Introducing Character Flaws?

[Aarrum 0]

 There are  a great many rpg's out there that off character flaws for interesting role playing, and then offer the players some kind of reward for such. My players have a moderately shallow background for their characters so far, given that 90% of the generation was done on the random table. So I'd like to find a way to encourage a deeper roleplay for these guys.

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to introduce flaws/perks for a character in this game? My thought was to take the Deadlands list of hinderances and edges, but merely convert the numbers and affects to something within the 40k rules.

[Gregorius21778 249]

My advise from experience with many an RPG-System offering character flaws as part of the character creation process:

Don´t go there!

The players will alway find ways of gathering a lot of "disadvantages" that will not be any disadvantage. Either to their special role in the gaming group (stuttering and horrbily disfigured combat monsters; telepathic psykers with many missing fingers or a completely crippled hand; near sighted knife-fighting thief-assassines; combat-shy scholars; witchhunters which are hated by witches; vows to never-ever use poison taken up to have the points for that marksman skill...) or which are more hindering to the game and their fellow gamers then to everything else (Zealots who will never tell a lie and will never-ever disguise, pc´s that hate the nobility/psykers/clergs/childeern and will never-ever cooperate with them, combat monsters who have to slay EVERY opponent they fight and will-never take capitives; honor codes that excuse violent behaviour for the least of all slides; sadistic tendencies to justifiy revealling in blood and murder; and my personal favorite::::: !ENEMY!-Flaws which give ONE player the points and give by designe ALL OF THE GROUP a problem to deal with.)

 

No, do not go there

[Aarrum 0]

Well, by that logic, it could be just as painful to say that a character could make very bad roleplaying decisions to begin with. The goal here isn't necessarily to introduce flaws, for the sake of flaws, but to do what many good stories do. Create a character that makes a decision based off his flaw, that isn't the best for the party, but is what that character would decide. The Adept has many options during investigation, but if a bloodthirsty adept existed, he wouldn't draw a pistol in every scenario, but he would find a cat's paw to end a scenario in blood shed. As a GM, you would hold the final say in whether or not a witch could be hated by other witchs. 

[Gregorius21778 249]

In that case, I advise to pay visit to the DarkReign forums. I remember there was something available to download which should provide you with your needs

http://www.darkreign40k.com/drjoomla/index.php/new-rules/careers/382-starting-backgrounds

Their was something more complete and allowing for far more tailoring..but I cannot find it any longer.

 

Oh! And I do not say "do not allow very bad roleplaying decisions". I simply say one should not get points / benefits for it.


last but not least, it might be best to give it the form of the "background packages" in IH. But especially tailored for the said charackter.

But again: To me, that´is for fostering munchkins.

[Aarrum 0]

 I can agree with that a bit. Offering a reward can often moot the flaw. I just find it hard to encourage a player to have a flaw, for no sake other than hindering the party.

[Gregorius21778 249]

Well, as far as I see it players should not encouraged to have "flaws". They should be encouraged to have "character"

As far as I know flaws from different flaw systems, they have a mechanic which enforces either a penalty on some stats or enforces/encourages a certain behaviour ("gain benefit if you do X"; "gain penalty if you do Y", "have to do Z unless you path a certain role"). Thereby, to me "flaws" are a part of the game mechanics, and not of the role playing, which are a player gets encouraged to pic for gaining some benefit. If somebody tries to encourage a penalty with a bonus, it is the natural reaction of the one who has to choose to get the lesser evil...or something that is not evil at all to him.

"Character" is something that gives the figur...well, character. If a player depicts a certain pc as being a womanizer 90% of the time I am quiet fine with the fact the pc suddenly stops flirting with this beautiful female npc as soon as her actions/questions start getting fishy. Even without any dice role demanded on his part for breaking out of his "bad habbit". He plays his figure and the figure gains character from the described actions. Even if they have no impact on crucial moments in the game. Just like a player playing up his pc´s foundness for green tee, cultivated music and dislike for getting dirty.

 But that is not the kind of reply you asked for in the first place, so let me try something more constructive for your topic (and thanks for bearing me!):

How to incorporate flaws as a mechanic in the character creation?
First of all, each flaw must have a benefit by design. The easy approach is xp and I would advise to try to design individual flaws that a worth 100xp each and ensure that a pc can not take more the three flaws in total. Unless, the ability has an obvious "twin" as a bonus.

