was originally written, it'd make the character unable to ever fight more than one enemy at a time, because of impossible conditions to meet. Use one of the edited versions (like the dismemberment one) and it's not a bad flaw at all.

[herrhauptmann]

Oddly, there's a feat, I think in PHB2 or PGtF which does much the same thing as your flaw requires of you.
After killing someone, it allows you to mutilate their corpse, making it harder to bring them back to life.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I love this flaw, love it love it love it. I'm totally mentally working it into a extra slimy rogue type I've been knocking around in my head.

I'd also like to say that in my personal experience I've found shaky on a melee fighter a much bigger flaw than I expected. I'm currently playing in a game that started at zero level and has reached level 2 and I've.

Looked like a fool trying to use a grappling hook.

Attacked a flying enemy.

Attacked a enemy that attacked from a sufficient range that the party got a round of ranged attacks before melee commenced.

Thrown a sword because I as at the wrong end of the formation in a hallway.

Attacked fleeing enemies on at least three occasions. 1 Kill :smallbiggrin:

Shot at a monster that was stalking the party.

Attacked from range in an ambush.

That's a lot more than never; came up enough so that I may think twice the next time I want to take shaky as a no brainer flaw.

[kardar233]

I play in a fairly high-OP group, so when I was building my character I mentioned: "To be honest, whatever flaw I take will have essentially no mechanical penalty associated with it; instead, I'm just going to take Compulsive Maniacal Laughter." Worked so far.

[noparlpf]

I don't know. You ever meet someone who loves to play basketball but can't dribble to save their life?

What else is there? Someone takes a flaw that has NO impact on their character (shaky for a melee fighter). Moderate impact (reflex penalty when they take a lot of classes with a good ref save). Or Big impact (ray specialist with shaky).
As is, most people take the first choice. And it's something the OP wants to avoid.

I don't think I've ever met anybody who plays basketball.

Personally I take things that won't cripple me but will come up often enough to matter. Cold-blooded comes up a lot because of how common fire damage is, Wild came up the second night of a campaign, Code of Arms never got a chance to come up because I kept rolling crap for initiative and the things with natural weapons attacked me first, Chivalrous Courtesy came up at least once, Claustrophobia comes up fairly often because dungeons are typically 10' high, Skulker will come up anytime something gets a chance to attack you in melee, and so on. I usually pick things that fit the character anyway.
Though taking Phantom Sparks and refluffing it to electricity for my Stormcaster because it did something I wanted to have and getting an extra feat on top of that was kind of not okay.

[Fengle]

Seems like it would be enough for the pc to take enemies to -10. Maybe require beheading for undead and constructs in lieu of the -hp req.

[Kol Korran]

@ WeeohhWeeohh:

first of all, i think it's a creative and nice idea, which i think the OP should be congratulated for. he's trying to contribute to the game, make it better, which is commendable.

a few thoughts though:
- first of all i think it's quite a serious flaw. sure, some say it's not, but it means you basicall lose at least a standard action (or finish a full round) on an enemy. and action economy is huge.

- you need to think of problematic situations with your DM: what if you guys are trying to run from an enemy, or make your way through mooks to a bigger threat, or there is some other pressing need (a friend on the edge of a cliff?) that merits attention?

- this can go three ways with the party- either they will accept it, laugh and play to it, or they will groan and be annoyed at their fighter at being... "bottomly inclined", or a combination ofthe two. i'd ask the party before hand what they think of this, just to be sure.

oh... and this?

Just to makes things absolutely clear, the PC in question was raised by a group of odd gnomes who worship Farl Glitterbutton. He is the half brother of Garl Gittergold. The PC also has 14 ranks in Craft (buttons) which he uses to gain favor of his god.

this is absolutely fantastic! cudos! (does he grow younger and younger as the years go by?)

[WeeohhWeeohh]

Thanks for all the great responses! Gives me a lot to think about. Ran it by my DM and he had one of those smiles that told me that he indeed liked the idea and that he already had some ideas about story impact. Like I said before, the concept is on the back burner until he kills my current PC or when we start up a new campaign. Got some time to iron out the details. Thanks again!

Edit: I love the idea of the stacking hit (maybe even AC) penalties for leaving a target before knowing its actually dead. This gives the ability to move on to a new target but the PC would always be looking over his shoulder.

Edit2:
i don't mind what other people say, i LOVE this flaw and will be using it in the future, if thats ok with you.

Go right ahead! Let me know how it goes hahahahaha.