Disadvantage Feat suggestions

[Valefort]

It's not hard to code but that's what I call going through hoops, it can't be done through the classic level up screen.

[BlueAce417]

Hello Baldur's Gate,

If anyone here has played GURPS you will understand what the following suggestion entails. I feel like the choice of picking a disadvantage as a feat should have some slight benefit. In GURPS, you can select a disadvantage to gain points. And you can use those points on positive attributes, skills or advantages. I propose that if you select a disadvantage feat you should gain an additional choice of feats.

Example:

Ruja the Orc Barbarian takes a disadvantage feat at level 3, she is then prompted to choose 2 feats. Instead of selecting Weapon Focus (Battleaxe), she selected Sickly and was able to choose Weapon Focus (Battleaxe) AND Toughness.

Essentially I am suggesting that we could incorporate mechanical weaknesses into RP and still have some bonus to work with. This way its viable to take up a weakness on your non-commoner PCs.

I also would like to suggest additional disadvantage feats:

Feeble Skilled - Minus 10 to any skill
Weak Will - Minus 5 to will saves
Weak Fortitude - Minus 5 to fortitude saves
Weak Reflex - Minus 5 to reflex saves
Mumble Mouth - Additional 10% Arcane Spell Failure (Only for arcane spellcasters; does not include Warlock)
Deftly Freight - Minus 8 to saves vs fear
Unwitting Ally - Minus 8 to saves vs charm, confusion, or dominate.
Night Terrors - After resting, there is always a 5-10% chance to be stricken with a ghastly debuff that takes a toll on your waking hours. Debuffing you with -2 to all saves, skills, AC, attack, and 5% arcane spell failure.
Brash - Minus 5 to Bluff, Diplomacy and and Appraise. +2 to Intimidate.

That's all for now and I don't expect the disadvantage feats to be added. I just hope to see a more viable reason to pick a disadvantage mechanically rather than for roleplay's sake. I hope this will entice people to flush their characters out and build their characters with intended flaws, as most story book characters.

If anybody is interested in GURPS, you can find free versions of the handbook online in PDF format. It is really easy to play and would recommend this game to anybody who also enjoys D&D. The current version is V4.

Thank you,

BlueAce417

The penalties are way too high.

-8 to saves is equvalent to loss of 12 to 24 levels.

-10 to social skills is equivalent to alienist level penalties. Alienist is an insane scholar that contacted eldrich abomination and those told him/her their terrible secrets no mortal was meant to know. At the point where character gets -10 penalties, they're pretty much a raving lunatic.

Well they're not called "Fatal Flaws" for nothing. I'd willingly take some of these weaknesses if I could get something positive from it at the cost of one feat slot.

[aaron22]

wouldnt take 10 from a skill be best used if only can be take from a skill with at least 10 points already in it?

[BlueAce417]

wouldnt take 10 from a skill be best used if only can be take from a skill with at least 10 points already in it?

That's a good idea. That could reduce the allure for min/max builds. If it's implemented as a feat like the restricted schools feat is, it should probably either list the requirements for each one before they select their flaw or instead have everyone gain the Flaw Feat at level 10 or something.

[NegInfinity]

Well they're not called "Fatal Flaws" for nothing. I'd willingly take some of these weaknesses if I could get something positive from it at the cost of one feat slot.

That's not a weakness, that's on the level of major curse bestowed upon your character by several major gods at once.

I wouldn't really mind someone taking those, but if there's a "positive feat" you can take if you get enough negative feats then I definitely I wouldn't want this system.

It'll encourage minmaxing, and will be like that situation "I got extra point in strength by trading in my ability to blink".

[BlueAce417]

Well they're not called "Fatal Flaws" for nothing. I'd willingly take some of these weaknesses if I could get something positive from it at the cost of one feat slot.

That's not a weakness, that's on the level of major curse bestowed upon your character by several major gods at once.

I wouldn't really mind someone taking those, but if there's a "positive feat" you can take if you get enough negative feats then I definitely I wouldn't want this system.

It'll encourage minmaxing, and will be like that situation "I got extra point in strength by trading in my ability to blink".

I'm not going to defend all of them, you could even ignore the skill ones (or have them have at least so many points into it before they can select it), I was just spitballing ideas afterall. The point I was trying to make since the beginning was a viable reason for someone to pick a disadvantage feat over literally anything else.

More spitballs:
Unnatentive - Minus 8 to Concentration; Can only be selected if subject can cast at least one Arcane Spell, one Divine Spell, or one Invocation.
Fatigued Battler - At the end of each combat, there is a 5-10% chance that the subject will be debuffed for twice their level in rounds by -4 Strength, -4 Dexterity, and 50% speed.
Stuttering Heart - 20% Vulnerability to Electricity
Holy Scorn - Subject is treated for the purpose of spells and effects as evil even if not evil, 100% vulnerable to Divine damage, and unable to enter holy temples or be restored from death in one such area.

[NegInfinity]

The point I was trying to make since the beginning was a viable reason for someone to pick a disadvantage feat over literally anything else.

There's already a viable reason - roleplaying a concept or increasing game difficulty. Someone could try soloing bosses as a Commoner, for example.

[BlueAce417]

The point I was trying to make since the beginning was a viable reason for someone to pick a disadvantage feat over literally anything else.

There's already a viable reason - roleplaying a concept or increasing game difficulty. Someone could try soloing bosses as a Commoner, for example.

Let me rephrase that, I'm trying to make a legitimate way to incorporate flaws into fully flushed out characters. Not to create a self-defeating commoner, not to impose restrictions where one could have just made themselves stronger, but to create a reason someone would choose a flaw.

This is the same reason nobody uses the Calamity Ring in Dark Souls, there's no point in using it other than artificially making it stupidly difficult for yourself. You shouldn't have to use up a feat slot for a flaw when you could just pickup what you normally would have picked without the option in the first place. As it stands, we are in the Calamity Ring scenario, and that's bad because there's no draw to it for the common player. I want to see a reason someone would pick them that doesn't include self-defeating commoner PrCs.

[NegInfinity]

Let me rephrase that, I'm trying to make a legitimate way to incorporate flaws into

I can only see this as "we need more min-maxing options".

There was an earlier suggestion that rather than eating a feat on level up screen those should be greanted by npc in nexus. That made sense.

However I think that picking a disadvantage shouldn't grant you any possible benefits. That's just doesn't sound like a right idea.

I mean, if your character got mauled by a bear, set on fire, and suffered a horrible explosion that made them disfigured, deaf scarred, and having trouble walking... that won't suddenly make them, say, an amazing wizard or make them incredibly strong.

So the whole idea that picking disadvantages should allow one to pick a benefit to counter-balance that doesn't sound right to me.

[BlueAce417]

Let me rephrase that, I'm trying to make a legitimate way to incorporate flaws into

I can only see this as "we need more min-maxing options".

There was an earlier suggestion that rather than eating a feat on level up screen those should be greanted by npc in nexus. That made sense.

However I think that picking a disadvantage shouldn't grant you any possible benefits. That's just doesn't sound like a right idea.

I mean, if your character got mauled by a bear, set on fire, and suffered a horrible explosion that made them disfigured, deaf scarred, and having trouble walking... that won't suddenly make them, say, an amazing wizard or make them incredibly strong.

So the whole idea that picking disadvantages should allow one to pick a benefit to counter-balance that doesn't sound right to me.

Eh I guess you're right. But I don't see anyone picking these feats up otherwise. Unless there was some slight benefit like an extra skill point per level or whatever. Maybe specifying a feat was a bit too beneficial.