Flaws

From Sagataflwiki

Revision as of 19:19, 2 December 2010

Flaws are DisAdvantages of a psychological nature, indicating that the character is vulnerable to specific stimuli, having a certain probability to "trigger" on encountered provications or temptations.

(move this: Examples include the potential for sexual activity (the Sexual Orientation Flaw, worse if synergizing with the Lecherous Flaw), or for indulging in good food, drink, company or art (Flaws such as Gourmmet or Glutton, Fond of Drink, Sociable and Connoiseur), or provocations (Pride or Bad Temper), or (often unpleasant and politically incorrect) forms of bias of various shapes and against various types of targets (underestimation, hatred, e.g., against a particular sex, religion, ethnicity, race, culture, or sexual orientation or preference).)

Almost all Flaws are measured by a Roll Strength, the number of dice rolled being constant for each Flaw of each character, but with the RD depending upon the strength (magnitude) of the stimuli, and in the case of som Flaws also upon how long ago it was that the character last satisfied his need or urge.

It is possible to create and play a character who has no Flaws at all, but it is extremely expensive. Converely, only a small amount of compensatory points are given for choosing to create and play a character with many Flaws.

This article, Flaw Selection, contains the actual Flaws that may be "purchased" with Flaw Points.

Flaw Poins

Flaw Points must be spent to "purchase" Flaws, thus a smaller number of Flaw Points is desirable from the point of view that favours self-control and freedom to act. The base number that a character has, and which must thus be spent during character creation, is 5 Flaw Points. Choosing to have fewer is an Advantage and so costs aDvantage Points, as shown in the below tables, while choosing to have more is a DisAdvantage and so gives aDvantage Points, although eventually with severe diminishing returns.

Any amount of Flaw Points between 4 and 8 is eminently reasonable and reasonably priced, but beyond that the pricing becomes progressively punitive, in order to discourage extremes. New players in particular should never stray outside of the 3 to 10 Flaw Point interval.

Be sure to spend all Flaw Points. If you cannot, go back and re-purchase the correct, lower amount. Or if you find yourself enamoured by many of the Flaws, and desiring to put all of them into your character, then go back and purchase more Flaw Points (as long as you don't stride outside of the guideline amounts if you are a new player).

This article contains the actual Flaws that you may choose from, in a typical world. Flaw Selection

Types of Flaws

There are five basic types of Flaws: Standard Flaws, Mandatory Flaws, Multi-Flaws, Special Flaws and Unusual Flaws.

Special Flaws usually modify Standard Flaws. Unsual Flaws are more or less mandatory for non-Humans, most often for non-biological entiites such as Undead and Elementals; they otherwise are used like Standard Flaws.

Mandatory Flaws are mandatory for a given species, age-range and/or sex (but can usually be strengthened or lessened via Special Flaws), with Sexual Orientation being the one Mandatory Flaw that all non-child Humans have. Multi-Flaws are combination Flaws that combine weaker versions of several Standard Flaws and also sometimes theoretical Flaws that do not exist as Standard Flaws.

All types are explained further, below.

Standard Flaws

Standard Flaws are most like those in certain other RPG systems. Lecherous, Bad Temper, Gluttony.

They are vulnerabilities to potentially encountered triggers/stimuli/provocations, and must be rolled for whenever the character comes across a credible trigger at an appropriate RD (a "non-credible trigger" would be an RD higher than 12, although for low-magnitude Flaws, 2d12 and 3d12 ones, the GM can - and probably should - not demand rolls against RD 12 (or even RD 11 in the case of 2d12 Flaws)).

Some Standard Flaws have a subject, for instance it is a rare character who is prejudiced in some way against everyone (it is possible, but is an unusual special case Standard Flaw). Rather the prejudice is against a specific defined target group, such as Jews, or heterosexuals, or Simulationists, or honest and honourable people.

