Feats with negative requirements

[Grazzt]

Very bad idea. Give them another reason to have a bad charisma. Until now they could just ignore their bad cha score and put the points into other scores, but now they acutally profit from a bad charisma. I'd never allow such a feat in my campaign.

Bad idea to reward players for bad scores, especially charisma.

Agreed. Bad to reward for bad scores period. There is a reason they are called bad scores.

 

[Grazzt]

I do allow the key ability for Intimidate to be Strength, largely because I like the idea of inarticulate thugs being able to induce irrational fear in people, just like they do in real life. It doesn't stop rogues and other "charm characters" IMC from taking ranks in Intimidate; in fact, these folks usually have the skill points to spare and more to gain from avoiding combat by scaring prospective opponents silly, so it works out. However, using the swappable ability rule does encourage barbarians to take Intimidate, which I like.

I have a feat IMC that allows such a thing (i.e., a character to sub his Str score for his Cha score on Intimidate checks). So far, only one player has taken it (even though another one or two have low, not bad, but low Cha scores). It seems pretty balanced thus far....and makes the big, goofy, fighter, a bit more intimidating...like you said.

 

[DM_Matt]

Um, there already are feats and PRCs with negative requirements..Have you ever thought about how many require Toughness or Endurance

 

[Taloras]

In Seafarer's Handbook, the Half Merrow race has something called Imposing Demeanor. They may substitute strength for charisma in an intimidate check, and intimidate is always a class skill for them.

Why not make this into a feat? Dont put a requirement of a neg charisma, but still....

 

[Jondor_Battlehammer]

How about one for INT 9- called "Idiot Savant", allowing the character to ignore maximum ranks in a craft or profession skill. lol.

HA! I like this one.

While I agree that it could go to min/maxing quickly, I don't think it would be a ballance issue. First of all, you are burning a Feat, which no one has enough of, and it is only making up for slack, not adding to an already good score. Secondly, it should be no more powerful than a standard Feat, so I see no power issue. And third, you are more or less forced toleavethat score low forever, or risk lessening or even negeting the Feat you spent, (see not having enough). Every thing that the PC spends to focus on this ability is one other he cannot max out, and you won't have the problem later on of having him worring about stat boost items, or burning a Ring of Wishes on his low score.

I could see something like...

WEEDY

Str 9 or less.

Intelligent creatures will tend not to view you as an imediate threat without other reasons, i.e. being an obvious spellcaster, trying to sneak behind them, ect. If you are randomly rolled as a target without having taken any suspicious actions, there is a 50% chance that the creature will target somone else this round. Animals and other creatures of low Intelligence will see you as an easy target, however, and you stand twice the chance of being targeted by such.


Bumbling

Dex 9 or less

You are a klutz. Any time you make a Dex based skill check and roll a 1, you must make a REF save of 15 or fall prone. If you are attacked by an opponent, and they would have missed if not for your Dex penalty, you roll with it as the Rogue ability, once per day.


OK, both are kind of disadvantages as well, mostly humorous, and potentially abused, but I don't see anything game breaking here. Such things are probably better suited for low powered games, though.

(OK, I've rewitten this next part about five times and it still dosn't say what I want. so bear with me.)

As far as Dwarves and Half-Orcs and Cha penalties, Charisma is a culmination of many factors. Should someone be better at casting spells because they look good? Yet looks is part of Charisma. Spellcasting deals with harnessing power. Sorcerers harness it with the force of their personalities. Half-Orcs being inherntly undiseplined, rude, chaotic, and prone to overpowering emotions, are not as skilled at weilding that power. Just like rage and hatred blinding you to the force. For Dwarves, they tend to be emotionally reserved, just the opposite of Half-Orcs. Weilding magic as a sorcerer requires you to put your pesonality and emotions out in front, something that they are not inclined to do. like the wallflower in high school, he's a great dancer, he just can't bring himself to do it in public. But thats why they are only penalties, and small ones at that. You can still have powerful Sorcerers of either race. It's no more unfair than having Elves be better at magic than most.

 

[Gyr]

How about this?

Sheep's Cunning
Prerequisite: Int 6 or below
Description: Beyond a certain level of mental retardation, a subject's mental processes may become sufficiently different from that of a sentient being so as to defy normal prediction.

Benefit: The subject is no longer considered to be a humanoid for purposes of mind-affecting spells and effects, such as hold person. However, the entity in question becomes subject to all mind-affecting spells and effect that would normally apply to animals, such as animal friendship, speak with animals, or, in some very rare and depraved circumstances, familliar link.

 

[yennico]

How about this?

Sheep's Cunning
Prerequisite: Int 6 or below
Description: Beyond a certain level of mental retardation, a subject's mental processes may become sufficiently different from that of a sentient being so as to defy normal prediction.

Benefit: The subject is no longer considered to be a humanoid for purposes of mind-affecting spells and effects, such as hold person. However, the entity in question becomes subject to all mind-affecting spells and effect that would normally apply to animals, such as animal friendship, speak with animals, or, in some very rare and depraved circumstances, familliar link.

The old cliche of a dumb fighter. Then my mage will have a familiar with class levels as fighter

 

[LokiDR]

Sheeps Cunning? Does that mean they follow the party around and run whenever they sense a threat? It is a funny picture, though.

The concept is fine, but if you set the requirement to be a score lower than *, you are actively discouraging advancing that attribute. If you require Cha 9 for a feat, and the person decides they want to try bluff and other charisma skills, they lose the use of the feat. You have created a situation where advancement is not good and that flies in the face of everything D&D is.

 

[totoro]

I love this idea. I realize many dislike (or even hate) it, but it helps some low-rollers make up for the bad rolls. In our games, there are no dump stats, so the concern about dumping all in CHA is moot. YMMV.

If anyone has any more ideas, please share. I like the effects of weedy, but hate the name... maybe "innocuous"? Idiot savant is fun for low INT (or "animal mind"). Low WIS could be lucky in some way (doesn't it seem like certain foolish characters in movies and books tend to survive against all odds?). Bumbling for DEX.

Fun for the whole party!

 

[Taloras]

WEEDY

Str 9 or less.

Intelligent creatures will tend not to view you as an imediate threat without other reasons, i.e. being an obvious spellcaster, trying to sneak behind them, ect. If you are randomly rolled as a target without having taken any suspicious actions, there is a 50% chance that the creature will target somone else this round. Animals and other creatures of low Intelligence will see you as an easy target, however, and you stand twice the chance of being targeted by such.

Got something similar in Quint Rogue

Contemptible Target
Prereq: Low Key(also from that book), max str 13
Benefit: Until you attack or cast a spell in combat, enemies ignore you. as long as a different opponet is within threatened area. Does not allow sneak attacks. They are aware of you, but give other targets a higher priority.