Flaws: Review, Suggest and advise.

[Sarethus]

Greetings, I would like to ask for some help for a new character I am making, specifically the flaws.

I've looked through all the official flaws and only one really stood out at me (I disliked the take take -2 to this etc of most of them) but I have seen a couple of custom ones on the web which look good but my DM and I would like some advice and balance suggestions regarding them:

1) Lost Soul
You are no longer properly anchored to your home plane.
Prerequisite: Must have been subjected to at least one spell or effect involving dimensional storage, planar travel, or returning from the dead.
Effect: You gain the extraplanar subtype even when on your home plane. If affected by a spell that would normally send you to your home plane, such as banishment or dismissal, you are instead sent to the nearest transitive plane (Astral, Ethereal, or Shadow).

My Comments: I rather like this one since I am using a PC who was born on Prime but his parents came from another Prime/World. However my DM raised an interesting question: Is there any reasonable way for a martial adept to make his way back from the Astral/Ethereal/Shadow planes by themselves? or a way for his party to summon him back? Would Summon Monster work (and would that only last for the duration of the spell)? Issue is being banished for one battle is different then being banished for the whole dungeon and having to wait until your party then can head home to summon you or go planes walking to find you.

2) Unusually-Formed Body:
There are parts of your body that are different from most other humanoids.
Prerequisite: Humanoid
Effect: Choose two of the twelve magic item body slots. You normally cannot wear magic items designed for those two slots - your body in those locations are such an unusual shape that such objects will not adjust to fit you. In addition, your general clothing, outfits and armor must be custom-made. Unless you are wearing rags or self-made clothing, you pay x2 the normal cost. Magic items specific to one of your unusual body slots costs x1.5 the normal cost (e.g. a pair of Bracers of the Dawn for unusual arms would cost 39,000gp instead of 26,000gp) and require an equal amount of added time to create.
Benefit: For every two slots you choose for this flaw you may gain either one extra feat or one natural attack for the corresponding slot (EG: Hands can give a claw attack, head with horns give a gore, heavy or pointed arms give a slam, etc.). If a natural attack is chosen, only one of the chosen slots will gain the function and damage corresponds to your size category/creature size(EG: a claw attack of a medium size creature is 1d6, large 1d8, small 1d4 etc).
Special: Here are some of the common unusual body parts and the item slot they usually correspond with: Horns, snout: Head. Snout: Eyes (hard to wear glasses when the bridge of your nose is above your eyes instead of between them). Wings, bony spikes, nonhumanoid bodily proportions: Torso/Body. Claws, unusual number of fingers: Hands. Tail, unusually formed legs: Legs. Hooves, unusually formed feet: Feet. Note: Absence of body parts should also be taken into account. For example, if you have tentacles instead of hands, you can't wear most gloves.
Roleplaying Ideas: The blacksmith scratched his scalp. He had just finished an odd discussion with an elven wizard. The elf had ordered a set of half-plate with strange specifications. The helmet had to have a few holes at the top, about a good 6 inches apart on the brow and a few behind those in rows, and the armor for the legs and feet had to be strangely shaped. On top of that he had to leave some open spaces in the gauntlets and make adjustments for shoulders far larger than normal. The blacksmith shook his head again. "If I did not know the man better, I might 'ave been inclined to get the guards to question him about arming a demon," he thought. "But you know.. Ain't nobody can understand dem wizards."

My Comments: I like this one again, my half-dragon has the back story to justify this. Not to mention it should make a character fairly distinct, I'd add a -2 penalty to disguise for each 2 slots chosen.

3) High Metabolism
You burn calories at a greater rate than average, though you gain no additional weight from such consumption.
Effect: You require twice the amount of daily food for a creature of your size and begin to feel the effects of starvation in half the time a normal creature would.
Roleplaying Ideas: Characters with high metabolisms might often find themselves munching on something or other during inappropriate times. While not a manic compulsion, characters with this flaw should keep their hunger in their back of their minds and likely seek out at least one or two snacks in the middle of the day, outside of their main meal. When they do sit to eat a full meal, they will likely do so with great haste and hunger (especially if they haven't had a snack).

My Comments: Again I can see this being a problem for my half-dragon. The guy needs a royal feast but would this warrant a Feat?

