Question about rules for Dissociative Personality Disorder

[ilovefire]

Allright, in a campaign of mine, a player's character was just severly tortured by her father whom she didn't remember previously because of a Programmed Amnesia spell. The player things, and I agree, that the torturing and sudden retrieval of all those locked-away memories would have been enough to cause a psychological issue, and because this campaign is about a group of standard DnD adventurers (if non-human) transplanted into the modern day, the player thinks that DID with two main personalities (the character's usual, and the character's modern-day disguise (complete with false memories!)) and various minor ones. I really, REALLY like this idea, but...


before I homebrew the rules for this, I have to ask if there's any official rulings on MPD or DID. Help?

[Stephen_E]

Well a number or people don't actually beleive that MPD exists, but I do recall several years back a paper where the researchers had been running brain scans while using hypnosis to shift between different personalities. What they found was that different personalities caused different parts of the brain (including different section of the meomory areas) to become active.

So you could handle it as essentally multiple PC's within the same body.
Each PC has their own class levels and XP total. XP earned should probably have someting like 20% handed to all personalities and the remaining xp given to the personality that was "present" or contributed tp the XP event (i.e. Personalities A,B,C,D. An encounter occurs where A & b contribute. 1000 xp is earned. C & D get 200xp each - 20%, A & B get 600xp each - 200 + 800/2 . This would most closely match how I've seen MPD handled in fiction.

This would mean that the all the PC's in the body would be lower level than the rest of the party, but the strongest "personality" would probably only be a level or 2 back, and you'd gain the versatility of different class abilities, skill sets hp's and alignments. IIRC the theory behind MPD is that the person creates different personalities to handle situations that were beyond the capabilities of the "dominaint" personality, so they should be quite different. Afterall if Fighter "x" can't handle the situation, then Fighter "y" in the same body is unlikely to be any better.

I'd suggest she have a brief personalty synopsis at the top of the various character sheets, and she could use some visual que to centre herself and create the right mind set for the other players. I found wiping your hand down you face when shifting personalities works well. She should also work on shifting voice tone and candances to create the right effect.
Note: If done well the other players may find this disturbing. I was told it was quite freaky to watch.

Stephen

[tainsouvra]

Well a number or people don't actually beleive that MPD exists, but I do recall several years back a paper where the researchers had been running brain scans while using hypnosis to shift between different personalities. What they found was that different personalities caused different parts of the brain (including different section of the meomory areas) to become active.

This is, in part, how the diagnosis evolved from "multiple personalities" to "dissociative identity" in the DSM--it's one person whose sense of self has split into sections, rather than more than one person. ICD10 sticks to the old definition and label, though...which contributes to the controversy by having two mutually-exclusive ways of looking at the same condition yet dealing with them as if they were interchangable.

A dissociated identity is subjectively very easy to verify, the controversy is in how to objectively categorize it by a checklist of measurable symptoms, and whether it is a naturally-occurring condition or something brought on to a psychotic client by the unconscious influence of those around him...but the mere existence of that condition is not really a point of debate.

Edit:
There have been several studies to the effect of what you said, here's an example. Unfortunately, since it does nothing to help objectively categorize the disorder nor proves how it came about, it doesn't really lay the debate to rest.

[dyslexicfaser]

If I remember right, a psychosis like that usually results in the new personality (called an 'alter') being created for a specific purpose, usually protecting the core personality in stressful situations.

Meaning that the new alter - which is often more aggressive than the core - appears in situations that put a strain on the core personality, which DnD battles certainly qualify for. But even trying to get the core to remember the traumatic event that led to their original break can do it.

Now how magic amnesia fits into this, I wouldn't have a clue, but in my opinion, you shouldn't bother divvying up exp or anything, just RP it out.

[Lemur]

DPD is a psychological disorder, but "multiple personalities" is also a trope of fiction and fantasy. Not surprisingly, fictional multiple personalities rarely resemble the real thing. However, there's nothing wrong with going with the stereotypical, fantasy version instead of a more realistic approach. It doesn't really matter which way you go with it ultimately, but the nature of the character may be affected.

It's impossible to completely "realistically" portray DPD, (especially as it's existence is disputed, as Stephen_E mentions) but that's not really important. I'll try to describe what I think is a decent way to go about a more mundane interpretation of DPD (fiction-style "multiple personalities" is probably more mechanically complicated anyway)

The really simple route, that only requires adaptation of existing rules, is to treat the splinter personality(s) as an intelligent item (in terms of mechanics). That is, it has it's own mental scores, and it's "ego" would be affected by such, and possibly also the level of the character somehow.