The mental disorders (p.235 core rules) could make usefull flaws on a "Minor" basis. On an equal mechanic, certain behavior flaws could work. Flaws which enforce the pc to behave in a certain way everytime unless he passes the test.

"Prayer before battle(+100xp)":
The pc will spend a half action for praying to the god-emporer or to calm/incite the machine spirit of his weapon.

"Rude behaviour"(Talented: Intimidation)
The pc has a hard to time not to behave like bully, even in non-aggressive social situations. All of his social interactions in non-rough situations (formal occasions, conversation with a cleric, talking to figures of authority) will receive a -5/-10 penalty (GM´s decision).

"Compulsive Liar" (Talented: Deceive)
Whenever telling something, the pc has an urge to incorporate a little lie which will make him look better. If he describes his deeds, he will make himself shine. If meeting a stranger he expects to never meat again, he will tell stories to make himself appear more interesting. And so on

Towering (Max Wounds+2)
Chosen at character creation, the pc will not role for wounds but will receive the maximum possible +1.  As a draw back, standard clothes will never fit him. Thereby, he has to buy "good quality" or it will be "bad quality" to him due to "unconfortable size".

Biased (+100xp)
The pc has a strong bias against a certain group of people (Workers, Nobles, Criminals, Clerics, Women/Men; Soldiers; Enforcers/Arbites; etc). and has -10 on all social interaction roles with them (other then Intimidation).

Battle Shock(+100xp)
At the begining of each fight with deadly intent, the pc must pass a Fright test (frightening).

Not used to pain (+100xp)
If receiving three or more points of damage, the pc will get stunned (unless the test is passed).

Religious Awe (+100xp)
The pc will not stand the defilement or destructing of holy objects or (perhaps) attacks against clerics

A scholasts heartblood (+100xp)
The same as above, but for books and other storages of knowledge

Friend of fine drink(+100xp)
Will drink alcohol if given the opporunity

 

[Brother Praetus 11]

@ Gregorius21778

Those aren't to shabby.  Pretty well balanced.  I'd give you a "thumbs up," but with no such emoticon available we must settle for a "" instead.

-=Brother Praetus=-

[Gregorius21778 249]

First of all: Thanks, Brother.

A thing that marvels me to no small extent is the fact that the majority of all players get very uncooperative as soon as they believe to smell railroading on the part of the GM.

GM Railroading is defined as the GM forcing a pc to act in a certain way for the sake of his adventure plan

Turn the source of the railroading from "a Game Master" into "a Game Mechanic" and turn the ends from "for the sake of the adventure" to "for the sake of maximizing your character stats" (and it is NOTHING else because if it would just be about RPG, you could do this anyway), suddenly players turn from "picking up the pitchfork and the torch" to "cheerful drooling away".

To justify my ranting and not to become completely off-topic, some more constructive ideas
@Aarum: If I reach the point where you say that my ranting in your topic is to much, tell me and I will be polite enough to simply stop bothering you


Adept related flaws:

Bad sight (100xp)
All the study of scriptures turned you near sighted over the years. For all perception roles involving sight for something more then Perception Bonus in meters, you are -10. This can countered by wearing glasses made for you (20 Thrones; scarce) which will be knocked off/destroyed by the first head to the head. You cannot gain the "Accute Senses (Vision)" Talent. At your GM´s descrition, the disadvantage can be bought off after undergoing laser treatment by the Adeptus Mechanicus (or installing augmetic eyes)

Overaffluent speaker (100xp)
You cannot say things the simple way and alway take lenghty explainations and tend to use terms less learned men simply cannot comprehend. Which tend to irritate and/or annoy them. You have to pass a +10 willpower test to say things simple and will other receive -5/-10 penalty if coming across as upnosed or "wimsy scholar" would matter (GM´s decision; anyone with a Low Gothic beyound 38 could ge annoyed). As an additional benefit, you gain +5 on "Low Gothic".

Hybris Lexicae (100xp)
In your "fields of expertise" (any Scholastic Lore you are at least learned) you cannot be wrong or without information. You tend to say "I know" where the correct formulations should be "I believe to remember to have heared, but I am not sure". In your fields of expertise, failure automatically leads to an additional level of failure.  Unless you pass a willpower+10 test.

