Hey so I'm new to DMing and one of my players is playing a Teifling Wizard (Necromancer) who was blinded by a cult he used to be in.
I decided to make things a little easier for everyone since my player is new to the game as well by saying that the blinding was part of a rite that gave him Blindsight 30ft.
However I'm still having troubles in how to run combat as well as just describing the world. It's hard to make the world interesting when they can't see anything I'm describing.
I'm thinking of making the blindsight function like Toph from ATLA or Marvel's Daredevil, at least for combat, but beyond the 30ft I'm not sure what to do.
Honestly, neither of those are really great options because you’ve essentially let a player trade a nominal “disability” for stronger sensory capabilities. Granted, a Wizard working with a 30 ft radius is still fairly handicapped with spellcasting range, but there is no quick and easy way to attempt to balance permanent blindness as a player condition. If it actually functions as a real handicap- as an inability to see objectively is for someone pursuing an active lifestyle, even if there are ways to compensate for it to certain degrees- then the player simply will consistently underperform, especially as a caster. And if you go the “blind but not really” route commonly seen in other pieces of fiction, then as I said already that means the player has effectively parlayed a free buff from the concept, which is usually not a good table dynamic.
To put it short, I wouldn't. However, if they really want to play a blind character, don't give them blindsight. Instead, either make them take a level in Warlock for Pact of the Chain and flavor it as the cult was a forced deal with a greater being, or make them reliant on the find familiar spell. You could still give them like 5-10 feet blindsight, but generally blindsight is a highly potent ability, and it could imbalance a game.
D&D does not have a system for disadvantages, so this is really up to the DM. Your basic choices are
Don't allow it .
Make them blind with no compensating advantages.
House rule some set of compensating advantages that feels fair.
Most likely #3 is going to come down to some sort of sense that replaces vision; this is typically blindsight but you can just invent some exotic sense that behaves however you like. Now, is 30' fair? Honestly... I don't know. I might start with 10' (like the blind fighting feat) and see how it goes, as it's usually less problematic in a game to boost something that proves too weak than to nerf something that proves too strong.
Part of the problem is that two players at my table have never played a ttrpg in their lives, and the other player played in some insane "power gamer" games with friends where it seemed everything goes and the DM said yes to everything.
I'm trying to keep things balanced, but that player wants SO MANY things that are overpowered or unbalanced. I've said no or later to a lot of it, but I've had to say yes to some because I need him at the table and he's already a flake. Then to make it fair I've allowed the other players to start with more than I'd like.
The party is pretty overpowered for lvl 1, but I'm just trying to give them a fun power fantasy at this point. Worry about perfect balance and adhering to RAW a little less.
The new player that is playing a blind wizard is mostly in it for RP. She did not make her wizard the least bit optimized, having a 12 in Intelligence despite my warning her that her magic would be weak. She wants to be kind of a dumb boy. Same thing for the blindness. She thought it'd be a cool character idea. We already ran a session zero for that character, but it's probably not too late to change some things.
The new player that is playing a blind wizard is mostly in it for RP. She did not make her wizard the least bit optimized, having a 12 in Intelligence despite my warning her that her magic would be weak. She wants to be kind of a dumb boy. Same thing for the blindness. She thought it'd be a cool character idea. We already ran a session zero for that character, but it's probably not too late to change some things.
30' blindsight range on a wizard is unlikely to be a balance issue.
I would highly suggest that you (and in fact everyone else who has posted here) read the FATE Accessibility Toolkit. It is designed for a different TTRPG system, but the lessons you can learn from it do transfer over. It is frankly a black mark on the writers, editors, and developers of D&D that they've ignored issues like this for so long.
D&D 5e and 5.5e are both written to hand all of the advantages to players. Power gaming is sort of what D&D is built for when compared with other systems. I wouldn't worry too much about overpowered players. If it ever tips over, simply enforce the adventuring day and put them through 8 encounters per in game day. Before too long you'll see that even the most 'well built' character will burn their resources by encounter 5.
The blind wizard, can be a good story thing, but should have a reason. I would suggest the following compensations. First off, I would suggest tremoursense that can develop into blindsight. I would tier it so that the player character develops as they level up. Levels 1-5 I would have the character simply get advantage on hearing, touch, smell, and taste perception checks. Levels 6-10 I would allow them to take Tremoursense up to 30ft. Then at levels 11-15 I would have Tremoursense extend out to 60ft, with blindsight of 10ft. Levels 16-20, I would have Tremoursense be 60ft, with Blindsight of 30ft.