Certain conditions, usually stressful will trigger a splinter personality to try to take over. Forcing the dominant personality to face his or her past, for example, will certainly trigger a personality, probably an agressive one, to try to take over. A splinter personality may try to take over while another splinter personality is in control, depending on the circumstances. Also, if both splinters are aware of each other, the switch may be willing, also depending on the situation.

When a splinter personality takes over, the dominant personality doesn't have any recollection of what happens, unlike when an intelligent item takes over. A splinter personality knows everything the dominant personality, and may or may not know about what other splinter personalities, depending on whether or not it's aware of the given personality's existance.

Determine whether you want splinter personalities to have the same, or different mental stats. If you want them to have some variation, a simple method is to take the existing mental scores, and switch their placement around. Or you could roll ones seperately. Different mental scores isn't necessary (and is also probably less "accurate" and more "fantastic") and if there are a lot of splinters, than also complicating to keep track of.

A splinter personality shouldn't be a completely different character, in terms of class and skills, unless you really want to go with a strictly fantasy interpretation of multiple personalities. Instead, a splinter personality should obviously have a different personality than the main character, and thus be played as such. Also, it might help flavor to throw in a skill bonus or similar minor bonuses for each splinter. For a general idea how to work this, look at psicrystal personalities. A splinter personality would provide a minor bonus based on its general characteristics, like +3 to a skill, +2 to a save or initiative, +1 to melee or ranged attacks, or whatever sort of minor bonus seems fair.

That's more or less how I'd deal with it anyway. Especially if the character is going to have multiple splinter personalities. If she's only going to have one or two splinters, you can flesh out each splinter more, and possibly give them a few more special things.

[Diggorian]

DID is briefly discussed in Unearthe Arcane, heres the SRD version.

I'd make an abbreviated character sheet for each personality, same ability scores and race but everything else is different. Under stressful times, call for a Will save (DC higher for the more duress), if they fail the character is subsumed by another persona to be NPCed by you if the other PCs are around or that goes on solo adventures that the main character never knows of.

I'd likely allow some crossover of skill and special ability to to balance this huge flaw. It's important to the feel that these personas arent under the player's control. It's a disorder because it controls them.

As a simpler option, just enable the character to change alignment.

[Aximili]

I'd likely allow some crossover of skill and special ability to to balance this huge flaw. It's important to the feel that these personas arent under the player's control. It's a disorder because it controls them.

But that kind of takes the fun from it. Just make sure that the player is actually able to interpret different personalities, and have a conversation earlier about the splinter personality's behavior and attitudes.

I'd agree, however, that the player can't have control of when his behavior is gonna shift (unless, of course, the DM trusts him to judge fairly and imparcially each situation).

[AtomicKitKat]

I remember some years back, there was a Dungeon issue where the "NPC hero" turned out to have been the "Big Bad" of a nearby region up till fairly recently, when he got smacked with Amnesia, and wound up doing the whole Paladin/Blackguard schtick, in reverse.

There are a few ways to play with the mechanics of an MPD character. You could add the HP/Saves/BAB, but that could go out of control pretty quickly. You could try to average those values out, but that's a headache. I do recommend one thing though. Bring along a calculator, so you can do % of remaining HP when switching personalities mid-battle.

BoVD has the Thrall of Demogorgon PrC(reprinted/updated in the July 2007 Dragon), which includes "free multi/dual-classing".

A lot of this depends on how you treat it. For example, if each personality is distinct, you could try to keep them all at the same level(commensurate with the amount of time spent, Jekyll and Hyde style), but not totalling the levels. At the same time though, the character can sort of qualify for some "gestalt" PrCs without realising it(eg, A is a Rogue, B is a mage, without realising it, they're taking Arcane Trickster, but each half still thinks they're advancing as normal, if a little slower). It's confusing, but makes for good immersion, IMO.

[Diggorian]

But that kind of takes the fun from it. Just make sure that the player is actually able to interpret different personalities, and have a conversation earlier about the splinter personality's behavior and attitudes.

Personally, I wouldnt be running MPD as a fun thing. It's an affliction like lycanthropy but with an irregular trigger.

[Roderick_BR]

If you want to avoid too complex rules, give the character two personalities, with different Int/Wis/Char stats, and a different set of feats/skills, and even different alignments, but keep the same class. It'll save a lot of time. If she tries to multiclass, it needs to be into something that both personalities would be able to get into, as they would, deep down, still share many traits.