In some cases a Standard Flaw also needs a flavour, for instance prejudice is never just prejudice but always takes a particular shape, in the form of underestimation, or verbal rage/attacks, or attempts (or desire) to physically hurt the target group. Usually this is defined by the name of the Flaw, for instance ther simply is no Prejudice Flaw. Instead there are a number of Flaws that represent various forms and shapes and flavour that prejudice can take.

Standard Flaws can have RD modifiers, e.g. a character with the Fond of Drink Flaw can have a +2 RD modifier for beers/ales and a -1 RD modifier for fruit wines. Thus he is less likely to "trigger" (higher RD) on beer and ale, and slightly more likely to "trigger" on cider and other fermented fruits, with a "normal" probability of "triggering" on meads and grape wines (on and more exotic beverages, such as kumiss).

Standard Flaws are subject to the usual rules on Similar Flaws.

Mandatory (Standard) Flaws

Each species in a Sagatafl world may be defined by having certain Mandatory Flaws, Standard Flaws that are biologically hardwired into the species at a certain level. Sometimes only a certain sub-species, or sex, or age category, or range of age categories, may have a Mandatory Flaw, but it is alwys biological in nature.

Humans of both sexes, for instance, manifest the Sexual Orientation Flaw upon leaving the childhood stage. The choice of Sexual Orientation is either Heterosexual or Homosexual (see further down) and is made at characte creation, even if the character starts a child and it will be many Years before the character leaves the childhood.

The Sexual Orientation Flaw marks them as being vulnerable to seduction from eligible targets, and therefore does not correspond fully to what present day people think of as sexual orientation. For instance one can envision a man in ancient Greece who has sex with his wife for the purpose of reproduction, but is completely immune to her allure, and likewise immune to seduction from other women, instead being vulnerable to seduction by other males (for added realism, he'd then have an RD penalty for young men, being more vulnerable to seduction from them, and an RD bonus for men his own age and older). To repeat: Sexual Orientation is not the same as sexual behaviour.

The Sexual Orientation Flaw is instictive and urge-driven and makes the character vulnerable to seduction.

Mandatory Flaws work like Standard Flaws, and in some cases can be modified by Special Flaws. Sexual Orientation can be modified by Special Flaws such as Lecherous, Reduced Sex Drive and Bisexual, the first two adding or subtracting dice from the Sexual Orientation Flaw, and Bisexual modifying the Sexual Orientation Flaw such that the character is vulnerable to seduction from both sexes.

Favoured Flaws

A few Flaws are designated as Favoured, universally (i.e. regardless of setting). This means that their Flaw Point value is increased slightly, for low- and medium roll strengths, so as to encourage players to choose them. Currently, only these 3 are favoured:

• Comfort-seeker is favoured because it is always realistic for Humans (and also for members of most other species) to seek comfort.
• Pride is favoured because it is realistic for high-GP characters to be somewhat proud; those who are not are exceptional (Pride is always favoured for NPCs for the sake of simplicity, but only for PCs built on 70 or more GPs; use a special version of Pride for those very few campaigns with GP totals under 70).
• Enigmaphilia is favoured because it's the ideal Flaw for adventurers, to get them into trouble. Some of the best fictional characters ever, including Sherlock House and Gregory Holmes, are or were severely enigmaphilic.

Favoured Flaws are particularly attractive to take at the lowest possible value, because the Flaw Point value is starkly out of proportion to the amount of inconvenience caused, compared to other Flaws (i.e. 2 FlP instead of 1, or 3 FlP instead of 2).

All players should seriously taking at least one of Pride 2d12, Comfort-Seeker 2d12 or Enigmaphilia 2d12. It's so worth it. Taking all three is worth a total of 8 Flaw Points.

Taking Pride 3d12 or Enigmaphilia 3d12, or Comfort-Seeker 2d12 with an Edge, is also a good choice, although the disproportionality between the Flaw Point value and the amount of inconvenience, relative to a non-favoured Flaw, is much smaller (15% maybe, as opposed to 33% or 50%).