Arbitrator related flaws:

Callous (100xp):
Your teachings, service and experience left you cold hearted and have trouble to allow yourself any emotions or see/declare things from anything but the "matter of fact" view. Hatred and despise if of course an exception, as it is proper for an imperial citizen. You are -10 on all Charm test and/or Deceive test to feign positive emotions (like "caring" or "bein friendly") unless you pass an +10 willpower test.  You can never be "Talented" for "Charm".

Distrusting (100xp or Paranoia)
You never trust anyone who hasn´t proofed to be trustworthy. New aqauintances feel this and you receive a -10 penalty on friendly social interaction if you do not pass a +10 willpower test (or a Deceive test to "fake it").



 

[MKX 248]

Gregorius21778 said:

Don´t go there!

I'd second that, its a lot of extra work for a GM to keep account of who's clinically psychotic, who's paranoid, who's got half the imperium hunting them down for a 50,000TG bounty, who has an irrational hatred of hats and of course once the proverbial crap hits the fan... WHO CONVENIENTLY FORGETS all their disadvantages and becomes a highly tuned killing machine capable of functioning perfectly rationally.

There are quite a few of the Inq Handbook backgrounds which could at-best be described as an 'unfortunate' places to come from that have a fair, quid-pro-quo system of you get some things that will screw you around and a few advantages, aside from that if someone really wants to be disadvantaged in-game past their history, I blow their legs off with a melta and give them a wheelchair.

[Gregorius21778 249]

Assassine related flaws:

Signature(100xp):
Either due to your overboarding ego or some religious rule, you have to leave a certain signature with an intended victim. Something that will either allow somebody to trace the work back to you (if personal sign) or to the cult that spawned you. If it is a personal thing, anybody passing a test for Common Lore (Underworld) will be able to trace it back to you. The difficulty depens on your ranks (which is assumed to be equal to your "fame"). The test is very hard (-30), but the difficulty is lowered by one step for every rank above the second. If you are spawned by a cult and it is the sign of your cult, the check is always challenging. You have to path a willpower test  +10 not leave the mark at the site of your deed. It can be hidden (Concealment vs. Search), but must b e placed.

This only counts for intended victims. If you are attacked, their is no need to leave the sign.

Assasines Code of Honour(100xp):
You deem downing a certain type of target to be dishounorable. This could be "no women, no children", "no clerics", "not the learned", "nobody unarmed" or something similiar (GM approval needed). If you ever have to down such a target, you must pass a willpower+10 test. If you succeed, everything is fine. If not, you are unpleased with your self and/or guilty ridden to the point that you are loosing a fate point.

Bounty on your head (100xp):
For a deed past, a bounty is on your head. If you stay in one place to long, somebody will find you and try to collect the money which is on your head. If on a mission which is not in an isolated place (i.e onboard a space hulk) each sessions that is played, the GM roles an Inquiry check as for Body Hunters (see core rules for stats). If during the ongoing mission/adventure 10 success are accumulated, bounty hunters will lay an ambush for your. Their will be one of them for every three ranks you have.

 

[Gregorius21778 249]

For those from "better areas" of void ships or hives:

Weak Immun System (100xp)
The pc ist prone to infections and illnesses since his immune system never had much contact to most illneses due to a more sanitary environment or to just a very limited number of health threats. The pc has a -10 penalty against illnesses, infections and poisons of all kind and cannot gain a Resistence Talent against those.
 

[Aarrum 0]

 Gregorious,

 

Your efforts here are far above anything that I actually expected to see. My original intent was to search for advice and/or ideas, instead I get a great pool of ideas and a few I will blatantly copy, lol.

 

Since your ideas on the word of flaw vs character, I'd come up with a new idea that I'd like feedback on. 

Dark Heresy is a world of flavor, stories, character backgrounds, and flavor all matter a great deal. To further encourage a deeper roleplaying experience, would a reward for a rich character background be a wise decision? The simple paragraph with a general outline about a boy trying to prove himself netting a small bonus, to the detailed account of events leading up to his mental instability netting a higher bonus. IE, 25-50 for something simple, and maybe 100-200 for great details? Of course, if I introduced this alongside of the flaw system I'm seeing here, I would cap the total bonus with the cap you suggested for the flaws, at 300.