[Aximili]

Personally, I wouldnt be running MPD as a fun thing. It's an affliction like lycanthropy but with an irregular trigger.

But D&D is sopposed to be a fun thing. Even afflictions are part of the game, and the should only be used in the game if they make it more interesting to the players.

Lycanthropy takes control of the character, but only at night. Which adds to suspense and intrigue.

Taking control of the character at stressful situations means he'll black out at combats and at moments when the character's background would be most important. Which is the opposite of interesting.

I mean... that's how I feel as a player, but maybe others wouldn't mind.

[Fhaolan]

Actually, I really like the idea of treating the 'splinter personality' using the intelligent item rules, with ego wars and the like. That's a very good idea, and I think I'm going to steal that for my campaign.

Thanks, Lemur.

[Diggorian]

But Aximili, not all of D&D is fun.

Petrification, Nauseated, Panicked, Stunned all are unfun things that D&D includes. MPD is just a new, worse, condition.

The character developement shouldnt be "Now I have two characters to play", it should be "I've gotta come to grips with these episodes before I kill myself, or hurt my friends."

Personally, I prefer the dramatic angle this allows. Man vs Himself theme is so rare in D&D. Didnt you like Fight Club?

[Stephen_E]

It's the players character.
The DM doesn't get to decide personality questions of the PC.
If you want to rule that DID allows the DM to take over the players PC whenever they like, the Player is equally entitled to say "well in that case I won't have DID".

RPGing is about having fun. Taking over control of the players PC tends to remove the "fun" aspect for the player.

Stephen

[Aximili]

But Aximili, not all of D&D is fun.
Petrification, Nauseated, Panicked, Stunned all are unfun things that D&D includes. MPD is just a new, worse, condition.

It is slightly unfun to be petrified right at the beginning of combat, but nobody get's petrified (or anything else) in every single combat. And nobody get's knocked out at every single tense moment. Stuff like this should be ocasional at best, otherwise the player won't feel like he's contributing to anything (and he'll be right).

By creating a condition that takes control of the player whenever a stressful situation or important combat comes up, you are basically nullifying his participation in the game.

The character developement shouldnt be "Now I have two characters to play", it should be "I've gotta come to grips with these episodes before I kill myself, or hurt my friends."

I agree with you 100%. And that's why I think the both character's should use entirely the same sheet (except, of course, for the alignment).
And that's also why I think that the player should not go around deciding when to shift personality (the DM should let him know).
And that's also why I said that the DM has to make sure that player understands the second personality, and sticks to it. It's supposed to have a very specific behavior, defined entirely by the DM. Just because the player is controling the episodes, it doesn't mean that they can't be agressive and dangerous to him or his friends. (it would be even more interesting if the other players didn't know of the condition, if the DM and the afflicted came up with a way of discretely communicating the moment for the personality shift).

Of course, maybe the player is not good at playing an entirely seperate personality. In that case, the DM should either intervene or avoid aplying MPD to the player altogether.

Personally, I prefer the dramatic angle this allows. Man vs Himself theme is so rare in D&D. Didnt you like Fight Club?

Never seen it, is it good?


And finally, I'm not entirely against the DM controling the splinter personality. It's just that, if this case is adopted, than there should actually be a way to win the "Man vs Himself" battle inside the character's reach. And it should be only two or three game sessions away.
'Cause if the player spends too long not being able to control the character at crucial moments, he's gonna start to get bored.

ps: damn, I hate long replies.

[Diggorian]

EDIT- @ Stephen, to differentiate readers.

As I dont usually use the Sanity rules variant, which mentions this disorder in UA, it is ofcourse up to the player to volunteer to develope it; as the OP's player did.

If they do, I'll inform them that this is how I'd adjudicate it, including instances of missing time and occasional unknown abilities surfacing. This follows my understanding of the disorder and serves to create verisimilitude. Disorders are penalties by definition.

Ofcourse, knowing this, a player may choose not to develope DPD.

[TheLogman]

If you do give each personality a class, you should probably make that no more than one of them is a prepared caster, cause then it could get hairy preparing more spell lists than usual, which would slow down play.

Just my two cents.

[Diggorian]

It is slightly unfun to be petrified right at the beginning of combat, but nobody get's petrified (or anything else) in every single combat. And nobody get's knocked out at every single tense moment. Stuff like this should be ocasional at best, otherwise the player won't feel like he's contributing to anything (and he'll be right).

