How Many Story Flaws Does Your Companion Have?

How Many Story Flaws Does Your Companion Have?

  • None
  • 1-2 Minor Story Flaws, No Major
  • 1 Major Story Flaw, No Minor
  • 1 Major Story Flaw, 1-2 Minor
  • 2+ Major Story Flaws or 3+ Minor

0 voters

Second poll on the same question. How many Story Flaws do your Companion characters have?

Due to a limited number of poll options the last choice is somewhat broad.

Feel free to elaborate on the details as much as you would like.

By default, characters don't tend to have more than 1 story flaw (as per the flaw guidelines), though I guess it's storyteller based how many are out there.

I tend to follow those guidelines, though, so 1 generally.

I think that companions should have 1 major story and 1 major personality for 2 reasons

  1. It defines the character and tells the storyteller what type of stories to run.

  2. it's a major flaw not for free, but that's pretty much a good way of racking up guilt free virtue points (which also help define the character).

Some people are unable to think outside the box I suppose. I think that you should be limited to only one Major Story Flaw, but you should certainly be allowed to take a Minor Story Flaw as well. Especially for companions, who have a more limited selection of Flaws than magi.

It depends on the nature of the minor story...

usual rule 7 ruling against min maxing would apply here.....

What is rule 7?

Nothing prevents you from taking all 10 points as story Flaws. The rule say's Shuld Not, not Cannot. This may be excessive, but I honestly have no problem with multiple Minor story flaws. Some are omnipresent, or they should be anyway. Like Close Family Ties and Mentor. These can be a constant presence in the character's life, constantly affecting they way they play, but do not need a full story to deal with by any means. And sometimes, rules force a story flaw on you, and that may not be the story you want. Like Cabal Legacy for magi. That should be omnipresent, always affecting the way you relate to other magi, but you should be able to pick a second story flaw that more directly represents the character.

And as a two Major Story Flaw combo, how about Dependant mixed with Enemies? Pretty juicy, eh?

AND, this doesn't mean that the character is steeling the spotlight. A good sg can combine hooks & story flaws. To me, it is optimal to mix a covenant hook with the flaws of one or two players. It makes the story relevant to the whole rather than a side show focused on an individual.

I always tend to figure out my companions background, and then hammer the Flaw system to make it fit...

.

Yup, and nothing really that makes multiple Major story flaws a bad idea either.
Its NOT a good idea for each and every character however, because then you get too much to handle for the GM, exception of course being if a group of the characters, or even everyone has one or several story flaws that is the same.

It is indeed a superb combination.

I favour allowing 1 Major and 1 Minor Story Flaw because they are so diverse and permit one to more fully develop a character. There are also many natural combinations, which I've brought up elsewhere (e.g. Close Family Ties and Feud).

Some of the Story Flaws published in the sourcebooks really should have other category crossovers. Pagan, for example, is really equivalent to the Major Social Class Flaw of Outsider, though since people in many different strata could have it, it might fit better as a General Flaw (Major).

My outlook, in general, is that the limits on the categories of Flaws which can be taken are an unnecessary and somewhat irksome addition to 5th Ed. They seem intended far more to enforce preconceived ideas about character types than about internal plausibility.

Of course, I also believe that there is no reason why Grogs shouldn't possess Story Flaws. If one looks at the history of the game one can find numerous examples in earlier editions of entire gaming sessions devoted solely to adventures involving Grogs and their lives. The attitude that they are somehow completely disposable, fully interchangeable background spear-carriers runs counter to this principle. I can't say if any of the later sourcebooks (e.g. "City and Gild", which I haven't read yet) corrects this, however, that is the impression I have from the main book. I always loved creating Grogs as vivid characters with their own lives and purposes. Fifth Ed. tends to stifle that. Others may disagree. I'll stand by my point regarding Story Flaws and Grogs. Animal Companion, Close Family Ties, Dependent, Feud, Enemies, Dark Secret, Fury, and Pagan (see above) all fit in well with Grogs in a very natural fashion.[/i]

Thats because there isnt any reason for it.
Grogs with a good story flaw or even several can be a great addition.

Yes, but according to the "official" rules, Grogs aren't allowed to take Story Flaws because this puts them at the center of the narrative, and in 5th Ed. that's not where they're "supposed" to be.

My issue is that Virtues & Flaws didn't used to have such categories. The old categories were Hermetic, Social Status, and all others were all General. In four out of five editions, Grogs could have what are now considered Story Flaws.

Exactly. There were categories of Virtues and Flaws, however, except for Hermetic they weren't treated as "exclusive", though some were off-limits to different types of characters unless there was a very good explanation. Social Virtues and Magi, for example, and certain Mental Flaws which would make being a Magus extremely difficult.

Truthfully, however, many Minor Story Flaws were formerly +1 Virtues. Perhaps if characters were allowed to purchase them as Minor Virtues then objections would disappear?

I was missing the one I adhere to: "One Story Flaw, Minor or Major"

I voted 1-2 Minor, No Major

But I always have just the one. In my 4th ed sagas, all the Magi and Companions had so many Flaws, that never came into play, because there were too many and too hard to use as bait for a story.

I like 5th ed mechanics of making soem Flaws as Story Flaws, and limiting them. That way, you don't get them 'for free', there should be time and resources to make it into stories, where the character is forced to take a stand. Either go out and take action, or suffer the consequences.

Granted, lots of story flaws are fun, and I'd ofteh like to take a lot more. But limiting myself and my player to one, makes it an object of more focus.

Pft, who cares.
Grogs are just "extras" 99% of the time, its just fun if one occasionally gets to play a major part in the story.
Its also a VERY good way of adding variation to a campaign.
Especially when players arent expecting it.

Back in the very old days, in an old 4th ed saga, we had some brilliant stories, played with almost solely Grogs. And not very intelligent ones ("everything larger than a horse is a Dragon!"), but they really did do well.

However, Grogs often seem to get a secondary role in my groups, since having a Magus AND a Companion AND ALSO a Grog to keep track of, can be a little too much.

that may be true in some sagas but is clearly not true in all:

IOS we generated a large number of grogs as full characters (not stock characters).

In play, we found a format where most often only one magus was active in the field (the "duty magus", the others being snug in their labs). We had companion level characters, but they were much more companions of the whole covenant, and mostly had roles that tied them up as much as magi ... the grogs, however, had a considerable life and charm of their own, and a wide variety.

We enjoyed forming up a party of 4-6 grogs + optional magus, and the player fully threw themselves into playing their characters. The grogs tended to associate loosely with certain magi, so there was a variety of individuals to be sent out; plus their skills varied... (for a long time the only PC with Second Sight was a (very popular!) grog...)

This is how I view Grogs. Each of them has the potential to be the subject of a tale or three in their own right. Many folk tales focused on characters who were not of the calibre of Magi or Companions, but who did and experienced things that were worthy of retelling. I believe that a strong Covenant is one that nurtures its Grogs, and that Grogs can become far greater in the service of Covenants than they can in the outside world. Sometimes they've even qualified as "junior Companions" who exhibit vitality, energy, and skill which merits eventual promotion.

Which is one of the many reasons why I'm very, very annoyed at the 5th Ed. declaration that they can't possess Confidence. From where does that come? How many stories involve the tenacity and perseverence of those not high-born or of legendary status, who pull through because of their own determination? Many. Grogs deserve considerably more respect than they frequently receive.