[Gregorius21778 249]

Hi Aarom,

I  happy that you consider my contributions to be "overall helpfull". After I was finished with my temper, I realized that my first reply did nothing to answer the question of your topic. A fact I consider bad style & and wanted to apologize for by providing something usefull. 

The idea of providing a little bonus for a flesh out background story sounds fine, I would even encourage you to give 50xp to 100xp for it since 25xp are next to nothing in this system (with 100xp being the smallest margin that will allow any advance. As it comes to encouraging a certain behaviour, I would always advice to give a benefit the subject will profit from "right here, right now" (see also diverse books about training dogs. ). 

Another option is a steady supply of xp per session if the players simply "play their character" (whatever this is like)

Methodes:

 

• Discussions about what to do is spoken "in character" rather then by the players
• Players take some time to describe some things that are purely "character"
• Player takes some form off set back for his pc (spending thorns, making himself vurneable) just for "it would be in character"
   

This (or any other points) could be formed into a simple "three (to five) points checklist" for every charackter each evening. A pc will receive an additional 20xp +10xp per checked point for roleplaying. BUT if you do something like this, make sure your players know in advance what you are checking.  And apply common sense, otherwise the pc will simply start to search for ways to spend thrones "in character" to buy XP. Which is the opposite for what should be encouraged. Sadly.

[zombieneighbours 1]

I have had a number of characters over the years who have been made by their flaws. My daughter of ether, who had the anachronism flaw is one for the characters I look back on most fondly, from her accidental racism and outlandish clothing through to her utter inability too function in a society that was not royal ethonautical society sanctum meant that she constantly needed to have a chaperon, thankfully her Laser pistol helped to clear up misunderstandings with the NWOs agents who invariably did not appreciate walking proof of that Queen Victoria's government put men on the moon long before Apollo.

 

[Artemesia2 0]

I have actually been reading through the rules for Big Eyes Small Mouth(oh god i am such a loser) and they have a whole section of character creation dedicated to character flaws. They usually come with some sort of "positive" like a meager to decent EXP equivalent bonus depending on the severity of the defect. It may be worth someone far more clever than myself's time to take a look at them and adapt them for DH/RT.

I'm not creative or dedicated enough to come up with anything of my own, so here's a page to show what I mean.

 

Defects!

[LuciusT 128]

In my gaming experience, the best "flaw" system I've seen are the "story flaws" introduced in the current edition of Ars Magica.

Ars Magica turned the concept on it's head and instead of these flaws being "this thing your character is bad at" or "this annoying thing character must/must not do" these "story flaws" are really story hooks. These are "flaws" like Enemy, Dark Secret, Close Family Ties, Plagued by Monster... etc. Each character can only have one "story flaw."  Further, it is the expectation of the system that every flaw does not come into play in every adventure... instead in adventure #1 character A's Enemy appears while adventure #2 is sparked by a call for help from character B's Close Family Ties.

Interestingly, Rogue Trader (and I think Dark Heresy: Ascension) have adopted a similar idea with the Rival and Enemy "talents" which are really flaws and could (IMO, should) be used as "story flaws" rather than just mechanical penalities.

[Gregorius21778 249]

Hi Lucius,

while I agree that such flaws as enemy are very good for providing plot hooks or "spicing up the adventure", their is one thing turning sour for me. The "reward". In most systems, one player pics the enemy flaw and one players gets some xp or some other benefit for it. But it is the whole group that have to deal with the enemy once it shows up. This is fine as long as it is "taking turn" and everybody got one (so Ars Magica properbly does it right), but in other systems  I do not see why only one pc should be given the xp where it is a team afford to handle the bad guy once he appears.

GURPS had nice way of dealign with this in pointing at the option of giving "group disadvantages". Enemies, bad reputation etc could be things sticken to the whole group. And the whole group got the bonus for it.

[zombieneighbours 1]

Gregorius21778 said:

Hi Lucius,

while I agree that such flaws as enemy are very good for providing plot hooks or "spicing up the adventure", their is one thing turning sour for me. The "reward". In most systems, one player pics the enemy flaw and one players gets some xp or some other benefit for it. But it is the whole group that have to deal with the enemy once it shows up. This is fine as long as it is "taking turn" and everybody got one (so Ars Magica properbly does it right), but in other systems  I do not see why only one pc should be given the xp where it is a team afford to handle the bad guy once he appears.