Common and Very Common (Standard) Flaws

In terms of world definition, some cultures or cultural groups may be defined as having certain Flaws that are common or very common.

This is almost always Standard Flaws, but in some cases may be Special Flaws, for instance some cultures may be defined as having Lecherous as a Common Special Flaw, and one way to try to simulate ancient Greece is to define Bisexual as a Common Special Flaw in males.

Common Flaws are nothing more than guidelines for players, although the GM, whether or not he is the one who built the world that the campaign takes place in, should look carefully at the list of Common Flaws when he creates NPCs. Dice rolls can also be used to quickly create very minor NPCs, by determining their most important traits, including via culture-specific random roll tables for Flaws.

Very Common Flaws differ from the merely Common ones, in that there's a bribe, reward, compensation, given for choosing several of them. For each culture or cultural group, there may be a short list of Standard Flaws (and perhaps Special Flaws), and the statement that if a character has at least two, or at least three, of the Flaws on the list, it counts in total as one extra Flaw Points. Basically the bonus is 1/2 or 1/3 extra Flaw Point per Flaw, but rounded down, and never more than 1 bonus Flaw Point total.

Common Flaws and Very Common Flaws may come with built-in tweaks, specific RD modifiers. In the case of Common Flaws, this is just guideline material from the point of view of a player. For Very Common Flaws, the extra Flaw Point is only given if the required number of Flaws are chosen with their tweaks intact.

A tweak is intact if the modifier retains its absolute value, that is a negative modifier must not be changed to zero or a positive modifier, and a positive modifier must not be changed to zero or a negative modifier. As an example, one of the Very Common Flaws for the "male citizens of classical age Athens" cultural group could be "Bisexual and -2 RD young men".

A player creating a male character is eligible for the partial bonus FlP as long as he takes Bisexual for his character and adds the negative RD modifier for young men to his Sexual Orientation Flaw, even if the player reduces the RD modifier to -1 or increases it to -5.

In the context of Common and Very Common Flaws, cultural groups are often defined as a combination of culture and religion, with sex also sometimes being an element (the women of clasical age Athens were not particularly inclined to be bisexual), and social role or status (citizens only; few free men cared about the sexual orientation of slaves or foreigners).

Cliche (Standard) Flaws

Some Flaws are classifed as Standard(C) or St(C), instead of merely Standard. These Cliche Flaws are undesirable in large amounts, and thus each PC is limited to a single Cliche-classified Flaw, or to two such Flaws with explicit GM permission, with the premise for GM permission being that the character also has at least one non-cliche Flaw and furthermore is defined prior to game start as a well-rounded and psychologically realistic and coherent individual.

NPCs may have two Cliche Flaws if the GM thinks so, or even three, although going beyond three that is generally a very bad idea, especially for NPCs that play a major role within the setting.

Typical Cliche Flaws are Phobias, Kleptomania and Trademark. Having one phobia may be good characterization, but having many leads to stereotyope and two-dimensionality, which is contrary to the purpose of Flaws: To add depth and complexity and richness.

Cliche Flaws have a lower value at high strengths, to further discourage extremes. Low and medium strengths are priced as for any other Flaw of the same breadth.

Note that Multi-Flaws can also be Cliche Flaws.

Setting- or campaign-based Cliche Flaws

A mild and not overly intrusive (or restrictive) control on certain unpleasant-yet-realistic Flaws, such as Homophobia and Anti-Semitism, is to designate them as Cliche Flaws, either on on a world basis (grounded on foresight), or on a campaign basis (grounded in experience with the players). Obviously this won't stop players from taking them, but overall they will be less prevalent

Admirable (Standard) Flaws

Some of the Flaws offered in the Flaw Selection article are ones that are held to be virtuous, one that are greatly admired, in contemporary Western society, and/or in non-Western or non-contemporary societies.

