A Question for DM's

[GutterFace]

so i have a player that, as per his back story, has 1 eye (and a wicked eye patch).

now this has to incur a penalty right? if not, if there a One Eyed Flaw? i haven't found a listing for it anywhere and i dont want to dump Murky Eyed on him.

[hymer]

He could take the flaw Shaky (IIR the name C) if you allow him. Or you could just not care at all and not have it give any substantial effect. Plenty of movie badasses with eyepatches that don't seem to be actually affected by it.

[Tanuki Tales]

Personally, I'd at worst give him a -2 to Perception and greater penalties when trying to use a ranged weapon outside of its range increment. But that's only if the wound was recent; if he's been missing an eye for years he'd have compensated by now.

[Pink]

Okay. Here's the thing. You have a player the seems to be generally interested in making a interesting, neat character (hey, he wrote a background and gave his PC a unique characteristic). Ask yourself, do you really want to penalize him for doing something that, I at least think, is desirable of a player?

If you really want a mechanical effect, I'd say something minor, like -1 to ranged attacks and perception, but also balanced with a benefit, like 20% miss chance from gaze attacks. But again, I don't think a player should be punished for making a character instead of a stat block.

[Lord Il Palazzo]

Murky-Eyed could work for this. I would tend toward some combination of Inattentive and Shaky (taking about half of each) with a -2 penalty on spot and search checks (it shouldn't hurt his listen skill) or just -4 on spot and also about a -1 on ranged attack rolls for the loss of depth perception (possibly scaling with each range increment but probably not).

That being said, DO NOT "dump" any penalty on him. Ask if he'd like to or be willing to take an appropriate penalty/flaw for his character's disability and if he does, come up with one you can agree on and give his character a bonus to balance the penalty (an extra feat is usually the reward for taking a flaw). If you just assign him a penalty because of something in his backstory without his consent, you're discouraging him (and others) from having backstory elements like that in the future and making it more likely that you'll get bland, generic characters who've never done anything interesting (read, plot hook worthy) for fear of being stuck with penalties.

[Fable Wright]

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with the other DMs here. Don't penalize him for making a fluff decision. If you want to make a mechanical benefit fluffed as missing an eye, like a flaw or a trait, that would work- just don't make it an all downside decision. Something like a trait for a -1 on Spot checks for a +1 on Intimidate checks wouldn't be out of order, if you wanted a trait instead of a flaw.

[Xzar]

Personally I'd offer him a -2 perception penalty and a +2 intimidate bonus... or just ignore it in the interests of cinematic coolness.

He certainly should not be penalised, unless by consent.

[GutterFace]

all awesome suggestions thanks everyone. i know i can always count on you guys to keep it fair!

[nedz]

Cyclops, Menta
+2 Con –2 Dex
Wizard • Medium Size
• 30’ Movement
• Darkvision 60’
• Single Eye – receives a –2 penalty on ranged attacks, Search checks & Spot checks.
• Future Sight – Augury as a Supernatural ability,3/day. Must touch the target & spend a Full Round Action. Cannot use the ability on himself/herself

You could always take this and tweak it a little.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Ask yourself: how debilitating is it to your vision when you close one eye?

I guarantee you that a vast majority of the people you ask would say that it does not impair their vision significantly, if at all. In fact, I'd eager that a great many people would tell you that they close one eye to do certain things relating to fine movement, such as aiming a rifle (or bow), looking through a telescope/periscope/magnifying glass, or working with precision tools, anyway, as it's easier to focus through one eye than it is two.

The only reason having one eye should confer a mechanical penalty is if that one good eye is also bad, because missing an eye doesn't significantly reduce your range of vision, and it doesn't affect your good eye at all.

[Slipperychicken]

Eye patches are awesome, and must be encouraged. Do not penalize your PCs for having them.

[ArcturusV]

Even give him access to a home brewed, kitbashed Snake Plisken PrC. :smallbiggrin:

[White_Drake]

Ask yourself: how debilitating is it to your vision when you close one eye?

I guarantee you that a vast majority of the people you ask would say that it does not impair their vision significantly, if at all. In fact, I'd eager that a great many people would tell you that they close one eye to do certain things relating to fine movement, such as aiming a rifle (or bow), looking through a telescope/periscope/magnifying glass, or working with precision tools, anyway, as it's easier to focus through one eye than it is two.

The only reason having one eye should confer a mechanical penalty is if that one good eye is also bad, because missing an eye doesn't significantly reduce your range of vision, and it doesn't affect your good eye at all.

Well, there is that bit about depth-perception.

[ArcturusV]

I honestly question how bad the depth perception thing is. I think it's more an invention people make up based off false (But reasonably sounding) logic rather than anything else. If it WAS a thing. Heck, a simple device like a scope would be almost useless. Consider when you aim a gun (And distance does matter on that), you do it one eyed.

Heck, if it was true I wouldn't have gotten my ass whomped in ping pong by that one eyed guy at the VFW I used to volunteer at as he'd have been missing all his timing on it.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I concur, depth perception is largely overrated. Short distances are judged mostly via the kinetic sense and long distances purely judged by how much smaller things appear.

