Is your character bad at something that most people would expect them to be good at?

>geomancer
Fils every spell
And I mean every single spell he ever casted

I wanted to free us from a labyrinth and summoned a earth spirit
That nigga went wild cuz I failed and he almost killed us

My monk can't swim.
Not only that, but she's terrified of any water that comes higher than her waist.

>Heal/buffing cleric
>Can't heal worth a damn
The dice hate me

My current party

>Merc
Abysmal melee fighter.
He put most of his skillpoints into throwing and some into shooting, but never really optimalised stats for that (optimalised, meaning already a far cry from min-maxing). Party's rogue has better melee capabilities than supposed "tank"

>Witcher
Really poor knowledge about monsters.
As in - the merc knows more due to combination of other skills than the witcher with specific skill

>Mage
Min-maxed into oblivion for casting and melee, but is utterly useless outside slicing & dicing. A big issue if you are supposedly the wise guy in the party

>Hermit
Doesn't know anything at all, lacks any knowledge or lore skills.
Instead, really, really, REALLY good at dodging and acrobatics.

>Rogue
Can't into climbing, barely knows how to pick locks
Amazing scout and thief, but still.

I'm playing an Ace in a Star Wars game, it's basically a pilot.

> we were discussing who should go into a gladiatorial pit, and we put forward the tank and the damage dealer. That makes sense, yeah?
>Nope. The face doesn't want us to blow our cover as imperial operatives, and we look at it again: Who should go in without using a Lightsaber (It's a very weird post-original trilogy take on star wars).
> The tank is an intellect based character. It's lightsaber skill is based off of intellect. Why FFG. Why. Actual tanky skills like resilience are completely unimproved.
> The damage dealer is an Ataru Striker, but the player never buys Attributes. Without using a lightsaber his skills pretty much all default to standard because he's only put points in Lightsaber and shit. He has no intention to use other weapons, so why bother?
> The face is a face. Her lightsaber skill is shit anyway, but it's based on presence.
> I have the highest combat skills because of my high agility for piloting.

We discussed this for a while until I finally managed to ram home the point that our orders had nothing to do with staying secret, and that we were meant to approach the contact as Imperials, and we were only going into this gladiatorial pit to impress him, but for a long time the starfighter pilot was seeming the logical choice for who to send to fight a rampaging bantha bull, not either of the two combat focused Imperial Inquisitors.

Another time I tried to do some counter-party hacking. I had decent int for the sake of fixing the ship as it's mechanic and systems expert. I just wanted to re-configure some systems so that I'd have a contingency if the party betrayed me, they weren't really Imperial as far as I was concerned, they were all aliens, and most of them barely spoke. So I hacked the system, and get caught out by our ridiculously high intellect tank, a character that should be brawn as far as character (and sense) is concerned.

Played a Crane Clan Iron Warrior who had shit for health and combat stats.

Was a fun roleplay concept but didn't really match the game.

I want this.

I guess she is a pacifist.

>illustrated step-by-step instruction how to prepare a ritual to cast a spell
Makes sense.

My character, an Investigator Rogue, while excellent at detecting lies, is terrible at making them himself.

Pirate who consistently failed swim checks because he's a dex based fencer.

Gauss wasn't a very mathy guy, so having a science/magic guy who is more visual than symbolic in their understated is fine.

Play a scary looking buff oni, but my charisma is negative so I can't I intimidate for shit.

That's entirely reasonable. Many pirates and other sailors couldn't swim.

Decision making.

Geeedy rogue who picks loot by how much it SEEMS to value (unless its a man-sized marble statue or some really huge shit) and not for how much its actual worth.

My 4e taclord is shit at tactics.

But that's mostly because I'm shit at tactics.

I'm bad at being a bard because I'm bad at thinking of things to say to people to win them over

I should have played a quiet character again, at least I'm good at that

>stick figure drawing showing how to wave your arms

...

I'm playing a heiress to a line of Belkan nobles in a Nanoha-based game. So far my character, while being a bit of a narcissistic megalomanic, has consistantly failed to *actually* be a supervillian.

Oh, and she's utter shit at evil laughter and princess-style laughter. You know the type, the one in the animes.

I DM a group that has a hemophobic Dwarf. He's by far the strongest in the group, but he only attacks with his fists or his shield to minimize the amount of bleeding on the enemy.
Sometimes the other party members score particularly gruesome kills through criticals, and dorf has to roll a constitution save to keep from vomiting or, in some cases (like when an enemy he's grappling gets eviscerated), going into shock.

Im playing a rogue assassin that can't lie. Its always fun when he gets caught.

>be a Sorcerer
>Have 9 Charisma

I guess I have to go full Batman or something