Maiming a PC (as opposed to killing him)

[Douglas Muir 406]

I'm posting this in "advice" rather than "house rules" because I'm trying to get a feel for whether this is a good idea. If I decide that it's worth trying, then I'll do a post over at house rules to discuss the details.

So: at low levels, Raise Dead is beyond most PCs' resources, so death is permanent. This adds a distinctly different flavor to low-level play, and on the whole I personally prefer it. That said, it seems worthwhile exploring alternatives.

So: what about giving the PC a major scar or disability instead? Offer the option -- "I can kill your character, or he can suffer a lasting handicap." Some players would probably rather see their character die than have to play a character with a disability. On the other hand, some might view it as fun or an interesting roleplaying challenge. Off the top of my head, possible disabilities might include:

-- Lost leg (below the knee). PC can get a pegleg. -5' to movement and -4 on Acrobatics checks.

-- Lost arm (below the elbow). PC can get a hook. Cannot use two-handed weapons or shields other than buckler. -2 on Sleight of Hand and Disable Device checks.

-- Massive facial scarring, including lost eye. -2 on initial reaction rolls, Diplomacy checks, and Perception.

All of these disabilities can be fixed with a Regenerate, once the PC has access to that spell. Which could take a while. (One of the weirdnesses of 1e that has been preserved in all subsequent editions: a 9th level cleric can bring you back from the dead, but you need a 13th level cleric to regrow a finger.) A PC who gets maimed at 2nd or 3rd level could be bouncing around on that peg leg until 9th or 10th level.

This seems like something some of my players might enjoy. Others not... but it might be interesting to give them the choice.

Thoughts?

Doug M.

[Saint Caleth]

I never would be very likely to do this to a player, unless there is a specific story reason or as you said it was the alternative to a TPK caused by stupidity.

One other disability that I have used on a few NPCs in various adventures is having fingers on one hand removed joint-by-joint for an arcane spellcaster, giving a spell failure chance.

[Exocrat]

I've been using heavy ability damage combined with a few points of con and strength drain. If it's a character they're attached to, they stick with it and play more cautiously. If not, I write it off and they bring in a new one.

[gnomersy]

Seems a bit silly to me that clerics could raise people from the dead but reattaching an arm is out of the question.

If I was doing maiming I'd introduce a lesser regenerate spell which would grow back the limb over the course of a week and would give you a minor debuff like -1 to hit and damage with regrown arm. Or only 10 rounds of full movespeed with regrown leg per day to signify it still being weak for another week after it's grown.

Also the maimed leg seems much more useful than the arm.

[Douglas Muir 406]

gnomersy wrote:

Also the maimed leg seems much more useful than the arm.

It's situational. -5' movement and -4 on Acrobatics checks would be a huge problem for the halfling rogue, not nearly as big a deal for the human cleric.

Doug M.

[Wolfsnap]

I save stuff like this for very rare occasions that call for something memorable. If you have to do something like this to more than one person in the party at a time then it just becomes a pain in the tuchas.

[Douglas Muir 406]

I agree that doing this to more than one PC would be kinda silly.

What I was thinking of was the occasional PC who as a great backstory and/or is set up to be central to the metaplot. For instance, in my Kingmaker campaign there was a paladin PC who took the "bastard" trait. We agreed that he was an illegitimate offshoot of the royal family. In the short run, this gave him a lot of interesting raw material for roleplaying. (He played the character as a guy with anger issues, who became a paladin to keep his inner demons in check. Yes, that's an old chestnut, but it was fun anyway.) In the longer run, it was setting him up to be baron/duke/ruler of the new kingdom. (N.B., I knew this but the player didn't.)

Now, losing this guy to a heroic death would be fine. But losing him to a random crit from a charging kobold would be kind of anticlimactic. It would seem more consistent with the Rule of Cool to give the player the option of keeping him alive, but with a lasting scar.

Again, I'm just kicking this around. I'd be interested to hear if anyone has done anything like this.

Doug M.

[Lightbulb]

GM: Kobold crits and kills you.

Player: I burn a Hero Point

GM: At the last moment the Kobold lose its balance and instead of splitting open you head the blade simply slices your ear off.

Too early in the morning for very good descriptions but you get the idea. Hero Points give a good way to save characters.

If you leave them with scars to remind them of their near escape so be it.

Giving characteristic penalties seems unnecessary with Hero Points. If they are out of Hero Points its game over...