Flaws would you...?
- Thread starter Wraith-Hunter
- Start date
A player in my campaign brought this up to me, and i had many of the same concerns you people have, he was a melee specialist fighter (as are all his characters, always) and he wanted to take the -2 to ranged attack ones.
Which takes away something he never uses, just to give him a bonus feat
Not liking that, i decided, if he really wants a flaw, he can roll randomly, at the thought of this, he decided not to take a flaw lol
I'd allow it, if the player rolled for a random flaw, and i dont think i'd allow more than one
Which takes away something he never uses, just to give him a bonus feat
Not liking that, i decided, if he really wants a flaw, he can roll randomly, at the thought of this, he decided not to take a flaw lol
I'd allow it, if the player rolled for a random flaw, and i dont think i'd allow more than one
Wraith-Hunter
First Post
bestone said:
Thats my feelings. Personally I feel that with the glut of feats and the use of them for nearly EVERY mechanic they want to introduce poses problems.
1. Wizards put in what they call "timmy feats" that suck on purpose so you can have "fun" figuring that out and not use that feat again. Works fine in 'magic' game lasts minutes, but not D&D and they are not 'fun'
2. They also required useless feats for entry into PrC's as a price for the PrC abilities. Not to bad when 3.0 started but 6-7 years later with 1000's of new feats its a big deal. Now most new PrC's don't require useless feats and many are now less than 10 levels. Again they realized these timmy feats were stupid.
3. They were the fighters only class feature. Dumb idea to begin with so many 1/2way decent feats have a very high cost for non-fighters. And single class fighters are still weak in comparision (general consensus not looking to get into this debate). Should have just given out some decent class features, like the new base classes. How many Duskblades or Beguilers will want to multiclass compared to a fighter?
4. The way the game stands NOW as opposed to when it first came out, there are WAY too few feat slots and way too many feats out there. Really they need to combine/remove some of the useless feats and change all the +2 to 2 skills to a generic just add +2 to 2 related skills.
5. Flaws and Retraining are in there as a nod that this problem exists and they know it but they don't want to revamp anything in this edition but offer some mitigation. Though they don't allow CHA dump flaws as it is a dump stat for most classes. Which is pointless because any character is going to pick 2 flaws that will have minimal impact on their character. Like the dwarf above with an already dismal REF save. Not going to make any hard ones anyways why not get a free feat for it? Same with a melee focused build or vice versa. So why not have a CHA dump feat.
6. If I were running a game, I would just dole out more feats. Simple as that. Fighters are better with PHBII. In the current game I am in the DM is allowing 4 flaws. I freely admitted that I would be taking flaws that would hurt me the least and feats that would help me the best and offered an idea of just using more feats. Still likes the flaws though, he agrees that there are WAY too many feats and not enough feat slots. He still wants to use the flaws though which is really not a big deal. There are a bunch on the WotC message boards, and in dragon magazine.
7. I really like the traits though and would like to see some more powerfull ones. They don't nessessaraly need to be minor effects but could be major, with a major related drawback.
Presto2112
Explorer
I personally have no problem with the Flaw System.
The selection of Flaws in UA (and the subsequent lists in the occasional Dragon magazine) are a nice selection; granted, a few of them seem a little drastic, but the option is there should a player want to choose it for their character (for whatever reason).
However, take into account the limited number of FEATS that you can choose after selecting a flaw. Flaws have to be added to the character at Level 1, so the feat you choose, you have to be able to meet the prerequisites at level one. That's not a huge list.
The selection of Flaws in UA (and the subsequent lists in the occasional Dragon magazine) are a nice selection; granted, a few of them seem a little drastic, but the option is there should a player want to choose it for their character (for whatever reason).
However, take into account the limited number of FEATS that you can choose after selecting a flaw. Flaws have to be added to the character at Level 1, so the feat you choose, you have to be able to meet the prerequisites at level one. That's not a huge list.
rgard
Adventurer
Wraith-Hunter said:
I was in the same boat. Wanted an extra feat and thought to take the weakwilled one (-3 on will saves) knowing that I would take iron will (+3 will saves) at some point in order to meet one of the prereqs for ur-priest. Ur-priest and wizard (the characters projected classes) have great will saves so it was tempting.
Kinda funny, i may not ever do this myself as a player, but would allow my players to do it when i DM.
Thanks,
Rich
"I want to play a deaf, dumb, blind quadrapalegic fighter. I've taken all those flaws, now what goodies do I get?"Ipissimus said:
Some builds are going to be useless, such as the above. It's absurd, but illustrates the fact that simply because someone wants to play something does not mean that the mechanics must be able to support them.
Wraith-Hunter
First Post
rgard said:
Iron Will gives +2 bonus, not +3. Flaws have to be worse than feats.
Similar Threads