Examples are Not Lying, Not Stealig, Soft-Hearted, and many more.

Nevertheless, they are perfectly valid Flaws because they restrict the options available to the character. He might trigger an admirable Flaw and therefore be unable to perform a tactically necessary deed.

(Standard) Flaws and cultural ideals

Some Standard or Special Flaws may interact with cultural ideals, in some worlds, in ways that seem odd. For instance, some culture of the past were sex-positive, at least for men, yet regarded the Lecherous Flaw as a character fault.

What's going on here?

Well, in some cultures, for instance the pre-Christian Germanic cultures, one of the greatest manly virtues is self-control, of not being a slave to one's urges. Thus instinctive and impulsive Flaws are seen as non-admirable. Having lots of sex (if one is a man) is good and admirable, even (or perhaps especially) if it is had with a long list of (eligible) females, as long as the sex is had in a manly and orderly and controlled fashion, on the man's terms.

In such cultures, women will often try to tempt men, not to get sex because it is contextually obvious that sex will be had eventually, but to get the sex to happen sooner and on the women's terms.

Manly self-control is a rare virtue to uphold in the face of extreme seductive pressure, and most men fall in, and end up having the sex sooner than what would have been admirable. That is faintly ridiculous, yet so extremely common that there is nothing wrong with it. Rather than consider those many of their brothers inferior who fail at manly self-control, men consider those few of their brothers who do not fail to be superior.

Note that that is just one culture. Other cultures may have an element of that, often in a much fainter and more tenous form. And other cultures again may be shaped in a very different way, as portrayed (no doubt historically accurately) in the mini-series "Rome", in which one male character's sexual activity is seen as diminishing him, for reasons that are not very clear to The Designer.

Multi-Flaws

Multi-Flaws are rather like Standard Flaws, except much broader in scope. Often they combine several real and/or hypothetical Flaws into one package, such as with Immature, Party Animal, Multi-Phobia and PTSD. To balance this, they are weaker in roll strength, thus a typical Multi-Flaw is 2d12 or 3d12 for a severe case, whereas a typical Standard Flaw is between 3d12 or 4d12, or 5d12 or 6d12 for severe cases.

Immature marks the character as being emotionally and developmentally immature, and combines elements of Lecherous, Overconfidence and Bad Temper, all at weak strength but in combination adding up to something that is noteworthy and rich in dramatic potential.

Party Animal combines elements of Sociable, Fond of Drink, Lecherous, and...?

PTSD stands for Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, and combines elements of Nightmares, Violent Reactions and Flashbacks.

Multi-Phobia

Comfort-Seeker

Intermediate Stage Multi-Flaws

Because Multi-Flaws are so broad, sometimes the right place to be, that which truly and precisely nails down that particular aspect of the mentality of the envisioned character concept, lies between two roll strengths, for instance for one character Party Animal 2d12 is a bit too weak, while Party Animal 3d12 is a bit too strong. For these cases, use the intermediate version, which gives the Multi-Flaw an Edge, so that for one type of stimulus it counts as one dice strength higher. For instance, Party Animal (Sociable) 2d12 means the character rolls 3d12 for casual carousing temptations and 2d12 for all other Party Animal-style temptations.

Simplified Stereotype Flaws (for NPCs)

It may be tempting for players to propose catch-all Multi-Flaws based on character species or religious faith, or sometimes occupation, e.g. Dwarf or Catgirl as a Multi-Flaw, intended to represent the stereotypical personality of Dwarves and (female) felinoids. That's a bad idea, for PCs and for NPCs who are important within the setting, because it is never clearly understood what exactly such a Multi-Flaw encompasses. That's an interpretation issue if such a Multi-Flaw appears on the sheet of a PC, and an issue of potential for oversight if it instead appears on the sheet of a major NPC.

Instead, break the stereotype down into its component parts, identify each part as a distinct Sagatafl Flaw (or invent and propose new specific, i.e. not Multi-, Flaws, as needed), and buy each and every one of them separately.

