Player starts with an impairment: What to do?

[The Shadowdove]

Hey everyone,

I had a question that came up in a previous discussion.

What do you do if a player chooses to start off with a serious impairment that their character has lived with for a long time?

I know that, in previous editions, I read a book that granted specific minor bonuses in exchange for detrimental "Flaws".

Let's say they choose to be blind, deaf, or mute...



1) Do you just give them minuses to their perception for something like blindness/deafness?

2)Do you just let them enjoy the rp value of being mute, without any actual negatives?

3)Do they gain some sort of bonus elsewhere if they have been living with this all of their lives?

4) Do I do both, and grant bonuses to some and minuses to others? (depending on the sensory organ being used)

What about something like a mental illness, or a lost organ/limb? Club foot, asthma, social anxiety disorders, paraplegic, etc!

In general, or under specific circumstances, let's hear your take on this!

Thank you in advance. I look forward to hearing what you come up with. Or, with your superior booksmarts(aka book-fu), what I missed when reading my rule books!


-Dove

[JackPhoenix]

1:
Blinded:
A blinded creature can't see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight.
Atlack rolls against the creature have advantage. and the creature's attack rolls have disadvantage

Deafened:
A deafened creature can't hear and automatically fails any ability check that requires hearing


2: Mute characters can't cast spells with verbal components (Though sorcerer with subtle spell would still work)

3: I propably wouldn't gave any extra advantage to a deaf character (hearing being secondary sense for a human), though I would likely do something to lessen the impact of playing a blind character... possibly negating the advantage on attack rolls against him, but only in melee, maybe give him an advantage on hearing-based ability checks. Mute wouldn't be much of a problem outside spellcasters, and allowing to ignore the verbal component would run into a versimilitude problem (if he can do it, why can't every other caster?)

The paladin in my PF game lost her right arm due to a bad decision on her part. For few sesions, she could use only one hand in combat (not much of a problem, as she was bashing enemies with her shield anyway) and had huge penalties on grapple and skill checks requiring both hands (climbing...). In a previous session, she contacted an artificer who may be able to create a magitech replacement (playing Eberron, paying for a warforged graft)

[Ninja_Prawn]

2: Mute characters can't cast spells with verbal components (Though sorcerer with subtle spell would still work)

3: I propably wouldn't gave any extra advantage to a deaf character (hearing being secondary sense for a human), though I would likely do something to lessen the impact of playing a blind character... possibly negating the advantage on attack rolls against him, but only in melee, maybe give him an advantage on hearing-based ability checks. Mute wouldn't be much of a problem outside spellcasters, and allowing to ignore the verbal component would run into a versimilitude problem (if he can do it, why can't every other caster?)

I agree that you should just use the Blinded and Deafened conditions from the PHB. No need to do anything crazy there. Equally, you could use the Long Term Madness table form the DMG to represent mental illness (though it's kind of clumsy, so you may want to check with the players - you never know what real-life experience they've had).

As much as it pains me to encourage such a problematic trope (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DisabilitySuperpower), D&D is a game, and game balance is important. A character with a disability that would normally be crippling for an adventurer should be given a bonus to compensate. For blindness, I'd be tempted to introduce an item like Extreme (http://shadowhearts.wikia.com/wiki/Extreme) from Shadow Hearts, especially for a martial artist.

[saeval]

They aren't daredevil. guy loses an arm, he's generally gonna have an awful time being a fighting class. he might train hard enough to be half decent, (ha-ha, not intended, keeping it) but he'll be outclassed by most healthy opponents with slightly less training. Could he be great with a longsword? sure. Could he equal the damage of someone using it two handed? No. would he have the defense of someone using a shield? No. could he be skilled for what he has? yes.

being mute/blind etc. is all terrible. unless your going magic/fantasy blind. then you are better than a room full of ninja's and generally the best person to have around to oppose a large force of any kind. a blind adventurer would -have- to have daredevil super powers, to be an adventurer. any unfamiliar place would be their doom.

A mute adventurer doesn't truly assist the party. Unless they are doing it to attempt to educate themselves as to how someone would try to convey things, and read people, and is willing to teach an entire table to learn sign language... whats the point. its dodging having a responsibility to roleplay. good liar's lie with their whole body. He might be able to read the waitresses interest in the busboy, but not the diplomat's boldfaced bluff to the king.

In the end, if he wants to fluff a disability, you can have it just not penalize him unless it makes sense to. If you wanna make daredevil go ahead and do that too. just try not to steal other peoples thunder with bonus's for being handicapped. the party get their skill bonus's for being well trained in those skills, above the average of other people. 5th edition isn't big on small +1-3 bonuses because they have a lot more impact with the redesign of bounded accuracy.