4) Fussy
You are uncomfortable ingesting any-thing but a small range of preferred foods and drinks.
Effect: You become sickened (no saving throw allowed) upon ingestion of any sort of potion for the duration of its effect, Potions with an instantaneous duration cause you to be sickened for a period of time equal to the potion's caster level in minutes. You also suffer a -4 penalty on saving throws made against ingested poisons.
Suggested Class/Race: Elf
Source: Dragon Magazine #328 (Nobody’s Perfect – New Flaws for Nonhumans)

My Comments: I rather like this one especially in combo with the High Metabolisim one above. My & my DM's issues is how to portray this. If I take this flaw, would I get sickened with every item similar to a potion or would it be potion specific? For instance in Complete Arcane (page 138) there are items like Magic tiles (just break them in order to unleash their magic) or Spell Wafers or skull tailsmans etc. The idea being during a typical dungeon I would only find potions and would have to place a special order (with 2x the price) when my PC reaches their city to purchase wafer/tiles/tailsmans instead of potions? Or would even potion equivalents not be allowed?

Please advise if you consider these as balanced or not.

Thanks.

Edit: Please note I found these from different websites and would have posted links but was informed that I needed 7 more posts before I could do so.

[Warrnan]

The magic item flaw seems excessive. Whenever things are nonstandard in shape in my games I assign "masterwork quality" to account for this custom fit. 150 gold for something minor like clothing with holes for wings and 300 gold for something more Complex such as a weapon screwed into a socket attached to a missing hand.

[Sarethus]

The magic item flaw seems excessive. Whenever things are nonstandard in shape in my games I assign "masterwork quality" to account for this custom fit. 150 gold for something minor like clothing with holes for wings and 300 gold for something more Complex such as a weapon screwed into a socket attached to a missing hand.

I'd love to agree with you on that but the issue is would that be worth a feat even for two of them in your view? and would that same price be enough for magic items?

Idea based on your feedback:

Masterwork price for regular items in affected slots.

Flat +1000 gp increase for each magic item in affected slots.

What do you think?

[SangoProduction]

High Metabolism for a feat? No. For one, it's often hand-waved at most tables. 2, any more than the lowest level of magic, and it becomes simply a free feat. Hell, 2 Everlasting Rations completely nullifies the requirement, giving you a feat for 700 gold. Kinda absurd.

You want High Metabolism? Just say your character eats a ton, and let that be that.

Unusually formed body is much too complicated. Not to mention many item slots can just go completely unused without people noticing a thing.
Make it a trait instead, which gives natural attacks for magic slots (not a particularly great trade for many builds...beyond amazing for others), in a 1:1 manner, and it will (probably) be fine. And say that any item that would conceivably need to be adjusted for the part (like armor would for wings, but not hand deformation) must be either rags, or masterwork quality to be worn.
Don't allow "finger" to be selected as one of these unusually formed body things.
And don't allow it to be taken more than 2 times to prevent the whole "I get 15 attacks at level 1" thing.

For the Extraplanar thing: You could be summoned....if you were on the summoning lists. The likelihood of this being the case when you needed this "flaw", is that you are not, unless you are an animal on the Druid's summon list.
But, no, I would not allow this flaw in my games. For 1, your normal race doesn't have this trait, so knowledge checks won't tell anyone about this, so unless the DM is being unreasonable, or you specifically drew attention to yourself, this is a free feat. And what if someone did cast banish on you? Yay, you get to go on your own little solo adventure...while everyone else is bored as hell. Or, you just twiddle your thumbs while the party tries to save you. Sounds fun.

[Warrnan]

The high metabolism flaw is so cheesy. This is totally not a hinderance. There are item that give infinite food. This will never be worth a feat at most tables.

Regarding the deformity feat, having a magic item cost 1.5 or 2x the normal amount for two slots is going to significantly alter this character's wealth by level. At low levels it won't matter too much. At high levels when you are buying a 300,000 item and it costs you 450,000 instead of seems very unbalanced.

I would go with the flat 1000. It would be a hardship at lower levels and wouldn't be an issue later. This seems more reasonable.

As far as the fussy feat goes, I think it's silly. Most buffs are cast by spell casters and most healing is done through wands and healing belts. This flaw is not worth a feat, imo.

Make it of equal hardship to -1 hp Per round flaw called feeble. Or the -3 will saves flaw.

Things like alcoholic and gambler aren't good flaws because they have little application to game mechanics and only make for interesting roleplay.