For minor NPCs, this approach can be good, and is therefore legal. Sometimes a minor NPC just is the archetypical Dwarf, a Dwarf's Dwarf, exhibiting all the stereotypes in all their vertically challenged glory, Same with other species, and also religions, and even occupational stereotypes (e.g. pirates, samurai). Flaw Point value does not matter for minor NPCs (since they are always low GP value anyway).

If a minor NPC ends up becoming major, simply remove the Stereotype Multi-Flaw(s) from his writeup, and instead add each component Flaw to his character sheet

Special Flaws

Special Flaws usually modify other Standard Flaws or Mandatory Standard Flaws, and so are only legal to take if the character already has the affected other Flaw.

A few Special Flaws may be stand-alone Flaws that produce some special effect other than having a Roll Strength. Also note that some Special Flaws are automatic, rather than choose-able. The only example, currently, is the Special Flaw gained for having a large number of Flaws (obviously its value is negative).

Soap Opera (Special) Flaws

Some Flaws, almost always Special Flaws, are marked with an S, i.e. Special(S) or Sp(S). This indicates that they are pertinent to romantic and/or sexual relationships.

This means two things.

First of all, in a normal campaign, a campaign that is not explicitly defined as a Soap Operatic campaign, all (S)-marked Flaws are worth 1 Flaw Point less. This is not specifically indicated in the tables by a separate value, instead the player or GM creating the character must remember the effect of the (S) tag. This has the effect of lowering the cost of some Flaws to 0 Flaw Points. These may still be taken; they just don't count as being worth Flaw Points.

The intent of this is partly to reflect that the focus of the campaign is not intended to be (and will not be) intimate interpersonal relationships; they'll play only a secondary role, as they do in many novels, movies and television shows. And partly to slightly discourage players from choosing those Flaws. Except of course if the campaign is intended to be Soap Operatic, such as an attempt to recreate the antics of Greg Stafford's "Pendragon" RPG in a Sagatafl context; such an attempt should definitely be treated as Soap Operatic.

Secondly, some of the (S)-marked Special Flaws are priced based on the assumption that the character is in a romantic and sexual relationships that involve certain obligations and duties (interpersonal, social, or both), or is extremely likely to enter into such a lasting relationship soon after game start. If the character is merely very likely to enter into such a relationship, the Flaw Point value of all such Flaws is halved (round down; this often causes them to cost zerp FlP). Othwerwise, the Flaw Point value of such Flaws is reuced to zero.

Characters who are single or on open relationships may still take such Flaws, but they use up only the rules-derived amount of FlP, often zero.

It is always abundantly clear when an (S)-marked Flaw (and almost all (S)-marked Flaws are Special Flaws) is intended only for characters in relationships.

Please note that a "romantic and sexual relationship" can take many, many different forms. In some cases it may even be completely legitimate (full FlP cost) if the relationship is one-sided, as long as the character who believes himself to be in this fictitious relationsship is under strong obligations, e.g. of faithfulness.

For instance a young female character who is pursuing a great hero, an older male. He has no interest her, yet she keeps pursuing him. However, she's at a stage in life where the hormones are very active, and so she may often be tempted to show interest in other males, which of course is a violation of her faithfulness to her great idol.

Another possible one-sided shape that such relationship can take is that of a pleasure slave who has no warm feelings for her male owner, yet he expects her to be faithful to him, that is to only have sex with him and never other men. The surrounding society has a weaker version of the same expectation. If she does "cheat" on her owner, she may be punished in various ways.

Or it could be an older woman, whose husband has found a younger mistress, in a society where divorce is difficult or impossible, and in which wifely faithfulness is taken very seriously. This woman's sexual and emotional needs are no longer fulfilled by her husband, so she needs to find a lover (in terms of what her other Flaw or Flaws tell her to do), but she must be discreet to avoid a scandal.

