5th Edition and the Female Demographic

[Desdichado]

I have never seen these before but I have to admit they kind of suck.

The flaws that I liked in Shadowrun were ones like have a phobia, bad reputation, wanted by the law, dangerous secret, have a dependent, addicted to drugs or alcohol.

Those are similar--if not identical--to flaws that have shown up in games like GURPS, Storyteller and elsewhere, too.

As much as they sound like they have potential, I think the designers of Unearthed Arcana left them alone on purpose; there's a school of thought that those kinds of flaws are unbalanced, because they're too dependent on GM whim to enforce them such that they're worth the value of a feat. Otherwise, they risk either becoming nonsense fluff that is exploited for free feats but which can't actually be effectively used in game, or they become so punitive that they're not worth taking.

I don't necessarily think that those balance concerns are entirely justified, and I'll point out that they were published during the 3e peak of balance concerns, but at the same time, they have a point.

 

[Elf Witch]

Those are similar--if not identical--to flaws that have shown up in games like GURPS, Storyteller and elsewhere, too.

As much as they sound like they have potential, I think the designers of Unearthed Arcana left them alone on purpose; there's a school of thought that those kinds of flaws are unbalanced, because they're too dependent on GM whim to enforce them such that they're worth the value of a feat. Otherwise, they risk either becoming nonsense fluff that is exploited for free feats but which can't actually be effectively used in game, or they become so punitive that they're not worth taking.

I don't necessarily think that those balance concerns are entirely justified, and I'll point out that they were published during the 3e peak of balance concerns, but at the same time, they have a point.

I sometimes feel that the designers of DnD don't trust DMs. In Shadowrun you take flaws to get edges and it is left up to the GM to work the flaws into the game. And in the 15 years I have been playing Shadowrun I have never seen them abused by either the players or the GMs. I have played with a lot of different GMs and I never really saw it being a major issue on the Dumpshock forums.

Yes the flaws have some mechanical applications someone with the flaw drug addict starts having issues if they don't get their fix and they take penalties to their rolls. Having a dependent means you have to support them and their lifestyles.

I remember using flaws in a 2E DnD game my character had the flaw phobia of undead and I had to make a will save every time we encountered them if I failed I tried to run if I couldn't run I found a corner and cowered. It lead to some interesting encounters.

I think that balance is sometimes highly overrated because I don't believe you can ever truly balance the game there are to many factors involved. And while I can see and agree that in some games flaws might unbalance or be to vague the flaws I read in the SRD are just plain downright boring and don't really do anything to enhance role playing. Again it is all crunch and no fluff.

When I made my first Shadowrun character the flaws I took helped define her and inspired her background which came into play. It was from the flaws that I built her entire past.

I took flashback , claustrophobia , police record, dark secret and dependent. From that I made a character who was born human to humans who were involved in human first groups, like a lot of adolescents she changed into a metahuman at puberty. Her father tried to kill her by smothering her with a pillow. While she was struggling she could smell the scent of night blooming jasmine wafting in the windows. Hence she got flashbacks that crippled her if she caught the scent and she could not stand having anything over her face. In Shadowrun they control mages by putting a skin tight hood over their heads.

She ran away from home got involved with a gang was arrested and ended up with a record which made it hard to function in the corp run world so she became a Shadowrunner. Her dark secret was her affair with a member of an Atzlan cartel and the birth of a daughter she keeps hidden from them and their blood magics.

All of us playing in that game had interesting flaws that the GM wove into the game. Some of the flaws had mechanical applications some more role playing. For example because of my phobia I would never let my character be arrested again being a mage she would rather die then have that hood put over her head.

I know that good role players don't need a codified system I always give my characters some flaws when I make them and I play them with them even if no one really notices. But I do think they can add so much to the game and can encourage a more three dimensional character.

 

[Kaodi]

So, I guess the question is what among the things we have talked about has a reasonable chance of being included in 5th Edition? Something like character flaws may be just the sort of thing that is needed in reality, but it is a bit of a break with the tradition of Core D&D. And I think there tends to be a bit of inertia on the part of designers when it comes to changing elements of the game (as opposed to the presentation of those elements).

 

[Alzrius]

I sometimes feel that the designers of DnD don't trust DMs. In Shadowrun you take flaws to get edges and it is left up to the GM to work the flaws into the game.

It's part of the contemporary thought of a lot of RPGs that a role-playing disadvantage is not properly compensatory for a mechanical bonus. I seem to recall that the 3.0 bladesinger prestige class was originally built that way (mechanical bonus offset with role-playing penalty), and was pretty quickly errata'd for it.

There's a great article about this over here: Role-Playing Disadvantages - With Teeth

 

[arscott]

I'd suggest rather that contemporary thought frowns on trading permanent and consistent mechanical benefits for inconsistent roleplaying penalties. The best incarnation of flaws we see these days usually use the tack of giving cookies whenever the flaw comes into play. (see, for example, FATE based games and compelled aspects).

Flaws in general aren't part of D&D because the game hasn't really made space for that kind of story-heavy character traits.

If you were going to take a flaw like "Wanted in the Crown Colonies" to gain a "Friend to the natives" bonus feat, that would make more sense. But outside of a few feats in eberron, those story feats are non-existent.