[Sarethus]

First off, thank you Warrnan and SangoProduction for the feedback, I really really appreciate it.


High Metabolism for a feat? No. For one, it's often hand-waved at most tables. 2, any more than the lowest level of magic, and it becomes simply a free feat. Hell, 2 Everlasting Rations completely nullifies the requirement, giving you a feat for 700 gold. Kinda absurd.

You want High Metabolism? Just say your character eats a ton, and let that be that.


Yeah, I think your right. I just felt it went well along with the Fussy flaw. A perpetually hungry Half-Dragon PC who only accepts Gourmet food but it's not worth a feat.



Unusually formed body is much too complicated. Not to mention many item slots can just go completely unused without people noticing a thing.
Make it a trait instead, which gives natural attacks for magic slots (not a particularly great trade for many builds...beyond amazing for others), in a 1:1 manner, and it will (probably) be fine. And say that any item that would conceivably need to be adjusted for the part (like armor would for wings, but not hand deformation) must be either rags, or masterwork quality to be worn.
Don't allow "finger" to be selected as one of these unusually formed body things.
And don't allow it to be taken more than 2 times to prevent the whole "I get 15 attacks at level 1" thing.


Well the thing is that I would be getting Natural atacks as part of being a Half-Dragon anyway. This was more for the feats and the slots I was considering were Hands/Feet/Head/ Body(Wings). Most of which are fairly noticable I think.



For the Extraplanar thing: You could be summoned....if you were on the summoning lists. The likelihood of this being the case when you needed this "flaw", is that you are not, unless you are an animal on the Druid's summon list.
But, no, I would not allow this flaw in my games. For 1, your normal race doesn't have this trait, so knowledge checks won't tell anyone about this, so unless the DM is being unreasonable, or you specifically drew attention to yourself, this is a free feat. And what if someone did cast banish on you? Yay, you get to go on your own little solo adventure...while everyone else is bored as hell. Or, you just twiddle your thumbs while the party tries to save you. Sounds fun.

Yeah, that is what my DM said. My PC being banished might make them miss the whole adventure. Although he did say that I might end up being "Planar Binded" by an enemy sorceror too while on an adventure but the main problem was getting back and there not being enough spells/abilities that purely affected an extraplanar subtype.


The high metabolism flaw is so cheesy. This is totally not a hinderance. There are item that give infinite food. This will never be worth a feat at most tables.

Regarding the deformity feat, having a magic item cost 1.5 or 2x the normal amount for two slots is going to significantly alter this character's wealth by level. At low levels it won't matter too much. At high levels when you are buying a 300,000 item and it costs you 450,000 instead of seems very unbalanced.

I would go with the flat 1000. It would be a hardship at lower levels and wouldn't be an issue later. This seems more reasonable.

As far as the fussy feat goes, I think it's silly. Most buffs are cast by spell casters and most healing is done through wands and healing belts. This flaw is not worth a feat, imo.

Make it of equal hardship to -1 hp Per round flaw called feeble. Or the -3 will saves flaw.

Things like alcoholic and gambler aren't good flaws because they have little application to game mechanics and only make for interesting roleplay.

Yeah, the high metabolism is a non-starter, the deformity looks good but I am surprised that you guys don't like the Fussy flaw as it came from a more official source and most of my characters rely on potions particularly for healing in combat.

Do you guys have anyother suggestions for interesting flaws for a Half-Dragon?

[elonin]

Problem with flaws is people often only choose flaws that don't impact their builds. Murky eyed or non combatant for full casters. Problem from what I read is DM's don't enforce flaws.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Yeah, the high metabolism is a non-starter, the deformity looks good but I am surprised that you guys don't like the Fussy flaw as it came from a more official source and most of my characters rely on potions particularly for healing in combat.

Using potions for healing is ultimately sub-optimal as it requires work to be able to use it without provoking an attack of opportunity. Healing in combat itself is questionable, so a flaw that punishes it seems very weak. Being sickened by foods you don't like matters little because you will consume food outside, and typically well away from, combat. The only part of that that can be interpreted as being dangerous is the -4 to saves vs poison, but how often is that going to come up?

[Sarethus]

Problem with flaws is people often only choose flaws that don't impact their builds. Murky eyed or non combatant for full casters. Problem from what I read is DM's don't enforce flaws.

