Talk:Hatred (3.5e Flaw)

Valid points, Marasmusine. I suppose I could include a note about clearing the race selection with the DM. But I'm at a loss regarding an alternative to a will saving throw. I would welcome suggestions.--Sir Dinadan (talk) 18:49, 30 September 2013 (MDT)

Scrap a save altogether. A flaw "must have a numeric effect on a character's specific capabilities" - the player shouldn't have a chance to avoid this. In my opinion this flaw has three other, uh, flaws: 1) It relies on a specific kind of entity - assume the DM is running random published adventures. The Player picks hatred towards gnomes. How often will they suffer a drawback (compared with the SRD flaws)? 2) It enforces PC behaviour. 3) If you have a fighter that intends to kill goblins, then picking this with "goblins" is no flaw at all, it's a bonus feat.

I know it's awful that my complaint is basically "all of it"! My suggestion would be to broaden out what triggers the hatred, and to have a numeric penalty. Something like "Choose a kind of creature from the list below. Whenever you see that kind of creature, you have trouble focusing on anything else and suffer a -4 penalty to Will saves and Perception checks." - and the list has things like "humanoids with darkvision" (it might specifically be orcs, but this makes it relevant more often). Marasmusine (talk) 01:18, 1 October 2013 (MDT)

I see what you mean. I only think I would disagree with one of your points. Number three, specifically. Hatred of goblins would not be so innocuous. Suppose my party sets up an ambush, and my character blows cover and charges too soon because he saw goblins amongst the enemy. Or pursues the retreating goblins despite the likelihood that he is running into a trap. Or suppose the party conducts a parley with the ogre king, and my character stabs one of his goblin underlings. I could go on and on, but I think I've made my point. Regarding the flaw as a whole, what you are suggesting doesn't sound like what I had in mind at all when I made this flaw. However, if you think that it is unbalanced as is, I will not object to its removal.--Sir Dinadan (talk) 11:48, 1 October 2013 (MDT)