GURPS had nice way of dealign with this in pointing at the option of giving "group disadvantages". Enemies, bad reputation etc could be things sticken to the whole group. And the whole group got the bonus for it.

 

Sounds to me like an issue with the way you, or your GM is handling the flaw, rather than the flaw itself. After all it is his enemy flaw, not the groups. I.E. is should be an enemy that interferes with his personal agenda, not the groups. The enemy should come into play when the PC is attempting to achieve something that is only of importance to him, that said ofcause even when it isn't handled that way, the group still benifits from the EXP spent on his character, as it allows the character to exceed what is expected of him, their by benifiting the group..

 

[graver2 4]

zombieneighbours said:

 

Gregorius21778 said:

 

Hi Lucius,

while I agree that such flaws as enemy are very good for providing plot hooks or "spicing up the adventure", their is one thing turning sour for me. The "reward". In most systems, one player pics the enemy flaw and one players gets some xp or some other benefit for it. But it is the whole group that have to deal with the enemy once it shows up. This is fine as long as it is "taking turn" and everybody got one (so Ars Magica properbly does it right), but in other systems  I do not see why only one pc should be given the xp where it is a team afford to handle the bad guy once he appears.

GURPS had nice way of dealign with this in pointing at the option of giving "group disadvantages". Enemies, bad reputation etc could be things sticken to the whole group. And the whole group got the bonus for it.

 

 

 

Sounds to me like an issue with the way you, or your GM is handling the flaw, rather than the flaw itself. After all it is his enemy flaw, not the groups. I.E. is should be an enemy that interferes with his personal agenda, not the groups. The enemy should come into play when the PC is attempting to achieve something that is only of importance to him, that said ofcause even when it isn't handled that way, the group still benifits from the EXP spent on his character, as it allows the character to exceed what is expected of him, their by benifiting the group..

 

 

 

By the RAW, one agent's enemy is everyone's enemy. For the crunchy rulesy part of it, if one character in the retune has a rival or enemy, then everyone in the retune receives the penalty for using influence on that group. Everything else is up to the GM, but going off of the Tainted by Association in Ascension pg 110, DH seems to advocate a stance closer to what Gregorius describes. Besides, why would an Enemy leave the other PCs alone just because they don't have him./her/it as an actual Enemy talent? Do the PCs make a habit of not utterly ruining the days of associates, comrades, bodyguards, and personal friends of their enemies especially when said friends, comrades, associates and bodyguards always tend to be around said enemy ready to help that enemy out of what ever jam the PCs choose to put him/her/it in?

[zombieneighbours 1]

I was refering to the more general norm with regards to enemy flaws in roleplaying games other than Dark Heresy. I am not really that familiur with ascention level characters, so i will read the influence rules tomorrow, and see how that effects my opinion on this.

As for why an enemy would focus their actions against the target of their vendetta, let me ask you a question, if you had sworn to kill a man, and you bumped into him, while he was out on the town with his entire rugby team, would you choose that momment in which to strike. I certainly wouldn't. Equally, If I where playing a lone acolyte in a game, i would be hesitant to attack the target of my mission while he was in a meeting with a group of heavily armed pychopaths, rather i would wait until he was alone.

Next, not all enemies take their revenge through physical violance. An enemy could as easily use Buerocrocy as a weapon to make the targets life a misory, but consider targetting the friends of the subject of their vendetta as being to much of a risk, after they already risk their job and freedom abusing their power as they do.

It is also possible the enemy is motivated by obsession, to  such an individual, hurting people other than the target of their obsession is simply pointless.

When you treat Flaws as being part of a living breathing world, populated with people who have genuine motivations to achieve their goal, but also motivations, then it very quickly becomes possible to see why some one might carry out a petty and very specific vendetta against a single individual.

 

For that matter, there are good reasons why two or more characters might share the same individual as an enemy, at varying levels, representing the varying degrees of chaos that the enemy brings into their lives.

 

[Gregorius21778 249]

zombieneighbours said:

As for why an enemy would focus their actions against the target of their vendetta, let me ask you a question, if you had sworn to kill a man, and you bumped into him, while he was out on the town with his entire rugby team, would you choose that momment in which to strike. I certainly wouldn't.