 

[Elf Witch]

It's part of the contemporary thought of a lot of RPGs that a role-playing disadvantage is not properly compensatory for a mechanical bonus. I seem to recall that the 3.0 bladesinger prestige class was originally built that way (mechanical bonus offset with role-playing penalty), and was pretty quickly errata'd for it.

There's a great article about this over here: Role-Playing Disadvantages - With Teeth

I am well aware of this and I disagree I think it really depends on the group and the DM. A good DM can make sure that they are compensatory to the advantages. Again like I said designers don't trust DMs .

One way to handle this is to make it it an add on feature to the game one you can drop in easily if you want these kinds of things in game.

 

[Umbran]

I'd suggest rather that contemporary thought frowns on trading permanent and consistent mechanical benefits for inconsistent roleplaying penalties. The best incarnation of flaws we see these days usually use the tack of giving cookies whenever the flaw comes into play. (see, for example, FATE based games and compelled aspects).

Classic Deadlands also uses this approach. A flaw may give you some small bonus in build points, but the real benefit comes during play - if the flaw is a notable hindrance in play, you get Fate Chips (equivalent to XP and Action points and damage avoidance points rolled into one).

D&D hasn't inetegrated a good bennies mechanic to make use of such - Action Points aren't compelling enough, IMHO.

 

[nedjer]

The afflictions and raving lunatic approaches to flaws don't seem to hook-up to playable actions or outcomes. Resulting in any player rolling a PC covered with boils and under treatment for OCDs is probably going to concentrate more on roleplaying class abilities. Applying actionable effects to flaws in a pain and gain trade-off is maybe easier to work into play?

 

[SSquirrel]

Create a TV show set in a D&D campaign setting that:

1. Doesn't suck
2. Has themes beyond those appealing to guys only
3. Does not objectify all of the women

My training tells me that the quasi-steampunky Eberron setting would be the best shot at getting major crossover appeal. At least one main character should be Warforged. However many women are in the main party, at least one should be a serious martial artist, not a primary spellcaster- the damsel/rescuer role reversal that served Buffy- the movie AND the TV show- would work for this show as well. Live action would be expensive, but has certain strengths...ditto for animation.

That role reversal has started getting referred to as the Self Rescuing Princess and both my daughters (3 1/2 and 6) would totally fit that category A lot of the women I game with started w/Vampire (I know my wife did), and they all prefer 4E to any other D&D edition. My wife enjoys minis, doesn't' mind if combat is tactical, so long as she gets to beat people down herself. Or just as likely, roast them w/a Tiefling Warlock

I'm not honestly a big steampunk fan, but a lot of my friends are. I do enjoy the Eberron setting (only read it, never played in it) and I'm always up for D&D getting back on my TV

 

[Celtavian]

re

I never have had the chance to play with female gamers playing a tabletop RPG. Played with plenty of female gamers in an MMORPG and met a ton that like to kick butt. Though they are generally less focused on perfect builds and competitive PvP than males, they do enjoy cooperative raiding and grouping a great deal. And they generally hold their own.

I figure tabletop RPGs are the same. Males tend to be aggressive in their opinions and actions. They tend to be competitive in character builds and glory hounding. They tend to enjoy the tactical play and focus on "winning" the RPG by winning the battle. Roleplaying is something they don't mind a little of, but don't want too much of. It gets annoying to them to explore their character's feelings and relationships. Many male players I've seen explore their characters using logical exposition rather than roleplaying such as saying "My character feels bad. He gets drunk." and then that roleplay situation is over. They love their toys. They love to kill those enemies and get those magic items so they become more mechanically powerful. The numbers definitely mean something to most male players I've played with. There is a satisfaction with obtaining high numbers for males.

This is not all male players, but I would say it is the majority. The game is built to serve their desires. That's why killing and getting loot is such a high priority in every edition of D&D. Just like MMORPG fantasy games focus on the same kill and get loot system.

The one thing that made this more attractive to females is the cooperative aspect of MMORPGs. Things such as guilds and grouping. Females in general enjoy a cooperative, social environment where they feel like valued participants.

Whereas males often create an aggressive competitive environment. Even when on the same team males are trying to outdo builds, have higher DPS,better loot, and all around be better than their teammates. They are also very aggressive about fair distribution of wealth so one player doesn't gain the advantage over the other. And I'll reiterate males are into numbers. It's a big deal to them even in MMORPGs.

Suffice it to say that I am agreement with those that say the male attitude over the gaming table would need to change for more females to want to involve themselves in gaming. My experience with MMORPGs indicates to me females want to be involved with the group and not competing within the group. I think that would be one of the biggest turn offs a female gamer could experience is the constant aggression, often passive-aggressive, around the gaming table. Not to mention the possible competition for her attention from guys that don't get much female contact. I've seen guys try to impress females with their virtual gear or virtual capabilities, which is highly amusing as I know most women could really care less if a guy has an orange sword or has the highest dps.

Personally, I love to roleplay. So I'd love to have a few female gamers at my table and see if they do prefer roleplaying more than males. Some of the best times I ever had was with a male buddy who liked to roleplay as much as I did. We would roleplay writing on pads of paper back before computers were common. Those were some of our favorite characters.