I endorse:
Rule of Cool; ignore it mechanically.
Murky Eyed Flaw
Shaky Flaw

[Story]

Long distances are judged by a variety of factors. In addition to size, there is also foginess, relative position, and general intuition about the typical sizes of objects.

The parallax effect is only significant at short distances, which is where having one eye would actually hurt you.

[KoboldCleric]

Eye of Gruumsh takes no penalties.

[TuggyNE]

Well, there is that bit about depth-perception.

You'd think, but you know those children's science books that give instructions for testing the impact of depth perception, and how covering one eye is supposed to make this big massive difference?

It doesn't. It's difficult to even tell there is a difference when you're specifically testing for it; normally it just doesn't matter at all.

Of course, this is from the perspective*of someone who has grown up with considerable nearsightedness, moderate astigmatism, and more than a trace of wandering eye. But that really just reinforces the point that if someone has a while to adjust to it it'll make just about no difference at all in all but the most specialized situations. *See what I did there?

[DonDuckie]

I agree with those who say "Don't penalize backstory or RP".

As for the consequences of having only one eye. The big loss is peripheral vision, not ranging. And since there isn't facing in 3.5, I wouldn't impose a penalty.

If the player agreed that the condition should be penalized, eg. I would make flanking the player give a +3 to hit instead of +2. And I would give him some benefit to make up for it, maybe +2 on saves against gaze attacks, dazzling flare and blinding light effects...

or a miss chance against those(as mentioned).

But if players do something extra with their character, I try to work with them to see if they want a mechanical effect from it.

[Flickerdart]

The problem isn't depth perception. The problem is that he's lost almost half his field of vision. While he's generally going to be facing the direction in which he's aiming if he's making an attack, for the purposes of things like Spot checks, where you don't know the direction to look unless someone points it out, he's going to be at a disadvantage. Since pointing out something is basically Aid Another, it makes sense for the penalty to be the same as the bonus: a -2. Limited FoV is going to make flanking more effective, but since 3.5 doesn't have facing, getting into this is probably not worth it.

As others have mentioned, the penalty should not be without its bonus, because otherwise you're discouraging players for making interesting characters. One amusing side effect of having one eye is that all goggles need only half of their normal magical potency, since you're only enchanting one goggle. But discounting magic items is always a tricky business, so you should probably stay away from that. Another advantage of a ruined eye is that you can get a graft of something cool in its place. Dart gun that shoots where you're looking? A bright light that dazzles people looking at you when you open your eyelid? A seeking ray, as the spell, that homes on to your target? A hideous scar that terrifies people when you reveal it? A framed photograph of Nicholas Cage?

If you wanted to be boring about it, just give him a +1 bonus on Charisma checks where he makes a good argument about why the eye should apply. Freaking someone out? Bonus. A kind old lady takes pity on him? Bonus. Gruff warriors respect a sweet scar? Bonus.

[hymer]

The problem is that he's lost almost half his field of vision.

Nowhere near half, unless he's a cow or a pelican. :smallsmile: For humans there's more overlap than peripheral vision. You can test it by closing your left eye, look straight ahead and placing your hand outstretched at the left edge of your field of vision - probably your nose will get in the way there. Then open your left eye, and notice how close to the edge of your vision the hand is.

Someone I knew vaguely had a glass eye, and she led a normal life (well, any abnormality is hard to attribute to the glass eye anyway). But she also once poured milk from one of those little plastic thingies onto the table rather than into her coffee. She didn't notice until she lifted her cup and milk was dripping off it. And more than once she hit a swinging door as she passed through the doorway (herself moving made her mind miscalculate the proximity and direction of a door that was also moving). So I agree it's pretty minor.
On the other hand, to those noting how you usually aim rifles and bows with one eye closed - you've already seen the target with both eyes open and judged by various factors how far away it is. The mind doesn't forget the estimate just because you close one eye.

[Killer Angel]

I would speak with the player, trying to define a little penalty (-1) to ranged attacks, balanced with a bonus to some Cha-based check.

[Clistenes]

Nowhere near half, unless he's a cow or a pelican. :smallsmile: For humans there's more overlap than peripheral vision. You can test it by closing your left eye, look straight ahead and placing your hand outstretched at the left edge of your field of vision - probably your nose will get in the way there. Then open your left eye, and notice how close to the edge of your vision the hand is.

Federico da Montefeltro lost his nasal bridge and his right eye at a tournament accident, and he was surprised by how little his field of vision was reduced (since his nasal bridge didn't block his good eye, he had almost the same field of vision as a person with two eyes).

[GutterFace]

Since i didn't want to impose too harsh of anything on my player and a flaw would give him a feat. i settled on this:

-1 spot (duh)
-1 diplomacy

+1 save vs illusions
+1 listen

[hymer]

Cool. :smallsmile:
May you all have as much fun as mosquito in a blood bank.

[ksbsnowowl]

Your answer is in the sidebar on page 27 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. It does imply that these penalties should be temporary, though.