No you woudln´t.  But as you place the bomb to end this guys life while he is watchinig DVD (or take out the breaks of his car, to be a little less drastic), you do not care for his team mates being with him at the moment, either.


Unless "the enemy" is somebody acting on a "I take him out in single combat" basis or someone with a certain honour code that forbids him to act against the rest of the group ("no colletaral damage"), I think it is more likely that the "enemy actions" will harm the group than that it is not. Especially if the enemy is into "social damage". Once you have an effective smear campagine running against you for...let´s say "****" your friends have to decide: not be seen with you or or getting cut and/or harassed by people as well. 
 

[zombieneighbours 1]

Gregorius21778 said:

zombieneighbours said:

 

As for why an enemy would focus their actions against the target of their vendetta, let me ask you a question, if you had sworn to kill a man, and you bumped into him, while he was out on the town with his entire rugby team, would you choose that momment in which to strike. I certainly wouldn't.

 

No you woudln´t.  But as you place the bomb to end this guys life while he is watchinig DVD (or take out the breaks of his car, to be a little less drastic), you do not care for his team mates being with him at the moment, either.


Unless "the enemy" is somebody acting on a "I take him out in single combat" basis or someone with a certain honour code that forbids him to act against the rest of the group ("no colletaral damage"), I think it is more likely that the "enemy actions" will harm the group than that it is not. Especially if the enemy is into "social damage". Once you have an effective smear campagine running against you for...let´s say "****" your friends have to decide: not be seen with you or or getting cut and/or harassed by people as well. 
 

There is ofcause some collateral damagge, but the additional build points on your sheet will general benifit the party regularly, where the effects of the flaw will dispropotionately effect the subject of the flaw.

 

[Kasatka 157]

The easiest way to handle flaws without writing up table upon table of options for different homeworld/career choices would be to get each player to write 100 words about their character. Those that do this get 100 extra starting Xp, those that do more than 100 (without just droning on and padding it out) get 150. Players who choose to place a restriction on their character such as "i will never use chems", "i must protect the weak", "i will never kill an unarmed adversary" should recieve an additional 150Xp, for a total of 300xp possible starting bonus. Players must then stick to their background choices ingame, or be docked 50xp per session they fail to follow their code or limitation.

Each game however, you should go around the table and get each player to nominate a Player Of the Game (or POG as we call them) to recieve an additional XP reward, dependant on their actions. Simple things such as communicating clearly and precisely with the GM over the parties course of action in a tricky situation or simply doing something in character that entertained the others could net 50XP, up to 200xp for something like critically charming their way through a room full of armed guards and walking off with a target unimpeded or sneaking into a hostile base and incapacitate all the perimeter guards.

Obviously the main rewards for good roleplaying should be an enjoyable experience by all and, if it furthers the plot, fate points. However you could also do the opposite and dock players fate points if they purposefully screw with the plot or ruin the fun of the evening for the other players. Other rewards and penalties should be based on ingame events. such as the priests Peer[Ecclesiarchy] being replaced with Peer[Mutants] if he found to be condoning equal rights for mutants and subsequently ousted and hunted by the Ecclesiarchy.

[Lucrosium Malice 0]

 For our groups we have always given 100-400 xp for a good background story (couple of pages) that tells us about your character and where it fits in the universe. It also helped the GMs so that the story could weave in and around those particular backstories.

I would also suggest awarding extra xp for good role-play, especially if a self imposed weakness/flaw is given.

For example, I made a Moritat assassin that was a hive mutant. Got good rolls for my mutations and had increased Str/T and decreased Ag, and Unnatural Str. It made him a monster in hand to hand combat but I only had a 35 Ag, and that was after buying it one level to meet some requirements. He made it to rank 6 never increasing his Ag. My reasoning was since he was so hulking in nature and size it didn't seem right that I would be agile. So I never got sprint, Agility increases or Acrobatics for example. I never took Chem use since I was illiterate. These are pseudo flaws and/or weaknesses that gave the character more realism rather than a munchkin monster (which he kinda was). But then again I wish I had more agility since the Alpha Legion marine blew my leg off (missed two dodges) and bled out.

Giving a character flaws by avoiding certain skills is a great way to do this without awarding xps. But that does take some personal responsibility on the players part to do so.