I never said "every single combat". Check my first post #6, I suggest using a variable DC Will save, which would reflect an "occasional at best" situation.

By creating a condition that takes control of the player whenever a stressful situation or important combat comes up, you are basically nullifying his participation in the game.

See above reply. By the literature on DPD, a situation like that which caused the original disassociation would warrant the highest DC. Ordinary combat neednt and wouldnt be like a tortue session (see post #1).

I agree with you 100%. And that's why I think the both character's should use entirely the same sheet (except, of course, for the alignment).
And that's also why I think that the player should not go around deciding when to shift personality (the DM should let him know).
And that's also why I said that the DM has to make sure that player understands the second personality, and sticks to it. It's supposed to have a very specific behavior, defined entirely by the DM. Just because the player is controling the episodes, it doesn't mean that they can't be agressive and dangerous to him or his friends. (it would be even more interesting if the other players didn't know of the condition, if the DM and the afflicted came up with a way of discretely communicating the moment for the personality shift).

Ok, we disagree on the middle man. You say: Let the player play the other (no middle man). I say: I play the other as an NPC with the Pc's body and ability scores (DM middle man).

I choose the later because the host isnt aware of the actions of the other persona (which is essentially an unconscious, highly complicated defense mechanism).

Of course, maybe the player is not good at playing an entirely seperate personality. In that case, the DM should either intervene or avoid aplying MPD to the player altogether.

Sure. A player like this likely wouldnt even suggest developing DPD. I'm discussing those that do, like the OP's player and advising ways to run it in the game that are faithful to the reality yet make interesting fiction -- to my personal idea of "interesting".

Never seen it, is it good?

It's in my top 15 of best movies I've seen, but I may have spoiled to much. It's about DPD amongst other things.

And finally, I'm not entirely against the DM controling the splinter personality. It's just that, if this case is adopted, than there should actually be a way to win the "Man vs Himself" battle inside the character's reach. And it should be only two or three game sessions away.
'Cause if the player spends too long not being able to control the character at crucial moments, he's gonna start to get bored.

Ofcourse allowing this disorder into the game, and running it as a big flaw, should imply that salvation is possible. The struggle to do so will make an good story IMHO, the dramatic angle I speak of. Once the condition is known by the afflicited they can take steps to overcome it, Will save start to lower in DC, maybe replaced by Concentration checks with lowering DCs until the DC for the most similar encounter to the torture session reaching DC 10 then fading away as the affliction is overcome finally.

ps: damn, I hate long replies.

Me too. I write pithy until I need to explain myself. I hope you see my point of view better. Or I've writtten this long for NOTHING!

[Diggorian]

If you do give each personality a class, you should probably make that no more than one of them is a prepared caster, cause then it could get hairy preparing more spell lists than usual, which would slow down play.

Just my two cents.

Yeah I was thinking a more aggressive class for the defending persona myself.

[JackMage666]

Things that differ: (possibly)
Skill Ranks
Feats
Class Levels
Mental Ability Scores
Proficiencies
Alignment

Things that stay the same:
Physical Ability Scores
Equipment (though the personalities may change this mundanely)
Racial Traits

Things that average out:
HP (Take average of Personality 1 and 2, since a Barbarian Personality would have far more than a Wizard Personality).

Those are the mechanical setups, anyway. Obviously, the characters act and think differently, too.

This is also an interesting system for players that may or may not be at a session. Make a Multiple Personality Disorder character who is played by either Player X or Y, depending on who is there. The Mental process changes, but the body remains the same (and, thus, physical ability scores and race doesn't change).

Also, you might need to determine the time the trama occured. If it was when he was a child, this would be a complete re-do, every time. If it was half-way through an adventuring career (a significant event such as a god's birth may cause this), perhaps each personality shares the earlier class levels and skill ranks.

[Aximili]

Me too. I write pithy until I need to explain myself. I hope you see my point of view better. Or I've writtten this long for NOTHING!

Yes, I do. And now I can say that would be willing to accept your version if the DM insisted on it. But I would very much like to be able to play the splinter personality (compromising, of course, to not remember what had happened once the original personality regained control).

[Diggorian]

@ Jackmage: I'm with you until "Things that average out". As HP are physical toughness as well as skill to marginalize successful attacks, I'd do seperate HP per persona. A Barbarian persona surfacing to protect the wizard host is an excellant idea, nice contrast.

@ Aximili: Were I confident in your RPing as a player, as opposed to a stranger that posts on the same forum as me, I would accept this compromise.