The 5e Flaws list, my editorial changes (to correct flaws in the flaws)

[Ristamar]

Suggesting that I am here to troll people is not supported by the facts.

Alright, cool. Just trying to be helpful. That being said, I'll bow out of this thread early.

I hope all goes well.

 

[superstition]

Alright, cool. Just trying to be helpful. That being said, I'll bow out of this thread early.

I hope all goes well.

It should as long as there are fewer "friendly intent" posts. So far, those have been the most rancorous.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Honestly, I find such posts to be useless. If you have something specific you think is flawed then make a list. Explain. Do some work.

Did you pick "You never understand sarcasm and other subtle jokes" as your flaw during character generation?

 

[superstition]

Did you pick "You never understand sarcasm and other subtle jokes" as your flaw during character generation?

Show me the subtlety in your lazy attack on my work and maybe I will.

What I am now asking is that people who aren't interested in constructively addressing this topic move along. Constructive comments include specific ideas about improving the language of specific flaws.

 

[superstition]

Constructive options (examples):

1) Specific ideas about improving the language of specific flaws.

2) Ideas for new flaws, like suggestions for what is missing from the original list.

3) Ideas for consolidating flaws.

4) Related specific revisions, additions, and deletions.

5) Information related to how the flaws have worked in your game. Suggestions for GMs and players.


Not constructive:

1) I think your list is poor-quality.

2) I think the original flaws are all perfect.

3) If you don't agree with my opinion then you're a troll.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Show me the subtlety in your lazy attack on my work and maybe I will.

What I am now asking is that people who aren't interested in constructively addressing this topic move along. Constructive comments include specific ideas about improving the language of specific flaws.

It's all in the italics. Try them out.

 

[superstition]

It's all in the italics. Try them out.

I think I'll try out the block button.

 

[Eltab]

Not constructive:

3) If you don't agree with my opinion then you're a troll.

Please review your own reactions to comments and criticisms, harsh gentle or otherwise.

At this point, I'm thinking you were not really wanting / expecting any input from third parties.

 

[DM Magic]

Wow. This thread escalated quickly.

 

[MNblockhead]

Interpreting and rewording or just makingn up flaws is not homebrew any more than selecting a character name outside the sample lists in the books. The rules TELL you to apply your own interpretations, or to alter them, or just make up your own. The lists is just examples to get you thinking.

Each background presented in this chapter includes suggested characteristics that you can use to spark your imagination. You’re not bound to those options, but they’re a good starting point.

Also:

The sample backgrounds in this chapter provide both concrete benefits (features, proficiencies, and languages) and roleplaying suggestions....A background contains suggested personal characteristics based on your background. You can pick characteristics, roll dice to determine them randomly, or use the suggestions as inspiration for characteristics of your own creation.

The flaws, bonds, personality traits, and ideals fit into the "roleplay suggestions" bucket. The flaw lists and descriptions are not crunch. Like name lists, they are just suggestions.

So, no, I'm not "homebrewing" by riffing off the FAW.