Or from a male perspective, in certain machismo-saturatd societies, it is a hallmark of manliness to exert control of one's sexual property (wife or wives, official concibine(s), and pleasure slaves). If one such female, whom the male character has officially and publically claimed as his exclusive sexual partner (e.g. via marriage), and she later cheats on him, other men will view this male character as weak. He'll lose face, may lose status, may be singled out as a potential victim for raids and robberies based on the assumption that he's not a strong man.

In some societies, this expectation of control may also extend to females that have not been claimed sexually by the man, usually daughters or other young women under his guardianship. These must be kept on a tight leash, otherwise the man risks being perceived as weak by the surrounding society.

Of course, in almost all such cases, excepting mainly the potential for pregnancies or birth that require explanation, what's important is not that which happens but that which is publically known or suspected to have happened. As long as the old wife's affairs are kept discreet, everything is fine. The husband may even assist her in her affairs, based on the cynical calculation that with his tactical involvement, the risk of scandal is much lessened. And obversely, in many settings, female characters must be careful never to be alone with inappropriate men, for fear of creating scandal fuel. Male characters must likewise act with care lest they hurt their female friends.

Keep in mind, though, not all societies of the past were such extremes, and also in a normal Sagatafl campaign, intimate interpersonal affairs will not be the focus (except if several players make it the focus through their choice of Flaws), except perhaps during a long and tactically tense and intense campaign, in which things temporarily turn soapy, conveniently giving the players a chance to relax from the usual ongoing concerns of their characters, for a play session or two.

Unusual Flaws

Unusual Flaws cannot be chosen during character creation, at least never when creating characters of the Human species. They are sometimes species-related, but most often transform-related, or possessed by non-biological creatures, such as the Hatred: Life Unusual Flaw possessed by most Undead, or the Destructive Unusual Flaw possessed by most Elementals.

Apart from being hardwired into the character and so difficult, or impossible, to change, Unusual Flaws function like Standard Flaws; roll to see if it triggers, when a stimuli is encountered, at an appropriate RD.

Rules on choosing Flaws

A Special Flaw must not be chosen unless the character also has the Standard Flaw or Mandatory Standard Flaw that is the prerequisite for the Special Flaw.

Tweaking Flaws

Sadly, it is not possible to turn this into an exact science, so the GM is going to have to eyeball it.

Players can apply permanent RD modifiers to their Flaws, this having the effect of increasing or decreasing the likelihood of the Flaw triggering when the character encounters specific kinds of stimuli.

For instance a character who has the Bisexual Special Flaw can have a positive or negative RD modifier for either or both sexes. He might be Sexual Orientation 2d12 but have a -2 RD modifier for females, meaning that he's more likely to "trigger" on potential female sex partners than on potential male sex partners.

RD modifiers can have any magnitude up to about +/-4 or 5. Anything above that tends to make the Flaw either nonexistent (it will almost never trigger anyway) or extreme (it will almost always trigger), both of which are boring and undesirable.

Players are prohibited from applying positive RD modifiers that largely or complete decreases the chance of the Flaw ever triggering, for instance by taking an RD bonus (=less likely to trigger) for Fond of Drink for beers/ales and also taking an RD bonus for wines, these (in many medieval areas) being the two most common types of alcoholic beverages by a wide margin. It should be permitted in a setting where alternatives such as ciders and meads are very common, however.

Players who choose to apply RD modifiers to their characters' Flaws during character creation must avoid giving the appearance of applying more positive modifiers than negative ones. Strive for balance. Or if balance is not desired, choose the appropriate Special Flaw.

The GM has every right to step in, if a player tries to abuse the system by applying many more of one type of modifier (negative or positive) than the other, and to fix the problem by ordering the player to take the appropriate Special Flaw. Or if that is too extreme a measure (because the overweight of plusses or minusses is small), to order the player to change the bonuses a bit so that they appear more balanced.

