Head or Body?

[weckar]

This debate came up after my last sessions (3.5): If you were decapitated, but somehow both your body and your head could go on living - which would you be better off being?

This assumes that the head has no (-) physical stats, and the body has no mental stats.

[Rebel7284]

Head.

Physical stats are overrated and easily replaceable. Just look at ghosts or psions.

[Gildedragon]

Head: physical stats can be replaced, see: robot body
Also no mental stats means no perception of the world (wis) of self (Cha) or any capacity to process info (int); there'd be no "me"

[Psyren]

No mental stats means you're nothing but an object, so obviously head is the right answer.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Demiliches typically choose head, and they've had thousands of years to think about it, so I figure they're on to something.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Demiliches typically choose head, and they've had thousands of years to think about it, so I figure they're on to something.

I still want to use my Demilich BBEG that's a Metacarpal. See that random, oddly shaped, roughly spherical bone? It's stealing your souls of your allies and draining your lifeforce with spells.

[atemu1234]

I still want to use my Demilich BBEG that's a Metacarpal. See that random, oddly shaped, roughly spherical bone? It's stealing your souls of your allies and draining your lifeforce with spells.

I once pitted the players I have against a femur. That was... interesting.

[Necroticplague]

Obviously the head. The body, as written, has no sense of self and can't perceive the world, so that can't really be 'me' in any real sense. The lack of INT would also prevent it from acquiring feats or skills. The head could overcome it's handicaps by becoming a manifester (likely one of egoist or telepath). I've played creatures that had both CON and STR as nonabilities, this is only adding one more. And adding DEX as a nonability has the awesome side effect of making your initiative INT based.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Obviously the head. The body, as written, has no sense of self and can't perceive the world, so that can't really be 'me' in any real sense. The lack of INT would also prevent it from acquiring feats or skills. The head could overcome it's handicaps by becoming a manifester (likely one of egoist or telepath). I've played creatures that had both CON and STR as nonabilities, this is only adding one more. And adding DEX as a nonability has the awesome side effect of making your initiative INT based.

Wait, what? I thought if you had a non-ability, you just treated your modifier as +0?

[OldTrees1]

Wait, what? I thought if you had a non-ability, you just treated your modifier as +0?

Sometimes the modifier is treated as 0 and sometimes it is replaced with another modifier.
Undead with the frequent Con mod->Cha mod is a good example of both.

I would choose Head. The Head is still a moral agent and thus still has moral obligations.

[Necroticplague]

Wait, what? I thought if you had a non-ability, you just treated your modifier as +0?

Generally, yes. That's the general rule for nonabilities. The specific rule for Dexterity as a nonability, however:

Any creature that can move has at least 1 point of Dexterity. A creature with no Dexterity score can't move (a shrieker, for example). If it can perform actions (such as casting spells), it applies its Intelligence modifier to initiative checks instead of a Dexterity modifier. The creature automatically fails Reflex saves and Dexterity checks.

In fact, Stregnth has a similar substitution rule.

Any creature that can physically manipulate other objects has at least 1 point of Strength. A creature with no Strength score can't exert force, usually because it has no physical body (a spectre, for example) or because it doesn't move (a shrieker). The creature automatically fails Strength checks. If the creature can attack, it applies its Dexterity modifier to its base attack bonus instead of a Strength modifier.