PDA

View Full Version : Extra feats?! Tell my more!



meet shield
2007-09-08, 02:14 PM
I discovery exist some kind of penality of you can have at the first level for give a bonus feat... or a bonus feats. For example, you can give a malus to -1 for all the distance weapons and give an extra feat at the fist level, like "focus weapon(long sword)".
So, something of you know what's the name of those penalities? And, more important, the complete list of they?

OneWinged4ngel
2007-09-08, 02:15 PM
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/buildingCharacters/characterFlaws.htm

Kurald Galain
2007-09-08, 02:41 PM
However, they're an optional rule, and I know several DMs (myself included) who would tend to forbid them because of the cheese factor. If you're into roleplaying, you don't a flaw per se to play your character; if you're into munchkinism, it's relatively easy to take a flaw to something that doesn't actually bother you (e.g. Murky-eyed on a buffer or batman caster).

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-09-08, 02:48 PM
The only other officially printed Flaws I know of were printed throughout a variety of issues of Dragon magazine, starting with issue #323 or so (the first one with the total redesign). Of course, none of these are Open Game Content, like the ones OneWinged4ngel directed you to, so I can't provide a full list of them. But, if you're curious, I can see about getting you some issue numbers, and you can order back issues from Paizo (http://www.paizo.com).

Quietus
2007-09-08, 02:48 PM
However, they're an optional rule, and I know several DMs (myself included) who would tend to forbid them because of the cheese factor. If you're into roleplaying, you don't a flaw per se to play your character; if you're into munchkinism, it's relatively easy to take a flaw to something that doesn't actually bother you (e.g. Murky-eyed on a buffer or batman caster).

This is why a DM just has to watch and make sure that players are taking them for non-gouda flavor.

meet shield
2007-09-08, 02:49 PM
I know, but one of my DM, I think, will don't give problems if I take FOUR FEATS EXTRA... Ask to me, in this campain we will only have to kill everything move...

Kurald Galain
2007-09-08, 02:50 PM
This is why a DM just has to watch and make sure that players are taking them for non-gouda flavor.

Yes. If you take a flaw with a penalty that's meaningless for your character, you may only take a feat that is similarly pointless, like Skill Focus (Basketweaving). :smalltongue:

meet shield
2007-09-08, 02:52 PM
No, thanks. My other DM (and I too, when I'm a DM) think the flaws are... how I can say it... tabý? But for this my PC... And this DM... I'll don't have any problems here like I am.

Lord Iames Osari
2007-09-08, 03:03 PM
I know, but one of my DM, I think, will don't give problems if I take FOUR FEATS EXTRA... Ask to me, in this campain we will only have to kill everything move...

Actually, you're limited by the rules to taking only two flaws... which means only two extra feats.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-09-08, 03:05 PM
If you're into roleplaying, you don't a flaw per se to play your character; if you're into munchkinism, it's relatively easy to take a flaw to something that doesn't actually bother you (e.g. Murky-eyed on a buffer or batman caster).
Of course, that's why the penalties for flaws are more severe than the bonuses granted by their equivalent feats.

Now, just cause it's something that's always bugged me, I just want to make a comment on the "If you're into roleplaying, you don't need [sic] a flaw per se to play your character."

First, this strikes me as a variation of the Stormwind Fallacy. If you're not familiar with what that means, see Common Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Terms. It's on the first page.

Second, you could go a step further and say "If you're into roleplaying, you don't need the rules at all. Just do free form." With that kind of attitude, why do we use a system with rules at all? It's because there is middle ground. Now, if we're going to play with a system, the rules and role-play should reflect each other. It doesn't make much sense to say, "My character is nearsighted," but then the mechanics depict him being able to make out distant objects as well as the any other schmo with 20/20 vision. Flaws do help give you a way to put a bit more of your roleplay into the mechanics. Of course, if you're going to give a mechanical penalty, it makes certain aspects of mechanical balance more difficult on the DM and Players alike, so it's only fair to allow the mechanical penalty to be counteracted with some form of mechanical bonus.

In any case, even when I'm allowed to take flaws, I rarely do, as I rarely find one that seems to fit my character concept. Even if the extra feat would be really tasty.


I know, but one of my DM, I think, will don't give problems if I take FOUR FEATS EXTRA... Ask to me, in this campain we will only have to kill everything move...
Four Flaws/Feats? The standard rules cap it at Two.

Even if you take Flaws that seem not to be much hindrance, by the time you have four of them, you are bound to be headed for disaster, as you will develop a number of nasty weak points.

ocato
2007-09-08, 03:09 PM
Granted, that can be removed by a DM, like all rules, I'd say 1-2 flaws is a good idea for keeping your character reasonable. You may want to scope out traits too, some of them are nice for character customization/squeezing any extra goodness out of him via aged milk byproduct..

Shadow
2007-09-08, 03:09 PM
If you're really looking for a complete list of flaws, THIS (http://realmshelps.dandello.net/cgi-bin/featsform.pl) is the closest thing that I know of.

Kurald Galain
2007-09-08, 03:12 PM
First, this strikes me as a variation of the Stormwind Fallacy.

There's a difference between claiming "people who use such rules aren't roleplaying" (Stormwind fallacy) and claiming "people who roleplay do not need this optional rule to roleplay better" (what I'm saying). I claim that the D&D optional flaw rules do more to encourage min-maxing, than they do to encourage roleplaying.