In general, though, it is unlikely to be a problem except in a very few cases, and almost all players can relax and just jot down as many -1 and -2 and +1 and +2 RD modifiers as they feel like, as well as the occasional +3 or -3 one. Try to think about the various sub-types of stimuli that may be encountered within the world.

Magic and Flaws

Temporary Mundane Flaws

In a few cases, mundane means, often in the form of extremely high social Skills, or stats (such as Appearance or the Charisma attribute, or the ability to Dazzle), may temporarily "saddle" a character with a Flaw, often in the form of Loyalty or Infatuation (or Fearful). These temporary Flaws often have a randomized duration, rolled for by the GM in secret, and after that interval the Flaw may disappear completely, or continue on for another interval in diminished Roll Strength, before disappearing completely.

Temporary Magical Flaws

Magic is rather more likely to "saddle" a character with Flaws, although the types are often the same as above: Loyalty, Infatuation or Fearfulness. The Duration of such effects is rather more formal, and tends to be deterministic in nature (based on spell level or similar) rather than randomized. There may be a fading interval, often of the same length as the initial Duration, or the temporary Flaw may disappear completely after the Duration.

Temporary Flaws and permanent Flaws

In a few cases, a character may be "saddled" with a temporary Flaw, through mundane or magical means, but already have that Flaw in permanent form.

For such cases, a rule is required to determine what the effect is, for the duration of the temporary effect.

Magic items and Flaw modifiers

Permanent magical items made via religious methods (Divine magic, Lunar magic or Satanic magic) give RD modifiers to the wielder, depending on how powerful the item is (its Item Level) and on the religious background of the creator of the item.

Each such item will have a list of Flaws that it affects favourably (making them more likely to trigger, by lowering their RD) and Flaws that it affects disfavourably (making them less likely to trigger). For instance an item made via Divine magic, such as a sword blessed by a Christian monk or priest, would give an RD bonus to Flaws considered sinful or evil by Christianity, and an RD penalty by Flaws considered virtous or good by Christianity.

Players are allowed to invent their own Standard Flaws and submit them to the GM for approval, but they must be prepared for the possibility that the GM, during the campaign, declares such a player-proposed Flaw to be similar to one of the Flaws listed as being affected by the religiously created magic item, and therefore affected by it.

The same goes for official Flaws that were not listed on the magic item's sheet due to an oversight, in short Flaws that ought to have been listed but weren't.

Ignoring or violating Flaws

Characters sometimes have the option of paying to ignore a Flaw (Standard, Multi- or Special) by spending Willpower points (representing an extreme effort of will on behalf of the character), but apart from that, players have to adhere to Flaw Strength rolls, and roleplay their characters in accordance with the rolls.

Failure to do so will result in escalating penalties, starting with verbal warning from the GM to the player, then a written warning, then the player's character suffering eXperience Point penalties and Sanity Damage, and culminating in the non-roleplaying player being dismissed from the campagin, so that those who appreciate realism and roleplaying are rid of the nasty distraction.

Of course almost all players will quickly learn to roleplay their Flaw and their Flaw Strength Rolls, and so the drastic measures remain something that the GM must use only in extreme cases.

Advice

Flaws are a fun addition to the campaign, an excellent opportunity to roleplay, and a very valuable aid in reminding each single player that his character is not a piece in a game board, nor a robot, but rather a living, breathing human being with a complex and rich psychology, and a deep and flavourful personality.

Don't worry much about the number of Flaws, as long as your Flaw Points remain within the normal range of, say, 4 to 8 points. Just spend as many as you feel suits your character concept, to bring your vision of the character to life.

If your concept ends up at 3 Flaw Points, you may have a problem, and even more so if it ends up at only 2. Concepts with 1 or zero Flaw Points are very difficult to work with, and highly undesirable, and so the aDvantage Point cost is very high, to serve as strong discouragement. If you need help spending more Flaw Points, ask the GM. He's there to help.