One of my favorite characters my friend made was basically a Braveheart rip-off, who lost his arm trying to defend his wife. character was rad. his inability to wield two handed weapons as well as another fighter was not so rad. His quest for vengeance? definitely rad. his ability to climb? also not so rad. Did it add flavor to the character? most definitely. Unlike a real disability, it is entirely up to the player.

[Temperjoke]

You don't necessarily need to do anything "special" for a character with disabilities, aside from taking certain things into consideration. For example, a deaf character fails hearing checks, but they would also be immune to sound-based spells like Dissonant Whispers. A blind person would be less likely to fall for visual illusions, and they would experience all darkness the same.

If you did want to give them something to compensate, not that it's necessarily realistic or anything, but give their other senses a bigger range of perception. If they're blind, for example, maybe they can smell things from a little farther away, or hear things at a greater distance. If they're deaf, you could give them the Observant feat, since they'd be used to watching people's lips.

[JackPhoenix]

There are some ways to compensate for certain disabilities, even at level 1...mute GOOlock can use his telepathy to "speak" to others (though the spellcasting is still a problem). Ony of my character ideas is blind diviner wizard (in a classic blind oracle trope), who uses his familiar as his eyes (even though it cost actions so it's not that great in combat) and Alert feat (variant human) to somewhat compensate for the combat disadvantage (explained as a form of prescience). Chainlock's familiar would work even better, with the ability to speak, it could work as a spotter ("enemy at 2'o'clock, 30 paces")

[Ninja_Prawn]

Oh, I was going to mention this before, but a deaf character should get some kind of sign language proficiency for free. That's a no-brainer.

[Belac93]

Give them a small extra bonus. For a blind character, let them ignore the Advantage/disadvantage rule when in melee. Or if one of their allies is beside an enemy, let the ally call out were the enemy is. Also advantage on hearing
Deafness would give a very small bonus. I would say just advantage on sight based Perception checks.
Mute characters would gain a sign language so they could speak silently. Not so good in darkness, but actually a boon in the light.

[Ruslan]

I would definitely not allow mute. My game is all about PCs interacting with each other and NPCs, and a character that can't speak is just not a good fit for the group. I would gently but firmly tell the player to pick another concept.

[Sredni Vashtar]

I would definitely not allow mute. My game is all about PCs interacting with each other and NPCs, and a character that can't speak is just not a good fit for the group. I would gently but firmly tell the player to pick another concept.

*shrugs and tilts head to the side*

*furrows brow and steeples fingers*

*raises eyebrows, smiles, and holds one finger in the air*

*takes a bow*


It's hard to communicate without words, but it's possible. It would sure as heck be memorable. This link (http://writerswrite.co.za/cheat-sheets-translate-emotions-into-written-body-language) can help with playing such a character.

[MaxWilson]

Give them a small extra bonus. For a blind character, let them ignore the Advantage/disadvantage rule when in melee.

Free Blindsight in melee is very abusable.

[Nishant]

*shrugs and tilts head to the side*

*furrows brow and steeples fingers*

*raises eyebrows, smiles, and holds one finger in the air*

*takes a bow*


It's hard to communicate without words, but it's possible. It would sure as heck be memorable. This link (http://writerswrite.co.za/cheat-sheets-translate-emotions-into-written-body-language) can help with playing such a character.

Agreed. This was noted earlier, but this could also be fixed with an 'old one' pact warlock. As for 'no verbal components', why not just replace verbal with somatic, like you can flavor a bard to dance instead of sing?

[Sigreid]

Oh, I was going to mention this before, but a deaf character should get some kind of sign language proficiency for free. That's a no-brainer.

Nah, give them the performance skill for miming.

[Sigreid]

1:
2: Mute characters can't cast spells with verbal components (Though sorcerer with subtle spell would still work)



Not necessarily. It says in the PHB that the important part of the incantation is the tone, pitch and meter. Hypothetically they could cast using a flute or other wind instrument that can hit the right notes. I'd make them take warcaster though as their hands will be in use. "Billy our wizard can't speak, but when he plays that harmonica reality dances to his tune."

[Logosloki]

I once allowed a player to play a sort of mute. They couldn't speak but when they cast spells with a verbal component they would speak out in infernal.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Free Blindsight in melee is very abusable.

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131116114037/kill-la-kill/images/4/4f/Uzu_Sanageyama_Ep6_appearance.png
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ljml1d62aa1qdqu2qo1_400.gif

[Temperjoke]

https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ljml1d62aa1qdqu2qo1_400.gif

In fairness, the DM gave her compensation with her touch sense through her feet. Although, that trade off is balanced by not being able to wear foot protection, and if her feet are injured she is completely blind.