Although of course it depends on the group, in my experience if flaws are allowed, people start thinking their character isn't "complete" without at least one flaw, and start making weird characters accordingly, that turn out to not really be what they wanted to play in the first place.

Lord Tataraus
2007-09-08, 03:13 PM
I would like to say that even though they are not actual flaws as in the mechanic, my group allows you to take phobias as flaws. In fact these work better than many of the flaws because they come up more often. Additionally, my group houserules that you need to take 1 trait for every flaw.

MrNexx
2007-09-08, 03:19 PM
The problem with the flaws system is that it lacks granularity. It grants you a feat, which can be a big benefit, or a small one, for what can be a big hindrance or a small one.

ocato
2007-09-08, 03:20 PM
There's a difference between claiming "people who use such rules aren't roleplaying" (Stormwind fallacy) and claiming "people who roleplay do not need this optional rule to roleplay better" (what I'm saying). I claim that the D&D optional flaw rules do more to encourage min-maxing, than they do to encourage roleplaying.

Although of course it depends on the group, in my experience if flaws are allowed, people start thinking their character isn't "complete" without at least one flaw, and start making weird characters accordingly, that turn out to not really be what they wanted to play in the first place.

I agree that playing a character with impaired sight who gets no penalties to search and/or spot is a bit of weird. I think that flaws can, when controled properly, be a nice way to bring RP concepts into the mechanics and therefore give a little 'realism' (in quotes because realism is always questionable in D&D). It's all about a good DM who has his finger on the pulse and players whose goals are fun for everyone more than being more uber than the person sitting next to them at the table.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-09-08, 05:09 PM
There's a difference between claiming "people who use such rules aren't roleplaying" (Stormwind fallacy) and claiming "people who roleplay do not need this optional rule to roleplay better" (what I'm saying).
Hence my reference to it as "a variation."

Same way "A Lover's Concerto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Lover's_Concerto)" is a variation of the "Minuet in G major" often credited to Bach (but apparently now believed to by by Christian Petzold).

Arbitrarity
2007-09-08, 08:35 PM
Huh, irony. If you roleplay, you don't need to take flaws to roleplay flaws, but you do need to take feats/skills to roleplay being skilled in those areas.

Hmmmm....
:smallbiggrin:

The Extinguisher
2007-09-08, 08:45 PM
Yes, you don't need flaws to roleplay, but they can help with getting a character into fit shape to role-play.

Zincorium
2007-09-08, 09:09 PM
I don't ask about flaws as a player, and as a DM I don't allow people to just select them as part of character creation.

Occasionally, when a player has come up with an interesting drawback for their character, I'll give them a bonus feat or something equivalent to balance it out a bit. But the thing is, I would have done that without there being a flaws system.

Generally, in actual play they tend to be a cheap way to get extra feats or a crutch for RPing. I don't like crutches, if someone wants some help or advice on roleplaying a bit more in-depth, I'm happy to help, but if being blind is the sum total of their character concept, that won't cut it.

Roog
2007-09-08, 09:30 PM
The best d20 flaws system I have seen was from D20 7th Sea - Swashbuckling Adventures.

The system they had allowed Virtues, Wiles, Hubrises, and Flaws, collectively labeled Arcana. Virtues and Hubrises were for good characters, and Wiles and Hubrises were for evil characters (although allowing neutral characters Virtues and Hubrises would be OK). Starting characters could take a Hubris or Flaw to gain a Feat, Virtue, or Wile.

Virtually all Arcana worked 1/time period (usually a day, but up to a year).

Hubrises and Flaws allows the GM (or another player) to activate them at an appropriate time in order to force the PC to act out the character trait(e.g. Arrogant, Careless, Cowardly, Lecherous, Merciful, Overconfident etc).

Virtues and Wiles are activated by the player (or GM for an NPC) for some advantage (e.g. Adaptable - cancel the effect of being flat-footed, Altruistic - rerol any one roll made while attempting to help someone else, Charismatic - have one of your follower die fearlessly for your cause).

While the list could do with some additions it avoids the major problems of the standard flaw system (Murky-eyed Buffers etc), while (depending on play style) encouraging the players to roleplay their character.

Mewtarthio
2007-09-08, 10:00 PM
Virtues and Wiles are activated by the player (or GM for an NPC) for some advantage (e.g. Adaptable - cancel the effect of being flat-footed, Altruistic - rerol any one roll made while attempting to help someone else, Charismatic - have one of your follower die fearlessly for your cause).

:smallbiggrin: Ha! Sweet! I love that! If I had that, I'd use it even during days when I didn't need to! "Excuse me, sailor, but there's a leak in storage, and all our carpenters are on break. Could you go downstairs and plug the hole with your body while I wait for them?" It's still hilarious even if you limit it to what it's obviously intended for: "In order to stop this MacGuffin, one of us must sacrifice himself to take the bomb into the core! I nominate you, redshirt. Get moving!"

As a side note, that system sounds like something they've got in GURPS. I've never played it, but I do know you can take drawbacks to free up character points, and some of those drawbacks are character flaws that have a certain chance of forcing you to play the trait straight (I think it's "roll a 13 or lower on a 3d6 whenever you try to resist the flaw or be forced to go with your nature").