This means that a character isn't penalised for a disability, and they aren't going to have the tedious thing of constantly rolling their attacks at disadvantage (due to the enemy being unseens). However, I would also make clear that ranged enemies will always be attacking at advantage. That can't be surmounted.
With all of this said, I'd also ask why the player wants to play a blind wizard. The concept vs the reality can often cause frictions in long term adventures. So it does require a decent conversation with the player about what their expectations are. To be clear, D&D is built on a set of expectations. The game does work far better for fantasy adventures, and is very, very clunky when it ventures outside that genre. There are some great systems out there for playing at superheroes, and if that's what the player wants to play I'd highly advice reading up on one of those systems and borrowing rules or mechanics to assist.
The blindsight 30' is still a pretty strong disadvantage over a fully sighted character and I think could play reasonably. The issue is that so many spells are RAW "a creature you can see" and so you need a way to let those spells still be usable. For a sighted character, they have far more range.
Something to think about is that Blindsight RAW is a radius for a sphere. Up to you if you want to keep that or if you want to make it blocked by walls etc. like light would be.
Wow - so much distaste for power gamers. Its almost as if folks think we would all be better off if people did not understand how their stat blocks work, how to properly build a MAD class, how to properly utilize all the tools in the toolbox and yes one of the tools is being creative and pushing the boundaries of grey areas and home brew.
I cant stand playing with or DM'ing a table where the players don't optimize their class - its a disservice to the rest of the players and the dm - the players either have to carry your dead weight around or the DM will need to dumb stuff down so the party can do anything - yuck.
I am all for power gamers and min maxers - use every tool as creatively as possible and to its maximum extent - keeps all the players and the DM on their toes imo.
The thing is that "power gamer" is not only used for "a person who optimizes their character well," it's also incorrectly used as a synonym for a munchkin. And from the OP's description, it sounds like they're referring to someone who's the latter.
OP, I just want to point out that you do have veto power over any ideas the players propose to you. Just because someone wants something really OP doesn't mean you have to give it to them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The thing is that "power gamer" is not only used for "a person who optimizes their character well," it's also incorrectly used as a synonym for a munchkin. And from the OP's description, it sounds like they're referring to someone who's the latter.
OP, I just want to point out that you do have veto power over any ideas the players propose to you. Just because someone wants something really OP doesn't mean you have to give it to them.
Well I have no love of munchkins --- except perhaps on occasion a few of the jelly filled ones with a coffee in the morning LOL! (That is a reference to Dunkin Donuts for those that may not have one in their area)
Part of the problem is that two players at my table have never played a ttrpg in their lives, and the other player played in some insane "power gamer" games with friends where it seemed everything goes and the DM said yes to everything.
I'm trying to keep things balanced, but that player wants SO MANY things that are overpowered or unbalanced. I've said no or later to a lot of it, but I've had to say yes to some because I need him at the table and he's already a flake. Then to make it fair I've allowed the other players to start with more than I'd like.
The party is pretty overpowered for lvl 1, but I'm just trying to give them a fun power fantasy at this point. Worry about perfect balance and adhering to RAW a little less.
The new player that is playing a blind wizard is mostly in it for RP. She did not make her wizard the least bit optimized, having a 12 in Intelligence despite my warning her that her magic would be weak. She wants to be kind of a dumb boy. Same thing for the blindness. She thought it'd be a cool character idea. We already ran a session zero for that character, but it's probably not too late to change some things.
I think you need to sit down and tell her that if she wants to play a blind character she really needs to play a fighter or monk because so much of Wizard requires sight.
And she absolutely needs to increase Intelligence. I get wanting to RP.. but there almost no monster is going to fail her saves and she is going to miss monsters way too much that she isn't going to be effective in combat. If she wants to play a dumb character she needs to play a Sorcerer not a Wizard. The low intelligence is going to be an issue after a couple of levels.
The PCs shouldn't have anything extra at level one. Especially not magic items. (The new monster manual is going to fix this I think.) A magic weapon makes several monsters significantly easier than they should be).
Wow - so much distaste for power gamers. Its almost as if folks think we would all be better off if people did not understand how their stat blocks work, how to properly build a MAD class, how to properly utilize all the tools in the toolbox and yes one of the tools is being creative and pushing the boundaries of grey areas and home brew.
I cant stand playing with or DM'ing a table where the players don't optimize their class - its a disservice to the rest of the players and the dm - the players either have to carry your dead weight around or the DM will need to dumb stuff down so the party can do anything - yuck.
