Forcing Quirks on Players.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:09 am

So I sit down to start a new 3.5/Pathfinder campaign for the school year. I have a really good DM, probably the best in the area. But my DM has the idea that he'll give out quirks to help promote role playing. We get three quirks, one good, one neutral and one bad.

My good quirk basically gives me heavy fortification at level 1, most would consider this very good.

My neutral quirk gives me a silly disfiguration that my character would feel the need to keep covered at all times.

My bad quirk is a strong phobia of the number 4.

I don't know why exactly, but I wanted to get up and leave right then and there. If I hadn't known this group for a year I would have. So I waited 5 minutes, made a polite excuse and left. I will not play if my character is forced to take silly character flaws. Emphasis on the silly, not the flaws. I don't think I'd have a problem if I got to pick the flaws myself or if they where serious in tone.

Has anyone else ever had a situation like this? Where you able to resolve it amicably?

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:53 am

sounds like the roots of 3rd edition there.

Player's Options in 2.5 had disadvantages and traits as part of its character point system.

you bought a disadvantage and got extra points to spend on other things.

Also, character points are used to purchase traits, and bonus character points are awarded for taking disadvantages. This is discussed in chapter six.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

i think something like this is also in 3rd because i saw it from some book in eTools.

the phobia can be silly if you want it, but i think your DM idea is for you to come up with something about it...as you said to inspire roleplaying.

so what do YOU want this phobia of the number 4 to be and how does your character react?

does he become a berserher and destroy everything in sight when encountering the number 4? does he cover in a corner and wet himself?

what connection can you make with it?

triskaidekaphobia is real, so much so that some buildings actually dont have a 13th floor, but go from 12 to 14 being next.

there is a LOT of fun you could have with this, and MAYBE, even screw with the DM with it.

assume you skip counting the numbers containing 4 when something costs 8 gp, you only pay 7 because you count: 1,2,3,5,6,7,8

maybe your character fear is such that it doesnt really cause anything to happen to them, you just mentally ignore and dont ever even see the number anywhere.

in a room with 4 doors each numbered, you see the numbers 1,2,3 on those doors, but just see scratch marks on the fourth door, and cant make out anything actually written on it.

of course, how YOU treat the phobia would be defendant on what class you are, but you can have LOTS of fun with these things.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:55 am

I'm not sure I would have walked out, but at best I would have just ignored it.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:13 am

Personally, I get irked whenever a GM makes up a houserule like that and doesn't even bother to talk to the group about it before immediately implementing it in the game. For example, I would be strongly opposed to a houserule that forces random quirks on me without my approval, but wouldn't mind a system wherein I came up with three quirks of my own, subject to GM approval. If the GM had talked about the system for ten minutes before implementing it, a compromise like this could've been reached.

Count Arioch the 28th · Thu Sep 15, 2011 4:30 am

I've thrown in things in my games where you would get a flaw and feat (both predetermined) for doing certain things (At a shrine properly unhallowed and desecrated to Falazure, you could gain Improved Turning for free in exchange for the Feeble flaw, to give an in-game example that a player took advantage of, or a similar bargain at the shrine of Garyx where you accept Vulnerable feat for +2 bonus to caster levels when you cast spells of the Fire descriptor that the party druid took)

The idea seems okay, but I would let the players choose their neutral, bad, and good quirks from the list rather than roll randomly. The idea seems flavorful and interesting, but I've never liked random rolls.

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:42 am

I'd talk to him about it. Basically say "I'll take quirks. But I will pick my OWN quirks. I mean, you have no idea if you're seriously screwing someone's character concept by assigning quirks at random. Give me the list and I'll pick them out."

Although you should use many more words than that to come at it roundabout. Gently point out the problems he's causing and it's really sort of insulting to imply that he doesn't trust the players to pick their own quirks.

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:50 pm

I think the OP was willing to roll with everything process-wise, he just despised "fear of the number 4". Because that is legitimately a stupid, stupid flaw. How do you even role-play that?

The way I read it, he would have been fine with anything remotely serious.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:27 pm

fectin wrote:I think the OP was willing to roll with everything process-wise, he just despised "fear of the number 4". Because that is legitimately a stupid, stupid flaw. How do you even role-play that?

The way I read it, he would have been fine with anything remotely serious.

That's exactly right. If my character had claustrophobia or pyrophobia, those are reasonable things to be afraid of, I could RP that. I think one character got the flaw that they are covered in green and purple polkadots, that doesn't strike me as good role play, that strikes me as juvenile.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:46 pm

Really? Because what I got from that flaw is that he's familiar with the "four means death" phenomenon and believes it to be incredibly bad luck. It still might mesh very poorly with the character concept you'd been hoping for, but it's not necessarily an absurd kind of thing. There's plenty of people in the far east today who have exactly that fear.

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:34 pm

Chamomile wrote:Really? Because what I got from that flaw is that he's familiar with the "four means death" phenomenon and believes it to be incredibly bad luck. It still might mesh very poorly with the character concept you'd been hoping for, but it's not necessarily an absurd kind of thing. There's plenty of people in the far east today who have exactly that fear.

yeah, it's basically an culture alt. version of the fear of 13.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:55 pm

Except that four comes up a lot more times than thirteen.

Juton · Post by **Juton** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:27 pm

RadiantPhoenix wrote:Except that four comes up a lot more times than thirteen.

There are 6 PCs in the campaign, if one can't make it that means my character would be freaking out because he's with four adventurers. Gamers are always missing games for one reason or another, so it would be the defacto norm.

I've resolved the issue with my DM, instead of being afraid of the number 4 I chose to take on the old Cleric requirement that I only use blunt weapons. Letting a player choose their quirk makes a huge difference, it empowers them, and lets them keep mechanical and thematic control over their character.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:02 pm

I think there are times when randomized 'quirks' can work, but it helps if they aren't meddling with the character's head, but with something the character has a lot less control over. I remember the old legacy tables in L5R, which would give you awesome or cowardly ancestors, evil magic items you had to safeguard, and so on. Sure, some results were essentially screw-yous (it was AEG), but the basic idea that your family's history and fortunes were things tossed on the waves of history, and you just had to deal with them - that was very evocative.