[Ninja_Prawn]

In fairness, the DM gave her compensation with her touch sense through her feet. Although, that trade off is balanced by not being able to wear foot protection, and if her feet are injured she is completely blind.

Yeah, that was pretty good DMing. Sanageyama, on the other hand, actually chose to trade his eyes for blindsight. That's clearly abuse.

[Blood of Gaea]

This is assuming you want to give them something to offset the disadvantage.

1. Blind, give them 5ft blind sense.
2. Deaf, advantage on perception checks based on sight.
3. Mute, +2 languages known.

Alternatively cherry pick a class/build to counter the downside.
1. Blind, Rogue get's blind sense.
2. Deaf, the Feat that allows you to read lips.
3. Mute, Great Old One Warlock, telepathy.

[Temperjoke]

Yeah, that was pretty good DMing. Sanageyama, on the other hand, actually chose to trade his eyes for blindsight. That's clearly abuse.

Yeah, and then later

He totally cheats and unseals his eyes for even more power. Gotta be dating the GM or something

[Ruslan]

*shrugs and tilts head to the side*

*furrows brow and steeples fingers*

*raises eyebrows, smiles, and holds one finger in the air*

*takes a bow*


It's hard to communicate without words, but it's possible. It would sure as heck be memorable. This link (http://writerswrite.co.za/cheat-sheets-translate-emotions-into-written-body-language) can help with playing such a character.I see the gimmick value, but definitely would get old after about 1-2 sessions. Thanks, but no thanks.

[Kane0]

Ever read the Big One campaign log? They have a mute monk (until a very specific plot event) and its fantastic.

[1Forge]

I dm a blind paladin. I gave him the blinded condition but gave him a bonus to detect evil/good so when it was active he could see.

[Hudsonian]

I feel like a mute barbarian should get an "intimidating Presence" as an out of combat feat. (Fluff, that he somehow has no tongue.)

Also, as far as blind goes. The Blind status in the PHB assumes that sight was removed/blindness is a new thing. I actually know several blind people and they say that they can tell when someone is within 5 feet of them... I didn't believe them... It has been tested and proven. Blindsense - 5ft is a real thing. (it's something about air pressure on their face or something.)

Also, keen hearing from MM.

I feel like the +2 languages, lip reading is pretty good for deaf. I'd also fluff it in some sort of others feel comfortable speaking their darkest secrets around him. Feat.

In general: If your players want to have something like this. I would consider it to be their background. No getting a deaf sage that reads lips and is the fount of all knowledge and hidden secrets.

[JackPhoenix]

I feel like a mute barbarian should get an "intimidating Presence" as an out of combat feat. (Fluff, that he somehow has no tongue.)

Also, as far as blind goes. The Blind status in the PHB assumes that sight was removed/blindness is a new thing. I actually know several blind people and they say that they can tell when someone is within 5 feet of them... I didn't believe them... It has been tested and proven. Blindsense - 5ft is a real thing. (it's something about air pressure on their face or something.)

Also, keen hearing from MM.

I feel like the +2 languages, lip reading is pretty good for deaf. I'd also fluff it in some sort of others feel comfortable speaking their darkest secrets around him. Feat.

In general: If your players want to have something like this. I would consider it to be their background. No getting a deaf sage that reads lips and is the fount of all knowledge and hidden secrets.

Being able to tell someone is 5 feet away isn't that hard, and doesn't remove any penalty...you still don't know what weapon does he have, where exactly is he standing and what is he doing to attack or defend yourself effectively.

[eastmabl]

For physical impairments like a missing limb, you could use a Tools proficiency or magic items in order to offset the impairment.

For example, with a lost limb, you could have a replacement limb with a benefit (you have both your arms!) with a flaw. For example:


Your wooden leg doesn't work so well - when you fail by five or more on a Str (Athletics) or Dex (Acrobatics) check involving your leg, the leg comes off. Your speed is reduced by 10 feet, and all attacks made against you are made with advantage until you re-don your leg. Re-donning the leg requires an Action.

In a campaign, I had a villain who cut off the arm of a player - which has since been converted into a hand of the mage. To compensate, the party later found the disembodied arm of a gearforged, which the player-wizard figured out how to attach to his arm with the aid of his transmuter stone. (Before you think that I'm a mean DM, the player wanted the gearforged arm).

This is what the arm does.


Robot Hand
Wondrous Item, uncommon (requires attunement)

This hand (and forearm) are part of some kind of construct from ages past. With enough time and research, you may figure out how to connect the robot hand to a stump and replace a missing limb.