Having 9-13 Flaw Points is not a big problem, but above that you start running into serious diminishing returns. You may want to play an Adrian Monk-like character, but the fact is that Sagatafl does not reward you for that desire with an appreciable amount of compensatory points, and if the campaign features anything like traditional PC party-style play, your psychologically crippled character would also realistically get thrown out from the party very quickly.

Unless the campaign is of a very unusual Psychodrama-style, create a character that has a high ability to function in a semi-hostile enviroment and who can work with and cooperative with others.

Please note

Roleplaying means roleplaying your character in a way that is realistic for him, not in a way that is realistic for you, nor for the kinds of - most likely - extremely average and normal people that you most frequently associate with. Thus the source of the individual realism is the character sheet.

The tabletop acting portrayal of the charater, if you have anyinterest in performing such a thing, is determiend by the Flaw Strength Roll, thus you first roll, and then the roll tells you how to roleplay. The roll tells you whether your character's Flaw triggered or did not trigger. You never get to dedice that the outcome is "not trigger", you have to roll, although you are free to decide on "triggered" without rolling, except that the GM must step in and intervene if you frequently decide without rolling that your character triggers on weak stimuli.

Also roll for Flaws, now and then, without being prompted by the GM. That's one aspect of good roleplaying, the willingness to play the character as his sheet says that he is, even in a pro-active fashion. If the GM describes something that can be seen as a serious stimuli for one of your character's Flaws, then roll for it without being prompted, at an RD that feels right to you (usually a base RD of 8, sometimes 7 or 9, but taking the information from the GM into account).

Do not get hung up on single events. Your character triggering or not triggering in one specific situation is howlingly irrelevant. What is relevant is the overall pattern that one can see after Weeks or Moons of observation of your character's behaviour. The conclusions that the other PCs can draw, about your character, after having adventured with him for several Weeks or Moons. Their ability to conclude that your character is Bad Tempered and is prejudiced against Jews but is not any more Lecherous than the average young man.

These conclusions are drawn on the basis of the outcome of many Flaw Strength Rolls, never just a single one, although it is realistic that characters earn nicknames from singular Flaw Strength Rolls, especially if the outcomes are spectacular. For instance a male character who fails to trigger on an extreme sexual stimuli, that of a very young and very attractive and very blonde and very approachable female, may well earn him the flattering nickname of "The Strong-Willed". Or he may earn a nickname that suggests he's disinclined to follow heterosexual pursuits (which may be a huge problem in some settings, and a minor problem in some other places). Or of being faithful to his wife, girlfriend or other favorite sexual partner.

Also, it is perfectly realistic for your character, or the characters created and played by other players, to have opinions and worldviews that would be regarded as profoundly politically incorrect in the world that you and the other players live in. Being able to empathize with, to think like, a character whose worldview and value set differs markedly from your own is one of the hallmarks of a good roleplayer. Each campaign group must set its own limits for what cannot be tolerated, e.g. anti-semitism, or ephebophilic or pedophilic desires, always striving to hold the ideals of flexibility, freedom and realism, in the highest regard possible.

Mini-FAQ

Put in sub-sections (three ='s) each containing multiple Q&As, and insert a blank line between each individual Q&A.

sub-section

Q:
A:

Q:
A:

The world

A section mainly for the GM, or worldbuilder, about the world impact of the phenomenon, e.g. an Item Creation Power, or an attribute or other stat that may sometimes be starkly high or low relative to the Human average.

World impact

Talk about the effect on the world that this phenomenon would realistically have (taking into account such facts of human nature as greed, ambition and sexual impulses).

The Ärth setting

Talk about how this trait appears and functions in the Ärth historical fantasy setting.

Design Notes

Talk briefly about what the purpose of the mechanic is. Omit this section if it is extrmely obvious to the target audience.

Quick mini-glossary

Explain terms of great relevance to the subject matter of the article here, but not terms that are of generally great importance (e.g. RD).

See also

Flaw Selection