I somewhat agree with you and somewhat don't. Speaking out of character you would want a flaw that impacts the character. On the other hand imagine you are the PC. In-chracter wise you grew up 'murkey eyed' or were inept at melee combat (non-combatant) or ranged combat (shakey) etc. When the time came for you to choose a profession would you choose to become Swordsman or Archer? Or would your instructor gently point you towards another profession?


Using potions for healing is ultimately sub-optimal as it requires work to be able to use it without provoking an attack of opportunity. Healing in combat itself is questionable, so a flaw that punishes it seems very weak. Being sickened by foods you don't like matters little because you will consume food outside, and typically well away from, combat. The only part of that that can be interpreted as being dangerous is the -4 to saves vs poison, but how often is that going to come up?

hmm. I can see some of what you say but my experience is that my group tends to use potions fairly frequently. Particularly after combat (We don't allow full resting in between combats so healing spells tend to be saved.)

I am curious though, do you think Fussy would be equalt to murkey eyed or non-combatant in this case?

Any way I have found two other flaws that might be ok:

5) Deadly Strength
No matter what your character's intentions are, your attacks always cause lethal damage... even with your fists.
Effect: You may not chose to deal nonlethal damage. Attacks you make with weapons that cause nonlethal damage, including unarmed strikes, must be made to deal lethal damage instead. If you attack a creature you must make it lethal. When handling any non-weapon items you must role 1D20 +strength bonus and if you get more then 15 you break it. Less then 15 you don't break it. You must do this every time you handle a fragile object.

My Comments: It somewhat fits my Half-Dragon. I just don't want to end up hurting my party members when I touch them.


6) Chivalrous Courtesy
You despise raising your hand against creatures of the opposite gender.
Prerequisite: Good or lawful alignment.
Effect: You suffer a -4 penalty on attack rolls to hit a creature you can tell is of the opposite gender.
Suggested Class/Race: Paladins
Source: Dragon Magazine #324 (Class Acts - Flaws For Paladins)

My Comments: My PC is not a Paladin or lawful or good but my table are pretty lax on alignment restrictions for the most part. Only downside is that I saw my character as a more respectful warrior type (ie. Doesn't care much for gender as long as they are good with holding a weapon) but I could work this in.

[Crake]

Problem with flaws is people often only choose flaws that don't impact their builds. Murky eyed or non combatant for full casters. Problem from what I read is DM's don't enforce flaws.

They were designed with the idea that people would take flaws that had the least impact on their build. While murky eyed or non-combatant for full casters generally won't see much effect, it will still see SOME effect likely at some point down the line. That's why flaws generally have a higher penalty than the associated feat would have bonus. That's the design philosophy anyway.

Generally feats aren't supposed to have roleplay impacts, they're supposed to have mechanical impacts, because you're getting a mechanical benefit. If you want roleplay flaws, they should have roleplay benefits, not mechanical ones.

My opinion on the flaws:

1) Completely counterable by getting an item of dimensional anchor, but otherwise will likely only come up once or twice in a game, and when it does, it will just be a huge pain. The only way players would be able to summon the character (unless he's an elemental or outsider) is to use the gate or wish spell. If you give the player a 1/day item of something like aspect of the deity or whatever those spells are that temporarily gives him the outsider type, that could let the others planar binding him, though at most levels he will be too high HD, unless he also applies some negative levels to himself via enervation or something.

2) I wouldn't go with two slots and a deformity (magic items are supposed to be able to shape themselves to ANYTHING, as long as it fits in the chakra) I would just say you have a single corrupted chakra, and no magic item (or anything that takes up a magic item slot, like incarnum) can use that slot. Harsh, probably not worth it by some people's standards, but I'd allow it if I was running with flaws.

3 & 4) No, as others have said, they're not flaws, they're quirks. Not worth a feat in any way.

5) No, it's too easy to just get your party members to deal the nonlethal damage for you, and unless the character is on single digits, dealing nonlethal is irrelevant anyway (unless you have vow of peace or something, but then you probably wouldn't have this flaw).

6) No, in a game where you, for the most part, fight monsters without discernable male/female features, this feat would likely never see play. Again, more of a roleplay thing (just take the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage instead, not worth a feat).

