Poly-Cripple?

[Dannyalcatraz]

In D&D, crippling wounds are not reflected on the character sheet in one's max HP total- someone permanently injured by something will generally not have his HP total altered.

So even while Polymorph self won't heal current wounds (HP damage), it is CLEARLY powerful enough to otherwise change one's entire physical structure at the cellular level. You can make yourself into an ooze, for goodness sake- all those pesky bones, eyes, hair, etc., altered to virtually undifferentiated slime...

And once the spell expires, the target returns to its original, crippled form.

 

[Nebrok]

That's the risk of applying modern thinking to magic I doubt any wizard knows anything about the nervous system.

It's true that a wizard wouldn't know about the nervous system, but a wizard wouldn't have to know. The spell takes care of that for him.

 

[Umbran]

If the trauma is greater than would be healed by the polymorph spell, then the Morphed form is just as injured. By the other side's "logic", Polymorph should heal all wounds completely. That is obviously not the case.

So even while Polymorph self won't heal current wounds (HP damage), it is CLEARLY powerful enough to otherwise change one's entire physical structure at the cellular level. You can make yourself into an ooze, for goodness sake- all those pesky bones, eyes, hair, etc., altered to virtually undifferentiated slime...

Danny's got a point. Some injuries cannot be analogously transferred to the polymorphed form. You have a character who has lost an arm, and you polymorph them into an ooze. How do you represent that injury?

Let's make it a little more difficult - you have a character who is a thri-kreen, that has lost one of his four limbs. Polymorph them into a human, who normally has two. Does it matter if the Thri-kreen had lost the upper or lower arm?

This way (the way of trying to be super-picky about the details) lies madness.

 

[Nytmare]

It's true that a wizard wouldn't know about the nervous system, but a wizard wouldn't have to know. The spell takes care of that for him.

That would also depend entirely upon whether or not the game was taking place in a universe where paralysis was the result of nervous system damage, or somewhere where paralysis was caused by evil spirits residing the person's legs.

 

[Celebrim]

Danny's got a point. Some injuries cannot be analogously transferred to the polymorphed form. You have a character who has lost an arm, and you polymorph them into an ooze. How do you represent that injury?

So, back up a bit. In 3e D&D there aren't really any common ways under the rules to lose an arm. So, before a player can lose an arm you need some rules for how that happens, and probably, some rules for what that means.

There are several ways for it to happen in my game:

1) A coup de grace attack targeting a limb, either by choice or because no other part of the body is exposed. This can also be the result of certain traps, for example, reaching your arm into a hole which has a guillotine trap.
2) As a result of certain critical hits that reduce the character to zero or fewer hit points.

Secondly, after an arm is lost, you need some rules definition for what that means. 3e D&D has no rules for spinal injury, loss of limbs, or anything else. Without rules, you can't really expect that when other rules are applied that you'll really have a clear picture of what happened.

If you lose an arm in my game, then there are certain effects. First, you temporarily gain the 'one arm' disadvantage, which says basically what you would imagine it says - you can no longer take any action that requires two arms. Secondly, you suffer disability in the form of strength and dexterity loss.

So what happens in common shapechanging situations.

1) Limbed character transforms to something without limbs: Well, to a certain extent this is obvious. Without limbs, you have the 'No Arms' disadvantage, which obviously makes the 'One Arm' disadvantage redundant. You've also gained a 'Limbless Locomotion' advantage, so if you'd lost or injured a leg and had the 'Lame' or 'One Leg' disadvantage, that disadvantage is irrelevant in your new form. However, nothing has changed the fact that you are currently suffering from strength and dexterity loss. Your new form is going to be similar disadvantaged. There is a good chance that a limbless character transforming into a slime is going to find that, even though they lack limbs, without those limbs they lack sufficient control over the new form to get much done.
2) Character missing an arm grows an new one: So, lets say you have more or less protein form, and you are missing an arm. You can grow a third, fourth, or fifth arm to deal with your 'One Arm' disadvantage, transforming you into a multiarmed being with a 'Missing Manipulator' disadvantage. But, you still have that lost strength and dexterity. You may have the hands to hold the pole arm now, but you won't handle it as well as you would have back when you were whole.
3) Character with multiple limbs in its natural form transforms into a form with fewer limbs: Fortunately, I don't have to deal with this so I've never had to really think about it and have never bothered to make rules for what happens when a Thri-kreen or a monstrous centipede loses a leg, but conceptually its pretty simple. Unless there is reason to think that there are primary and secondary manipulators, that is to say unless is there some mechanically important difference between Thri-keen upper and lower arms, I'm probably just going to have the 'Missing Manipulator' disadvantage go away. The new form still carries the lost strength and dexterity penalty (in the case of the centipede losing a single limb, I'd ad hoc rule that as little or none). I'd flavor that by having the limbs merge, and the side with the missing limb would produce a limb which was week and deformed.

This way (the way of trying to be super-picky about the details) lies madness.

Beyond rules for two armed, two legged humanoids, I don't see much point in formalizing this sort of thing. I could, but the cases in which it comes up and matters are so rare that they just aren't worth it.

However, the central idea of my house rule is always applicable. Loss of limb rules-wise is mostly equal to loss of attributes and that is constant with regard to form changes.

Now, that is probably not the only way to do this. My point is that without a framework of rules for something, of course when you ask a rules question you get an ambigious answer.

In the case of the OP, it sounds like the PC in question is paralyzed either from birth or otherwise in the backstory. I really can't answer that question because I wouldn't allow that. I'm pretty open about backgrounds, but 'paraplegic' is such an extreme disability that it generally is only going to work in a situation where the PC has a complete and total work around that virtually negates the disability. And, since I see that as too much risk of getting something for nothing (since taking a disadvantage provides advantages during character creation), I don't even have rules for 'paraplegic' or 'no legs'. If I did, they'd probably be something like, "You lose your walk or ground speed, and can only crawl. Even if you change form, you retain this disability. If this disability is not gained through play, this disability is presumed to be the result of a powerful curse, and is thus not curable by ordinary magical means without buying off the disadvantage." Then I'd be able to answer the question.

 

[Nebrok]

More than one person has mentioned the paralysis may be part of a curse or magical in nature. Just for clarification, in this case the paralysis is the result of physical injury and not supernatural or magical in any way.

 

[Celebrim]

More than one person has mentioned the paralysis may be part of a curse or magical in nature. Just for clarification, in this case the paralysis is the result of physical injury and not supernatural or magical in any way.

I understood that, but we've been discussing the general case as much or more as the particular example you've brought up.

IMO, the example is a bit problimatic, since by the time adequate shapechanging abilities are around, likely the means to magically cure the disability are also available. The reason I only allow physical disabilities which are the result of curses, is that it is far too easy for magical healing to fix the disability. And, without providing the character with offsetting advantages to make them balanced and playable, such disabilities tend to be no fun for other players or even the player that wanted them in the long run. But if in the long run the disability is cured, then they lose the disadvantage and likely retain whatever advantage they were given.

In any event, the presence or absence of a curse IMO only effects whether or not the disability is easily cured. It does not effect how I would handle issues like shapechanging. IMO, regardless of the origin of the disfigurement, it would pursue the character however they changed their shape.