RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I'm preparing to run the Kingmaker AP for my group, and so the players have been working on their characters for the last few days. One of them has come up with the idea for a ranger who has been blind from birth. Difficulties? Oh yes. But because it's a cool idea, we've been doing some thinking on how to make it a viable concept without simply removing any penalties or obstacles the character would face in trying to do her duties.
So. In combat, a blind character essentially treats all opponents as invisible; they take a -2 penalty to AC and lose their Dexterity bonus to AC, which is analogous to an invisible character getting a +2 bonus to hit and ignoring his target's Dex bonus. In addition, all opponents have total concealment versus a blind character. (The other penalties, such as limited move speed, are minor and not really under consideration here.)
So in order to successfully attack a target, the blinded PC would first need to discover the location (i.e. the square) that the target is located in, and even then, any attacks would have a 50% miss chance. Taken as it is, this would make for a lot of misses and a lot of frustration. Some frustration is fine, but the point is to mitigate it a little bit. So the question becomes twofold: One, how would the PC go about locating a target's square, and two, how would the PC mitigate the concealment penalties one the target has been located?
A few ideas have cropped up, but they raise questions, too. Using Keen-Eared Scout, beating your Listen (Perception, in Pathfinder) check by 10 gives you the "precise location" of an unseen creature. Some of my players think this means that succeeding on such a check would negate concealment penalties, because precise is precise, after all, not "vaguely somewhere in this 25-square-foot area". However, I notice (and cross-referencing from 3.5 rules) that normally beating a Listen/Perception check by 20 allows a PC to identify the square that an invisible creature is located in, but that concealment penalties still apply. This would mean the feat halves the margin you need to identify the location, but my hunch is that the concealment penalty would still apply.
However, this also raises questions. Beating what Perception check? Obviously, if the target is trying to be stealthy, then it would be an opposed check against Stealth. But what if the target is in combat, or patrolling a corridor, or just standing around smoking a cigarette and not trying to make any Stealth check? Is there a good Perception DC to be able to hear someone who is just standing still, but not making an effort to be quiet? For that matter, the DC for hearing the sounds of combat is -10, but it's a far cry from being able to hear that swords are clashing over there to knowing exactly what squares the combat is taking place in. Or is it?
So. For the sake of argument, the PC has somehow targeted her opponent's square, and attacks. What methods are available to reduce the concealment penalty? I've posited a seeking longbow, but are there other methods, and how would they interact with the necessity of having to locate the target audially beforehand? I'd be interested in any related thoughts on the subject of "blind archers" as well, if anyone has any clever ideas.
Check out how the Oracle playtest class handles it. One of the drawbacks you can select (I forget the official term, and don't have the PDF with me at the moment) is Clouded Vision. It grants Darkvision out to 30', but you cannot see beyond that AT ALL. As you go up in level it extends to 60', and then gain abilities such as blindsight and blindsense I believe.
I think these class features are actually quite self-contained and self-balancing. I don't see any reason why they would have to be exclusive to the Oracle class, and instead they should be able to be taken as traits, or something similar. Though I'd still restrict each character to one.
Enworld listed this article a few days ago but it specifically deals with the idea of a blind character and how to pull them off. Check it out it might give you some ideas on how to do this.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I agree with the finding the square and concealment penalties would still apply.
How about the Blind Fight feat? it helps out some.
Give the character blindsense at some point? blindsight at higher levels?
Blindfight would help with the necessary Acrobatics check and if she ever gets into melee combat, but she's being built as an archer. Crazy, right? Maybe, but we're trying to make it work.
In terms of granting abilities, technically yes, I could give something like blindsense or blindsight, but I want to avoid just giving things out of the blue, and would prefer (initially) to limit myself to working within the rules. I mean, technically, I could just say, "Ah, what the hell, you don't have any concealment penalties," but as a DM I prefer to have a light touch.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I should also note one rather troubling aspect of being blind: Blindness (or invisibility) prevents a ranger from applying favored enemy damage to targets. I could, of course, just handwave that away as something which the PC has adapted to over the years, but again, I'd like to review more elegant solutions before having to say "a wizard did it".
I dunno. I'm not comfy with the idea of blindsight ever coming into the picture. If a player wants a blind character, the character should remain blind. Not "you can now see, only not using your eyes".
I don't know of a way to make a blind ranger really work while retaining the flavor of blindness. The penalties are huge, and the combat effectiveness is low.
On the other hand, a blind sorcerer or warmage could be really fun. All area-effect spells, all the time. The enemy is somewhere vaguely to the left? fireball Oops. Missed. Rinse, repeat. As a DM I'd consider compensating by doing something like letting the character "pull back" wasted spells 50% of the time or something. Or letting them have widen spell as a free feat. Or both. Basically put emphasis on the blindness while still being combat effective. Another off-the-wall compensation would be to let them cast spells for attacks of opportunity and let them threaten with touch spells. They hear someone sneaking up to stab them? Fine. vampiric touch
Basically, with a ranger you're going to just spend time waiving away the penalties instead of keeping them and cherishing them.
I think adding blindsense and blindsight at a midling level is cool, I would suggest however that you do make them required feats, thus depriving them of other feats. I mean, being blind is a disadvantage, even if you have learned to overcome it.
On a side note, there is a real-life analogy to this idea. I saw a documentary once about a teen-ager who plays sports even though he is blind. He makes clicking noises with his mouth, and uses his hearing to judge the location of opponents and balls by their echo. Human echo-location: it does exist.
I think adding blindsense and blindsight at a midling level is cool, I would suggest however that you do make them required feats, thus depriving them of other feats. I mean, being blind is a disadvantage, even if you have learned to overcome it.
On a side note, there is a real-life analogy to this idea. I saw a documentary once about a teen-ager who plays sports even though he is blind. He makes clicking noises with his mouth, and uses his hearing to judge the location of opponents and balls by their echo. Human echo-location: it does exist.
I disagree with just offering your player blindsense/sight. The article on deafness mentions penalties decreasing over time based on GM discretion, maybe throughout time make the miss chance due to blindness decrease by certain percentages.
I played a blind druid in a Ptolus game. We compensated with, I think, 3 free feats: Blindfight (which eliminates movement issues and improves melee), keen eared scout, which allows pinpointing square with a perception check, and skill focus: perception, which made the check possible. By 5th level or so, I had a huge perception modifier.