I am all for power gamers and min maxers - use every tool as creatively as possible and to its maximum extent - keeps all the players and the DM on their toes imo.
Like 90% of my players don't optimize and they are still really powerful in 5e. It would be a nightmare playing for a group who optimized because id have to double like all the encounters.
Part of the problem is that two players at my table have never played a ttrpg in their lives, and the other player played in some insane "power gamer" games with friends where it seemed everything goes and the DM said yes to everything.
I'm trying to keep things balanced, but that player wants SO MANY things that are overpowered or unbalanced. I've said no or later to a lot of it, but I've had to say yes to some because I need him at the table and he's already a flake. Then to make it fair I've allowed the other players to start with more than I'd like.
The party is pretty overpowered for lvl 1, but I'm just trying to give them a fun power fantasy at this point. Worry about perfect balance and adhering to RAW a little less.
The new player that is playing a blind wizard is mostly in it for RP. She did not make her wizard the least bit optimized, having a 12 in Intelligence despite my warning her that her magic would be weak. She wants to be kind of a dumb boy. Same thing for the blindness. She thought it'd be a cool character idea. We already ran a session zero for that character, but it's probably not too late to change some things.
Most spells require you to see your target. I'd not allow that character because it's highly likely to be useless. Even an experienced player I trusted I'd think long and hard about approving. Personally, when I take a character with disadvantages, I want to play through them...not get compensated for them. I'd be careful with the powergamer character, he might overshadow everyone else.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey so I'm new to DMing and one of my players is playing a Teifling Wizard (Necromancer) who was blinded by a cult he used to be in.
I decided to make things a little easier for everyone since my player is new to the game as well by saying that the blinding was part of a rite that gave him Blindsight 30ft.
However I'm still having troubles in how to run combat as well as just describing the world. It's hard to make the world interesting when they can't see anything I'm describing.
I'm thinking of making the blindsight function like Toph from ATLA or Marvel's Daredevil, at least for combat, but beyond the 30ft I'm not sure what to do.
Honestly, neither of those are really great options because you’ve essentially let a player trade a nominal “disability” for stronger sensory capabilities. Granted, a Wizard working with a 30 ft radius is still fairly handicapped with spellcasting range, but there is no quick and easy way to attempt to balance permanent blindness as a player condition. If it actually functions as a real handicap- as an inability to see objectively is for someone pursuing an active lifestyle, even if there are ways to compensate for it to certain degrees- then the player simply will consistently underperform, especially as a caster. And if you go the “blind but not really” route commonly seen in other pieces of fiction, then as I said already that means the player has effectively parlayed a free buff from the concept, which is usually not a good table dynamic.
To put it short, I wouldn't. However, if they really want to play a blind character, don't give them blindsight. Instead, either make them take a level in Warlock for Pact of the Chain and flavor it as the cult was a forced deal with a greater being, or make them reliant on the find familiar spell. You could still give them like 5-10 feet blindsight, but generally blindsight is a highly potent ability, and it could imbalance a game.
KOBOLDS WITH CANNONS! A RP thread about Small humanoids with Huge weapons.
Proud member of the EVIL JEFF CULT! PRAISE JEFF!
Homebrew Races: HERE Homebrew Spells: HERE Homebrew Monsters: HERE
MORE OF ME! (And platypodes/platypi/platypuses) (Extended signature)
D&D does not have a system for disadvantages, so this is really up to the DM. Your basic choices are
Most likely #3 is going to come down to some sort of sense that replaces vision; this is typically blindsight but you can just invent some exotic sense that behaves however you like. Now, is 30' fair? Honestly... I don't know. I might start with 10' (like the blind fighting feat) and see how it goes, as it's usually less problematic in a game to boost something that proves too weak than to nerf something that proves too strong.
Part of the problem is that two players at my table have never played a ttrpg in their lives, and the other player played in some insane "power gamer" games with friends where it seemed everything goes and the DM said yes to everything.
I'm trying to keep things balanced, but that player wants SO MANY things that are overpowered or unbalanced. I've said no or later to a lot of it, but I've had to say yes to some because I need him at the table and he's already a flake. Then to make it fair I've allowed the other players to start with more than I'd like.
The party is pretty overpowered for lvl 1, but I'm just trying to give them a fun power fantasy at this point. Worry about perfect balance and adhering to RAW a little less.
The new player that is playing a blind wizard is mostly in it for RP. She did not make her wizard the least bit optimized, having a 12 in Intelligence despite my warning her that her magic would be weak. She wants to be kind of a dumb boy. Same thing for the blindness. She thought it'd be a cool character idea. We already ran a session zero for that character, but it's probably not too late to change some things.