[Sarethus]

They were designed with the idea that people would take flaws that had the least impact on their build. While murky eyed or non-combatant for full casters generally won't see much effect, it will still see SOME effect likely at some point down the line. That's why flaws generally have a higher penalty than the associated feat would have bonus. That's the design philosophy anyway.

Generally feats aren't supposed to have roleplay impacts, they're supposed to have mechanical impacts, because you're getting a mechanical benefit. If you want roleplay flaws, they should have roleplay benefits, not mechanical ones.


Thank you for the feedback Crake.

I understand that but I have some difficulty with your response to a couple of them. Particularly when I look at the examples you gave: murky eyed or non-combatant for full casters but will discuss that later.



My opinion on the flaws:

1) Completely counterable by getting an item of dimensional anchor, but otherwise will likely only come up once or twice in a game, and when it does, it will just be a huge pain. The only way players would be able to summon the character (unless he's an elemental or outsider) is to use the gate or wish spell. If you give the player a 1/day item of something like aspect of the deity or whatever those spells are that temporarily gives him the outsider type, that could let the others planar binding him, though at most levels he will be too high HD, unless he also applies some negative levels to himself via enervation or something.




2) I wouldn't go with two slots and a deformity (magic items are supposed to be able to shape themselves to ANYTHING, as long as it fits in the chakra) I would just say you have a single corrupted chakra, and no magic item (or anything that takes up a magic item slot, like incarnum) can use that slot. Harsh, probably not worth it by some people's standards, but I'd allow it if I was running with flaws.


Checked the book. Magic armour can ignore size (even then it's between small-medium-large). However it's cost does increase for non-humanoid creatures (only the armor not the enchantment) for example the cost of a medium size chainshirt +1 for a non-humanoid would cost:

(100 X 2 [Medium Non-Humanoid]) + 150 [Masterwork] + 1000 [+1 enchant] = 1350 gp while the normal one would cost 1250 gp.

Not much of a difference but it does prove that unusual shapes can cause problems. So raising the price for the flaw does not seem too out of place too me.



3 & 4) No, as others have said, they're not flaws, they're quirks. Not worth a feat in any way.

I still think 4 is a decent flaw, if a group is more used to potions and/or faces poison on a decent basis. By decent I mean better then murky eyed or non-combatant for full casters which is not the highest standard I'll admit.




5) No, it's too easy to just get your party members to deal the nonlethal damage for you, and unless the character is on single digits, dealing nonlethal is irrelevant anyway (unless you have vow of peace or something, but then you probably wouldn't have this flaw).

6) No, in a game where you, for the most part, fight monsters without discernable male/female features, this feat would likely never see play. Again, more of a roleplay thing (just take the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage instead, not worth a feat).

My issue with your comments here is that when I look at your earlier line where you mentioned:

[B]"While murky eyed or non-combatant for full casters generally won't see much effect, it will still see SOME effect likely at some point down the line."

I look at chivalorus conduct and see my character fighting female orcs/goblins/orgres/succubus/erinyes and so on. I don't think all the orgres/orcs etc my PC will face would be female but I would more likely face them then a wizard would get into a melee combat.

Same thing with lethal damage only. It will somewhat depend on the GM and possibly the party but I can see it coming into play as much as murkey eyed for wizards.

I do have to ask which flaws do you think are worth a feat and can you suggest any for a Half-dragon melee character?

[Crake]

I suppose I should have said that wondrous items* reshape. Armor would need to be custom tailored, but as you pointed out already, all it does is double the base cost, which, once you get past level 2, is practically negligible. The reason why 3 and 4 are out in my opinion is, as I said earlier, flaws should have mechanical effects, not roleplay effects.

5 and 6 are too game specific. The problem comes from it being too swingy. It's a heavier penalty, but only against a subset of creatures. These creatures might never come up, or they might always come up. Murky eyed and noncombatant are based on environmental (murky eyed) or tactical (noncombatant) situations, which will generally be omnipresent in games. It's like saying you have arachnaphobia, and just run away from spiders. Spiders might just never come up in the game, but on the other hand miss chances, or melee combat pretty much will at some point in the game.

If you want to go a half dragon melee combatant, just grab shaky (-2 to ranged attacks) and vulnerable (-1 AC). AC is super easy to boost and you get +4 from being a half dragon already, so -1 isn't gonna make much of a difference, and if you're focusing on melee, then -2 to ranged attacks isn't going to be that bad.