Born with no arms?

babomb · Aug 27, 2004

Well, you could make him a monk and have him team up with a guy who has no legs.

Ogrork the Mighty · Aug 28, 2004

Actually, I asked what the game effects would be. I didn't ask whether it was a viable option. My "coming out swinging" was in response to people trying to tell me it wasn't a viable option, when I knew it was, which wasn't the question I had asked in the first place. So that's that.

I wasn't disappointed in the answers, I was disappointed in the attitude. I would never want to play with people who try to deepsix a character concept just b/c they didn't think it was "optimized" enough.

As for accusing me of DM fiat, you're out to lunch b/c I wouldn't be asking for a ruling if I was just going to decree it now would I?

The part about crushing skulls and all was role-playing..., remember that?!? Apparently some people do not.

Anyhoo, thanks to all the positive posters. To the rest, oh well.

And now on to bigger and better things.

Scion · Aug 28, 2004

I think that 'not viable' and 'incredibly difficult without extreme circumstance' are both 'game effects'

Still though, if someone wanted to do this in my games they would have to have an incredibly good reason. Just like they would have to have an incredibly good reason to play just about anything else that would cause for great difficulty in game play.

As an npc? anything can happen. come up with a reasonable list of penalties (needing a feat to be able to grapple at all sounds reasonable, still have a penalty though. somatic components? right out. and a lot of others)

Still, maybe a guy with no 'hands'? that would make things just as interesting for the character, but with a whole lots of extra possibilities.

Patryn of Elvenshae · Aug 28, 2004

Ogrork the Mighty said:
As for accusing me of DM fiat, you're out to lunch b/c I wouldn't be asking for a ruling if I was just going to decree it now would I?

Sorry. You misunderstood, or I mistyped.

By "DM Fiat," I mean "Despite a drawback which would have likely left him dead long, long before, he will have succeeded against all comers and will be a 10th+ level Something with the power to crush kings' skullz."

In other words, the only likely scenario in which such an odd character makes it to the rarefied heights of power is when the DM says, "He made it."

The part about crushing skulls and all was role-playing..., remember that?!? Apparently some people do not.

Sorry. It sounded more like, "My NPC is uberleet! He will kick everyone's butt and take names, despite an inability to write! He will kill you before you get a chance to look at him! He is unstoppable!"

Mentioning how he was slowly being twisted into a raging psychopath merely added supporting evidence for such a supposition.

Again, he's an NPC; you can do that. Just expect it to be met with a healthy degree of skepticism. Skepticism, in this case, is expressed as, "I'm not really sure he'd ever survive a dungeon crawl, let alone the first enemy who decided to grapple him, pin him, and draw a light weapon."

ThirdWizard · Aug 28, 2004

Again, he's an NPC; you can do that. Just expect it to be met with a healthy degree of skepticism. Skepticism, in this case, is expressed as, "I'm not really sure he'd ever survive a dungeon crawl, let alone the first enemy who decided to grapple him, pin him, and draw a light weapon."

You know, my PCs never seem to see that far. "It's a gift. And a curse." (Monk)

I'm gonna go with him having a Kobold Bard to do these things for him. When in doubt, put someone more odd than yourself nearby. Distractions work wonders!

Three_Haligonians · Aug 28, 2004

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
By "DM Fiat," I mean "Despite a drawback which would have likely left him dead long, long before, he will have succeeded against all comers and will be a 10th+ level Something with the power to crush kings' skullz." In other words, the only likely scenario in which such an odd character makes it to the rarefied heights of power is when the DM says, "He made it."

Anabstercorian said:
Killed at birth, or killed as a toddler due to a tragic but ultimately hilarious accident.

Alright, fair enough, in the real world, people who were born with physical differences in the middle ages may have had a tough time making it to age three. However, so too would any child! Most children did not survive past infancy in the middle ages due to a number of factors including poor nutrition and illness. No one would accuse your character of being unplayable because she was more likely to die in her first year of life, nor, I doubt, would they question your background if all of your characters brothers and sisters grew to adulthood.

Part of the beauty of D&D is developing an interesting character. Shakespeare created a character who, in her infancy, was rejected by her father and cast into the wilderness (The Winter's Tale). Luckily for Pertida (the character in question) no one told Shakespeare that the odds of Pertida being rescued were unlikely, and that she wasn't a "viable option". Whats more, many people create characters who have lost their family to some horrible misfortune, making the character the last of thier family. I've yet to see someone look at such a background and say "well, how did YOU survive the misfortune, then?"

Clearly this character is extraordinary...ALL characters in D&D are extraordinary...if you don't believe me, try lifting over your head the amount of weight your character can. If you can do that...move 120 feet in six seconds. If you can do both those things...you've got my seal of extraordinaryness

along with Ogrork the Mighty's character.

In his early life, I'm assuming SOMEONE was looking out for him until he became independant. Consider this writing on Neandertal: "From their remains, it has been discovered that some of the Neandertal people suffered from rickets...people suffering from rickets have soft bones which cause them to have swollen joints and distorted limbs—sometimes they are extremely bow-legged, but in more severe cases they are completely crippled and unable to walk....Their bones demonstrate that they kept on living long after the onset of their disability. This shows that these people had tender feelings for each other—sometimes apparently providing support for those they knew would never get better." This is how Neandertal cared for members of their communities who were unable to become dependant, which is a worse case than Ogrork the Mighty's character. My point? Its been said that NPCs and PCs would make fun of this character and would have little to do with him. Consider this: if your character has less compassion than a neandertal, what does that say about him?

T from Three Haligonians

Lonely Tylenol · Aug 28, 2004

Its been said that NPCs and PCs would make fun of this character and would have little to do with him. Consider this: if your character has less compassion than a neandertal, what does that say about him?

That he doesn't want to die due to reduced speed due to having to carry Bob the Armless Psychopath Wizard up a rope to escape a rampaging dragon...again?

Lord Pendragon · Aug 28, 2004

Three_Haligonians said:
My point? Its been said that NPCs and PCs would make fun of this character and would have little to do with him. Consider this: if your character has less compassion than a neandertal, what does that say about him?

Well, I for one have never said such a character was impossible. Again, it's not impossible, just improbable. The illness and disease you mention ordinary children suffering does not change this fact, because while full-bodied individuals had to deal with malnourishment and disease, the PC in question would have to deal with malnourishment, disease, and not having arms. It's not either/or. In the case of the person without arms, he would suffer all the bad conditions any other person in the period would, and the lack of arms, which is a severe difficulty.

But I've already made my points about the armless character himself before. What I really wanted to respond to was your above comment, regarding a lack of compassion.

Keep in mind that adventuring is a very dangerous profession. Sure, an armless character might function as well as any other (given the right class choices etc. etc.) but I, as another PC, will never give him that chance. Because if he doesn't function as well as an able-bodied man, I die. My life is worth more to me than an armless man feeling bad because I wouldn't accept him into my adventuring group.

I tend to think of it this way: would they let an armless man join the Navy Seals, or any other military commando group? My guess is No. For the same reasons that PCs I play would balk at adventuring with a man without arms.

It's not a matter of compassion. It's a matter of life and death.

apsuman · Aug 30, 2004

Three_Haligonians said:
Most children did not survive past infancy in the middle ages due to a number of factors including poor nutrition and illness.

Not to nitpick but wouldn't this be an impossibility?

I guess it could depend on where, when, and for how long you define the middle ages, but with illness, plauge, and war killing off the older population if a couple would have to have six children to grow replacements plue one more in an era when childbirth itself can kill the mother, I find it really hard to believe that most children did not survive past infancy.