Power Fist: when attached to your arm, you are proficient with a natural attack that does 1d4 + Strength damage.

Surge of Power: you can summon the power of robot hand to give yourself advantage on a Strength ability check or saving throw. Once used, the ability cannot be used again until you complete a short or long rest.

Hidey-Hole: you have a hiding space in your hand that can be used to hide any object the size of a wand or smaller. In combat, you can eject the object hidden within the hide-hole into your hand as a bonus action.

Hard to Hide: any Charisma (Disguise) checks are made with disadvantage, as the sound and appearance of the robot hand is very hard to disguise as human.

Bull in a China Shop (flaw): any Dexterity ability checks made with the robot hand to manipulate fragile objects are made at disadvantage, as you never quite learn your strength.

Just a way to think about these things.


Agreed. This was noted earlier, but this could also be fixed with an 'old one' pact warlock. As for 'no verbal components', why not just replace verbal with somatic, like you can flavor a bard to dance instead of sing?

I think that to reflavor the mute spellcaster to be usable, you have to create some identical constraint to the verbal component. For example, if the mute sorcerer's spells make some sort of sound that the essential to the casting of the spell - a choir of dragons, or manipulation of the words that the gods used to create the world.

Otherwise, in exchange for never talking, you essentially get a free Subtle Spell for every spell that you cast.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

I think standard procedure is giving people a feat in return. I case of a severe impairment maybe two or one and a half, depending on the feats or feat-like character aspects they're interested in. Then they can choose whether to spend any of that on making their life easier. The most important part is probably to figure out what they want in return. Don't just offer them what you think is fair and would want in their situation. I would let a player switch out his sight for blindsight if he wanted. That's probably about a fair trade off. If they choose blindsense (and that includes not wanting to take it but role playing their character in a similar way anyway) they still have some "points" left, since it's not nearly as strong an ability as normal sight. Both of those abilities can be fluffed into "has been doing this all his life". Just being blind does not make you better at hearing. It's purely a disadvantage, except in specific circumstances, like a hypnotist swinging a watch in front of their eyes. (Although a clever rules lawyer will have a point if they say they'd get a bonus to detecting a sound while visual stimuli are distracting the rest. The DC for that perception check factors in the distraction, that can be removed for a blind person.)

For the actual disabilities themselves, I think others summed it up pretty well. Try to think of what they're trying to do. If the perception check is for detecting an archer in a tree in the distance then that's either impossible or very hard without sight. If the perception check is for a troglodyte around a corner then sight has nothing to do with it. A blind person does not get a penalty over what the normal folks get, and a blindsense or blindsight user will get a bonus over them.

Deafness is the same thing, except, you know, totally different.

[Vogonjeltz]

Hey everyone,

I had a question that came up in a previous discussion.

What do you do if a player chooses to start off with a serious impairment that their character has lived with for a long time?

I know that, in previous editions, I read a book that granted specific minor bonuses in exchange for detrimental "Flaws".

Let's say they choose to be blind, deaf, or mute...

Well, I'd make certain they understood that doing that would be self-imposing restrictions on their character. Of course, two of those conditions are simply reversed by a 2nd level spell.

Mute isn't a condition, and a missing tongue seems to be something almost outside the considerations of the rules, as essentially only True Resurrection (which would require the character to be dead) really encompasses the reconstruction of a cut off tongue (assuming you didn't hang onto it for Regeneration). Using the maiming rules in the DMG as a guideline, I'd say any magical healing would be sufficient to restore the character's power of speech.

So basically these just aren't long-term problems for adventurers, they would have to be deliberately avoiding being healed magically to retain any of the three conditions.

[Starsinger]

Depends on the impairment and the class. Like, a Sorcerer who was born mute? I would probably allow them to cast spells with Verbal components anyway, since Sorcery is inborn power, it makes sense that they would have worked around it. Likewise, it also makes sense for a mute character to go Old One Warlock, specifically if they discovered that it would let them be able to communicate with others before hand.

But also, you should ask why they're playing blind. If they specifically want like a Blind Swordsman who fights like he can see, then yeah work around it somehow. If they want to play someone who is blind, maybe they shouldn't be an archery ranger. (But hey, a reason to be a beastmaster and give up your own attack actions!)

[Reosoul]

I personally find stuff like this incredibly annoying, especially back in 3.5 when it was encouraged for monks to do stuff like vows of silence, where instead of talking, they just communicated through slipping around pieces of paper or 'talking ooc'.

If someone wishes to play a mute character at my table, they can do so, but under the compromise that they stay in character at all times. "Enjoy the game!"