Talk:Not Good Enough (3.5e Flaw)

Ratings

	Sulacu is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
	I don't mind this flaw quite so much. There's tons of builds that can be thought up that don't suffer terribly from any particular flaw, but a flaw that takes away the cathartic potential of scoring a lucky crit is not terribly fun.

Not so. They'll still have to make saving throws and spot/listen checks. --Fluffykittens (talk) 11:10, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

HA HA HA HA HA! CALLED IT! I win $20, I knew you'd forget all about saving throws Ghost. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 11:12, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

10% chance of failing any saving throws they attempt is a harsh drawback. Concentration checks (very important) are also affected. This is NOT virtually unaffected. --Leziad (talk) 11:13, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

This doesn't change the actual roll--only chance of fumble or crit, if I understand it correctly. Thus, it only affects saves if you would be off the RNG already, something I disapprove of. Thus, I stand by my point. --Ghostwheel (talk) 11:40, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

on phone. That is wrong. Its 10% fumble, no autohit/crit on 20, and -1 everything d20. Though I find the fact you don't consider twice as much nat 1s and no hope for auto passing, on saves of all things, the much more horrific part. It has silly. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 11:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Wait, so I'm confused. Is this an ACTUAL -1 to every d20 roll (which would be fine for a flaw, and I would have originally no problem with it), or only EFFECTIVELY -1 for the purpose of rolling botches and crits? Do you ACTUALLY get -1 to everything? --Ghostwheel (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Back on the computer. It's an actual -1. You roll a 18? Nope, it's a 17. 3? 2. 20? Nope, 19. And so on and so forth. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 14:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Gotcha. --Ghostwheel (talk) 16:14, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

OW OW OW OW OW

"Effect: Whenever you roll a d20, treat is as a natural roll one lower. This means a natural 2 becomes a fumble, and you can never roll a natural 20." A -1 on all d20 rolls is pretty brutal as is, but never being able to roll a natural 20 and 2s counting as natural ones? Eiji, I appreciate your effort to make flaws meaningful, but isn't this going a little too far? Also, on d20 rolls for random effects, this skews the effects a bit. --Fluffykittens (talk) 10:15, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Heh, yeah. it may just be a -1, but it's a -1 that huuuurts. Even so, I found it fascinating. I debated keeping natural 1s the only natural 1s (though a 2 would be 1 result, just not natural 1). I was fascinated by the inability to crit. At least not with a 20/anything weapon. For the latter thing, that seems like something the DM probably rolls more than the player. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 10:32, 3 April 2015 (UTC)