That said, I am wondering if people would take the opportunity, if it were presented, to take a flaw at any time in exchange for a feat. This could be when you level up to level 7, and you really want a feat to get into a prestige class at 8. This could be mid fight with some goblins, after rolling a 19, and you decide you want improved crit.
I would have the flaws penalties immediatly applied and then any benefit from a feat chosen, and flaws are perminate.
I guess I am just throwing out ideas, and seeing what people's opinions on the idea are.
This is the problem I see: say you give someone a wand that autokills the user on a failed fort save, but casts a 10d fireball. Even if the player knows he will die, if he has the item, things will happen that will force him to use it.
If he doesn't have the item, then he will have to play around the situation.
If you let people take extra flaws for feats, then every character will max out the number of flaws they can have. If they need another feat to win a battle, they will get a flaw in a heart beat to take it.
You will end up with a whole party full of one eye, one ear, epileptic, phobia ridden, haunted gimps with true loves, codes of honor, and swarn enemies...
Recently,my dm did that exactly for my Paladin3/Monk2 (returning the Paladin at 6th level). After becomeing lvl 5, he was taken out of his monastary and into the "real world", but having the Serenity feat (DCv1), is a worshiper of Rao, and had never been in any fighting except for sparing and training, he would much rather use words than fight. At this point and time, my character was going to join the group, and I was asking if I could take on an extra feat, Ascectic Knight, so I would be less gimped.
So my DM made a custom flaw where I take a -4 to my to hit bonus in a battle that I did not first try to be diplomatic. Obviously for creatures that cannot be communicated with, or in cases where I am attacked before I can reason with them and other situations like that, the deduction does not apply.
Talking is also a free action, so I could fight defensively and try to reason.
In exchange for this, I got ascectic monk. Next level, when I choose the Holy Warrior variant paladin I can take feats I actually want, vs one i actualy want and one I had to take.
The only think I might be picky about is introducing new fluff. All flaws have some sort of fluff to go with them; for example: Murky-Eyed -- equivalent to near-sighted or simply sub-par vision. When creating a character from scratch, it's easy to just add this flaw and claim he has bad vision (from birth or whatever). But, it you are adding this flaw at a later time, you might want to add some fluff as to why he has suddenly has poor vision. Maybe acid partially splashed in his eyes or he stared directly into a bright flash.
But, if fluff isn't important to you, feel free to ignore my post.
Mechanically, it seems ok; and, it also seems balanced.
The only think I might be picky about is introducing new fluff. All flaws have some sort of fluff to go with them; for example: Murky-Eyed -- equivalent to near-sighted or simply sub-par vision. When creating a character from scratch, it's easy to just add this flaw and claim he has bad vision (from birth or whatever). But, it you are adding this flaw at a later time, you might want to add some fluff as to why he has suddenly has poor vision. Maybe acid partially splashed in his eyes or he stared directly into a bright flash.
But, if fluff isn't important to you, feel free to ignore my post.
While I hate to say "Fluff isn't imoprtant" I generally leave it open to players (or DM's who steal my ideas -feel free too-) to determine their own fluff.
So if the player in the midst of a fight says he wants improved crit, and he decides to take my "Pathetic" flaw, applied to Intelligence. (giving him an int penalty -more to it than that, but im keeping it brief-) he could feel free to describe it as any of the following.
1- My character has never been paticularly smart, the 14 int didnt fit him from the start. Lets drop it to 12. He was always good with weapons though, let me grab improved crit.
2- During the fight he got with that mace right? perhapse it was mildly concusive. I will drop my int a little to reflect that, and during said fight in watching that goblin use his mace quite effectivlty, I saw something to improve my own. I will take improved crit.
3- I want a new feat, let me take this flaw.
Depending on the level of roleplaying they wish to do.
(FYI pathetic is my easiest flaw on the PC by far.)
Flaws
The following flaws may be taken at first level in exchange for a feat. If you loose the flaw you loose the feat gained.
Bad Back- For carrying capacity, reduce your strength score by 5. May not be taken if a characters strength score is above 16, and is lost if strength goes above 16.
Feeble- you take a -2 penalty on strength, dexterity and constitution based checks and skill checks. Including attack rolls and AC when applicable.
Meager Fortitude- You suffer a -3 penalty on fortitude saves.
Pathetic- Reduce an ability score by 2. You cannot take this flaw if the total modifier of all your abilities is 8 or above. This cannot reduce an ability score to below 3, after racial modifiers and age modifiers.
Poor Reflexes-You suffer a -3 penalty to reflex saves
Slow – You move at ½ your base land speed. All other move speeds are also reduced.
Weak Will- You suffer a -3 penalty to will saves.
Blind Rage-must be able to rage- May not end rage voluntarily. Must attack a creature each round of rage. May attempt DC 15 will save to end rage.
Exhausting Rage- Must be able to rage- You become exhausted instead of fatigued at the end of a rage. At 17th level, you become fatigued instead if you have gained the tireless rage feature.
Slow to Anger-must be able to rage.- Entering rage requires a full round action.
Bad Spells- Must have access to spells- Your spells have a 10% chance to fail every time cast. In addition they have a 2% chance to turn back on you.
Unlucky Swordsman- Requires a BAB equal to your level. If you loose this, you loose the flaw. Whenever you roll a 1 on an attack roll, there is a chance you drop your weapon, hit your ally, or yourself. On a roll of 1 roll a d10. On a roll of 1-4 throw weapon 1d6 squares in random direction. On a roll of 5-8 you hit a nearby ally within range. On a roll of 10 you hit yourself.
Bad Back- For carrying capacity, reduce your strength score by 5. May not be taken if a characters strength score is above 16, and is lost if strength goes above 16.
I like your flaws Krusk but I thought this one would be even better if stronger characters took it. I'm a weight trainer and I think I've taken this flaw in real life.
Imagine the strongest character in the group has this flaw a fumbled strength check and it's bed rest for a day or so. This would only count on certain types of activity, anything that compresses the spine such as lifting etc. You'd end up with a character that could bend iron bars no problem, but ask him to lift something heavy and it'd be 'No chance, not with my back'.
As for your question. I thought about it too, but my concern was that characters with insan str scores would take it almost every time and it would hardly be a problem.
But as you point it out, it honestly sounds like I was over estimating it and that I should let people with 16+str take it.
It would take a super high str. score to be made pointless. Ill probably let them do it, and see how it goes.