Egres said:
Does anyone use/allow them?
I allow the UA ones, but not all of them. In any case, no one has used them yet.
Egres said:
What's your DM point of view on them?
They can be a nice addition in two cases:
1) to a character build who really benefits from an extra feat [e.g. qualify for a PrCl much earlier]
2) to a player who really means to roleplay the flaw, and not just put the flaw where he can safely ignore it *
UA flaws are the best around for one reason: their penalties are hard to avoid. You cannot choose not to make a saving throw or to roll initiative... You are always going to pay for that extra feat, if the flaw gives you penalties to: Hit Points, Initiative, saving throws, Listen & Spot checks. I do not allow flaws with attack penalties, because it's easy to take them for spellcasters and never pay the price.
* Flaws are more fair when put in something you neither have very high or very low. However the fact that UA flaws penalties are bigger than the equivalent feats which give bonuses to the same thing, should compensate even for players who try to minimize the flaw effects. I even think that -4 to Listen & Spot (perhaps the weakest penalty among these) has its price when you almost always miss the surprise round.
The biggest criticism vs flaws is minmaxing. However many who hate UA flaws use UA traits, which is incredible since UA traits are much much more subject to minmaxing...