30' blindsight range on a wizard is unlikely to be a balance issue.
I would highly suggest that you (and in fact everyone else who has posted here) read the FATE Accessibility Toolkit. It is designed for a different TTRPG system, but the lessons you can learn from it do transfer over. It is frankly a black mark on the writers, editors, and developers of D&D that they've ignored issues like this for so long.
D&D 5e and 5.5e are both written to hand all of the advantages to players. Power gaming is sort of what D&D is built for when compared with other systems. I wouldn't worry too much about overpowered players. If it ever tips over, simply enforce the adventuring day and put them through 8 encounters per in game day. Before too long you'll see that even the most 'well built' character will burn their resources by encounter 5.
The blind wizard, can be a good story thing, but should have a reason. I would suggest the following compensations. First off, I would suggest tremoursense that can develop into blindsight. I would tier it so that the player character develops as they level up. Levels 1-5 I would have the character simply get advantage on hearing, touch, smell, and taste perception checks. Levels 6-10 I would allow them to take Tremoursense up to 30ft. Then at levels 11-15 I would have Tremoursense extend out to 60ft, with blindsight of 10ft. Levels 16-20, I would have Tremoursense be 60ft, with Blindsight of 30ft.
This means that a character isn't penalised for a disability, and they aren't going to have the tedious thing of constantly rolling their attacks at disadvantage (due to the enemy being unseens). However, I would also make clear that ranged enemies will always be attacking at advantage. That can't be surmounted.
With all of this said, I'd also ask why the player wants to play a blind wizard. The concept vs the reality can often cause frictions in long term adventures. So it does require a decent conversation with the player about what their expectations are. To be clear, D&D is built on a set of expectations. The game does work far better for fantasy adventures, and is very, very clunky when it ventures outside that genre. There are some great systems out there for playing at superheroes, and if that's what the player wants to play I'd highly advice reading up on one of those systems and borrowing rules or mechanics to assist.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
The blindsight 30' is still a pretty strong disadvantage over a fully sighted character and I think could play reasonably. The issue is that so many spells are RAW "a creature you can see" and so you need a way to let those spells still be usable. For a sighted character, they have far more range.
Something to think about is that Blindsight RAW is a radius for a sphere. Up to you if you want to keep that or if you want to make it blocked by walls etc. like light would be.
Wow - so much distaste for power gamers. Its almost as if folks think we would all be better off if people did not understand how their stat blocks work, how to properly build a MAD class, how to properly utilize all the tools in the toolbox and yes one of the tools is being creative and pushing the boundaries of grey areas and home brew.
I cant stand playing with or DM'ing a table where the players don't optimize their class - its a disservice to the rest of the players and the dm - the players either have to carry your dead weight around or the DM will need to dumb stuff down so the party can do anything - yuck.
I am all for power gamers and min maxers - use every tool as creatively as possible and to its maximum extent - keeps all the players and the DM on their toes imo.
The thing is that "power gamer" is not only used for "a person who optimizes their character well," it's also incorrectly used as a synonym for a munchkin. And from the OP's description, it sounds like they're referring to someone who's the latter.
OP, I just want to point out that you do have veto power over any ideas the players propose to you. Just because someone wants something really OP doesn't mean you have to give it to them.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well I have no love of munchkins --- except perhaps on occasion a few of the jelly filled ones with a coffee in the morning LOL! (That is a reference to Dunkin Donuts for those that may not have one in their area)
I think you need to sit down and tell her that if she wants to play a blind character she really needs to play a fighter or monk because so much of Wizard requires sight.
And she absolutely needs to increase Intelligence. I get wanting to RP.. but there almost no monster is going to fail her saves and she is going to miss monsters way too much that she isn't going to be effective in combat. If she wants to play a dumb character she needs to play a Sorcerer not a Wizard. The low intelligence is going to be an issue after a couple of levels.
The PCs shouldn't have anything extra at level one. Especially not magic items. (The new monster manual is going to fix this I think.) A magic weapon makes several monsters significantly easier than they should be).
Like 90% of my players don't optimize and they are still really powerful in 5e. It would be a nightmare playing for a group who optimized because id have to double like all the encounters.
Most spells require you to see your target. I'd not allow that character because it's highly likely to be useless. Even an experienced player I trusted I'd think long and hard about approving. Personally, when I take a character with disadvantages, I want to play through them...not get compensated for them. I'd be careful with the powergamer character, he might overshadow everyone else.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha