Then reality hits me. People will say, "He can't do that, because he can't see." Even in a fantasy setting, there's only so much I can do. I can "heighten" his other senses, but I'm sure if I don't modify his ability to fight somehow, it will be hard to swallow.
How would a blind fighter fight in a fantasy setting (complete with cool special moves and all), without straining suspension of disbelief?
1) You're "blind". By that, I of course mean blind purely in flavor, you otherwise act normally, through your special senses. Any condition that would blind another individual somehow throws these senses off, etc. Blindness is thus purely cosmetic, and you act as any other character would, with the addition of nifty flavor.
2) Your character mans/womans/etcs up and accepts penalties. Sorry, blindness isn't a cakewalk, it's called a disability for a reason. You don't get superpowers or miracle compensations, you just have to take the penalty as it comes and try to mitigate it with items, feats, or class features.
3) You try to work up a convoluted deal with the DM. This general involves free feats like Blindfighting or whatnot. Personally, I don't like this route because it seems like a way to get out of the very disability you are trying to play. If you want to play a character that is actually hampered by blindness, you'll have to accept the problems that come with it. If you want to play a character that is blind yet functions normally due to special abilities, that's what flavor changes are for.
"the gods show me where to smite, they talk to me, they understand"
"the scent of battle its so strong i could actually see colours before me, and some colours just made me angry"
"The Arcane powers flux through me, i don't really know what i'm doing, its instintcive and magical!"
As a DM when this comes up (and it does for every group at least once) my solution was to tell the player they could do option 1. If they insist on some mechanics to back it up, I present option 2. If this is still no good they don't need to play someone blind.
Both players I presented it to chose option 1.
Say he's blind. Take the penalty for being blind.
Blinded
• You grant combat advantage.
• You can’t see any target (your targets have total concealment [see below]).
• You take a -10 penalty to Perception checks.
• You can’t flank an enemy.
Total Concealment
Total Concealment (-5 Penalty to Attack Rolls): You can’t see the target. The target is invisible, in a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square and not adjacent to you. Attack penalties from concealment apply only to the targets of melee or ranged attacks.
So, you're at -5 to hit, can't flank, grant combat advantage, and take -10 to perception.
However, consider asking your DM if you can play this character with blindsight. Justify it by placing it in the backstory. Blind since birth, you've managed to develop a keen awareness of your immediate surroundings, relying on hearing, touch, and smell.
Blindsight
A creature that has blindsight can clearly see creatures or objects within a specified range and within line of effect, even if they are invisible or obscured. The creature otherwise relies on its normal vision. I recommend a blindsight range of 3 squares. 15 feet is far enough to manage combat.
Then impose the following conditional circumstances:
- Stench attacks (even unsuccessful ones) blind you (in addition to the normal effects it might have).
- Successful sonic attacks blind you.
- When fighting in the presence of rain, rushing water (rapids or waterfalls), or crowds of more than 10 creatures, you are still considered to grant total concealment to your opponents. This is because there is too much confusion. (Consequence: -5 to hit).
Reasonable?
1) make a figher
2) make him blind
3) apply all penalties for blindness
How would a blind fighter fight in a fantasy setting (complete with cool special moves and all), without straining suspension of disbelief?
You need to specify better what you mean by fantasy setting, it covers a big range of realism and power levels. The more mundane and realistic the campaign setting, the harder such a character is to justify. At the other extreme, in a super heroic high fantasy game, it wouldn't even be a concern.
At the low fantasy end, you have to play the blindness with all of the associated real disadvantages. The character can't read, can see where he is going, will have huge penalties to fighting and so on. The character might have abilities to get out of some of the worst of it, or let him avoid the problem for a short burst of time, but it should be a huge limitation. Hopefully your playing in a system where you can get other advantages to compensate for your disadvantages.
In the middle fantasy type game, you can play the character as having some sort of magical/mystical/zen sense that lets him fight in melee without penalty or with only a small one but is still unable to fight at range normally. This would make it a much smaller penalty, and come with equally smaller advantages.
At the high fantasy end the character might have magical powers or a magic item that effectively negates the problem, reducing it to a character quirk.
Jay
Blindsight maybe a bit strong, perhaps balance it out with a creative penalty involving thunder damage.
How does a blind fighter work in a fantasy setting? Much like this guy:
That's kind of like saying "How does a strong and tough fighter work in a fantasy setting? Much like this guy:"
Superheroes ≠ adventurers.
That's kind of like saying "How does a strong and tough fighter work in a fantasy setting? Much like this guy:"
Superheroes ≠ adventurers.
Except that it totally isn't. Many of Daredevil's methods of working around his blindness can be reasonably transferred to a fantasy character. "Heightened senses" is totally in line with the sort of preternatural abilities that many characters have. Superman is a nigh invulnerable alien with a hodgepodge of other powers.
A lot of how you should represent your blindness mechanically depends on how you want your character to play. "Accept the full penalties for blindness" is nearly a useless suggestion, since the -5 to hit alone will make the character brutally ineffective in combat.
There are a few options I see. They fall into basically two classes; the first class is making up reasons that your character has most of the benefits of sight without actually being able to see. The second is making up penalties that represent blindness without making the character useless in combat. (The blind monk is a fantasy staple. The fact that D&D doesn't currently have a real way to represent it doesn't change that.)
Category 1)
Your character has the psionic, divine, magical, racial or innate ability to sense other minds, provided that there aren't other things in the way. This is basically like sight, except it works in the dark, which is a problem. Maybe you can come up with a good reason that the power doesn't work in the dark. (Perhaps it comes from Pelor!)
Your character's blindness comes from a curse, so it isn't like normal blindness. It affects your ability to see, but you can "see" things with your mind. In the light. I know that doesn't make a lot of sense.
Your character has heightened senses. Again, you need a way to turn this off in the dark.
Category 2)
Invent a series of penalties to represent your blindness. The issue with this approach is that your character is arbitrarily weaker. It may not be fun to have a character that's ineffective; the character is supposed to be awesome, after all.
Additionally, I'd talk with the DM first, especially in terms of the mechanical aspects of your blindness. A blind character qualifies as extremely unusual, and a DM may not want to deal with various complications that arise from it.
Alternately, ask your DM if you can replace your normal vision with blindsight, removing the "can see invisible enemies as if they weren't invisible" part.
The one point where I would make a mechanical difference is that the character is (obviously) immune to the blind condition.
To make up for this mechanical advantage, he suffers from other conditions more: the deafened condition has the same effect on him like blindness on others. He takes a double penalty from stench effects (such as from troglodytes).
Since stench is not an official keyword (AFAIK), the DM has to decide whether a specific effect is stench or not.
Except that it totally isn't. Many of Daredevil's methods of working around his blindness can be reasonably transferred to a fantasy character. "Heightened senses" is totally in line with the sort of preternatural abilities that many characters have. Superman is a nigh invulnerable alien with a hodgepodge of other powers.
And the point is that Daredevil, if one were to look at it in game terms, has bought off the disadvantages of Blindness with feats. One is welcome to do so in D&D, to spend all their feats offsetting the disadvantages of blindness, but at best they then end up pretty much where they started.
A blind warlord could do alright, too, using Commander's Strike like some sort of Zen chessmaster to direct the fray. Unfortunately, the concealment penalty really hurts those warlord powers that need to connect to provide the buff. Maybe some sort of hybrid fighter|warlord could do the trick?
Except that it totally isn't. Many of Daredevil's methods of working around his blindness can be reasonably transferred to a fantasy character. "Heightened senses" is totally in line with the sort of preternatural abilities that many characters have. Superman is a nigh invulnerable alien with a hodgepodge of other powers.
Except Daredevil's heightened senses are more in scale with a comic book character. When you're dealing with a superhero who has the ability to hear a heartbeat from four blocks away (with which he can also tell with 100% accuracy whether or not you are lying), track a target down by smell with a greater level of proficiency than electronic chem-sniffers, read a normal book by touch and sense exactly where you are by even the most miniscule of sounds (and again, heartbeat), you aren't talking about a character who is going to be in line with what would be a sensible blind character for the purposes of D&D.
I don't consider Blind Sense 720 (3600 feet being the length of four city blocks in New York) with an infinite bonus in Insight for purposes of comparing to bluff (exceptions: people with pacemakers, undead, constructs, and other creatures without a heart) and a three-digit bonus to non-sight perception to be a fair advantage in D&D.
Want to play a gimp in D&D? Make it all flavor. Or suck it up and play with the penalties and the derision of your fellow players every time you fail to deliver because the penalties make you less effective to the party.
How would a blind fighter fight in a fantasy setting (complete with cool special moves and all), without straining suspension of disbelief?
Despite what the thread title implies ;), a 'completely' blind fighter doesn't seem to be what you're aiming for. You've indicated that you want cool special moves. That coolness comes from the idea that he's blind, not so much from the actual game mechanics of being a blind fighter. If it is an idea that you're aiming for (and not actual mechanics), I'd recommend a purely cosmetic approach.
As others have mentioned, blind characters (fighter/monk/assassin) are a pretty common (and accepted) fantasy trope. Who hasn't toyed with the idea once or twice, eh ;)? It shouldn't strain anyone's suspension of disbelief to say, "Hey, you fight pretty good-- for a blind guy!".
It shouldn't strain anyone's suspension of disbelief to say,
"Hey, you fight pretty good-- for a blind guy!".
Added the link.
Next cover Perceprion penalty and auto combat advantage with background. Perception cannot be used for sight but you gain no penalty for listening, smelling and tasting. Blinding works the same way as for everyone else it just obscures your other senses.
Now how to rp this in combat... Well have perception trained and you will more or less know where the enemy is close to you on just passive perception. and for charges and the like get your group to call you shots (using free actions during your turn). For egzample: 6 o'clock hostile within 5 steps. Note to work well you might need to have nature trained (to always discern north).
So by the end of the day we have more or less custom background: You dont get -10 penalty to your perception for your natural blindness. You dont grant combat advantage for your natural blindness. (the clauses allow you to get "blinded" therefore function as the rest of the party). And you gain training in Perception (hightening of other senses), and nature (hightened sense of directions).
A blind warlord could do alright, too, using Commander's Strike like some sort of Zen chessmaster to direct the fray. Unfortunately, the concealment penalty really hurts those warlord powers that need to connect to provide the buff. Maybe some sort of hybrid fighter|warlord could do the trick?
Also, don't a lot of Warlord powers say "an ally you can see?" That seems like the worst nail in the coffin.
Also, don't a lot of Warlord powers say "an ally you can see?" That seems like the worst nail in the coffin.
Ooh, forgot about those; yep, that'd be a problem. The effects that require an ally to see the warlord/be within X squares should still be fine, but I don't know which type there are more of.
Except Daredevil's heightened senses are more in scale with a comic book character. When you're dealing with a superhero who has the ability to hear a heartbeat from four blocks away (with which he can also tell with 100% accuracy whether or not you are lying), track a target down by smell with a greater level of proficiency than electronic chem-sniffers, read a normal book by touch and sense exactly where you are by even the most miniscule of sounds (and again, heartbeat), you aren't talking about a character who is going to be in line with what would be a sensible blind character for the purposes of D&D.
After having read over some of the various Heroic Tier, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies, I'd say it's safe to say that D&D 4E falls in scale with comic book characters. Throwing fireballs, teleporting to your foe and lassoing him with your "sword", and turning into a panther/bear aren't in scale with comic book characters?
I'll remember to say "BAMF!" the next time an Eladrin or Shadar-Kai use their racials...
-Cal
I'll remember to say "BAMF!" the next time an Eladrin or Shadar-Kai use their racials...
Beat you to it ;)
Hasn't anyone played GURPS or something in this thread?
I've played it and know it well…which is why I'm posting here and not on the GURPS forums.
Hasn't anyone played GURPS or something in this thread?
Many of us have (and do), but GURPS and D&D mechanics do not mix well (when they mix at all).
- GURPS is a point-based system. D&D is a level-based system.
- A GURPS PC looks very much after a year of play how it looked on day 1. A D&D PC looks nothing like its starting self after a year of play.
- Disadvantages in GURPS tend to have a much lower impact than in D&D.
- Disadvantages and advantages are explicitly balanced against a point system in GURPS. There is no such thing in D&D.
I'd say it's safe to say that D&D 4E falls in scale with comic book characters.
True. But in the comics, you finish the same way you start. Although a 4e PC falls into scale with the universe of comic book characters over the course of an entire campaign, but a 4e PC starts out as Howard the Duck and finish as Green Lantern.
Blind-fighting is an EPIC level feat, deemed by the designers to be inappropriate for characters under 21st level.
After having read over some of the various Heroic Tier, Paragon Paths, and Epic Destinies, I'd say it's safe to say that D&D 4E falls in scale with comic book characters. Throwing fireballs, teleporting to your foe and lassoing him with your "sword", and turning into a panther/bear aren't in scale with comic book characters?
I'll remember to say "BAMF!" the next time an Eladrin or Shadar-Kai use their racials...
-Cal
Considering that Nightcrawler can teleport several dozens of times in a single second, do each teleport over a maximum distance of two miles, and do so without line of sight... I'd say no. That's not to say there aren't comic book characters that would synch up well with D&D concepts (the Sword & Sorcery genre of comics is perfect for D&D)... just that the superhero genre isn't the best one to try.
To say that "D&D is in scale with superheroes because there are powers" is like saying "That 4-year old child is a professional boxer because he can punch!". Not even close.
Step 2: draw or download a picture of a character with a blindfold on.
Step 3: Have fun!
Superheroes ≠ adventurers.
Jayne, you're throwing FireBalls and Slicing through 8 men at a time. You're a superhero. Just admit it. :D
True. But in the comics, you finish the same way you start. Although a 4e PC falls into scale with the universe of comic book characters over the course of an entire campaign, but a 4e PC starts out as Howard the Duck and finish as Green Lantern.
Blind-fighting is an EPIC level feat, deemed by the designers to be inappropriate for characters under 21st level.
Not in the comics I buy... but I don't expect people to read the Indie press stuff.
Considering that Nightcrawler can teleport several dozens of times in a single second, do each teleport over a maximum distance of two miles, and do so without line of sight... I'd say no. That's not to say there aren't comic book characters that would synch up well with D&D concepts (the Sword & Sorcery genre of comics is perfect for D&D)... just that the superhero genre isn't the best one to try.
To say that "D&D is in scale with superheroes because there are powers" is like saying "That 4-year old child is a professional boxer because he can punch!". Not even close.
I completely comprehend the point you are making, my point is simply that literature and gaming of a fantasy nature always has heroes who are FAR beyond the scope of normal in ability and as such I see it fitting "well" (campaign type pending of course) with D&D.
I think in the end it all comes down to what type of campaign is being played (high fantasy, low fantasy, etc etc) and what the DM is willing to allow.
-Cal
D.
I completely comprehend the point you are making, my point is simply that literature and gaming of a fantasy nature always has heroes who are FAR beyond the scope of normal in ability and as such I see it fitting "well" (campaign type pending of course) with D&D.
I think in the end it all comes down to what type of campaign is being played (high fantasy, low fantasy, etc etc) and what the DM is willing to allow.
-Cal
But again, there is a divisive line between heroic characters (D&D, Conan) and superheroic characters (Daredevil, Nightcrawler). There may be places where the border is a bit blurry (characters like Batman have walked the line between the two), but D&D is definitely not one of those places, even when you take the epic tier into account.
Maybe the gods, though... I could see St. Cuthbert in a superhero comic, a la Thor.
Jayne, you're throwing FireBalls and Slicing through 8 men at a time. You're a superhero. Just admit it. :D
I am, yes, but my characters are pussies.
If your DM is amenable, you can come up with a couple house rules.
1. Immune to normal blind effects and attacks that require vision (medusa's gaze, etc.)
2. Successful thunder attacks blind the PC until the end of his next round.
3. Successful deafening attacks daze and blinds the PC for the length of the deafening.
That seems to be some reasonable drawbacks for the immunities. With a high enough perception, you can justify being able to hear the breathing of the ninja attempting to hide in plain sight against you.
How can I make a (completely) blind fighter combat in a fantasy setting?
Say he's blind. Take the penalty for being blind.
Blinded
• You grant combat advantage.
• You can’t see any target (your targets have total concealment [see below]).
• You take a -10 penalty to Perception checks.
• You can’t flank an enemy.
Total Concealment
Total Concealment (-5 Penalty to Attack Rolls): You can’t see the target. The target is invisible, in a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square and not adjacent to you. Attack penalties from concealment apply only to the targets of melee or ranged attacks.
So, you're at -5 to hit, can't flank, grant combat advantage, and take -10 to perception.
However, consider asking your DM if you can play this character with blindsight. Justify it by placing it in the backstory. Blind since birth, you've managed to develop a keen awareness of your immediate surroundings, relying on hearing, touch, and smell.
Blindsight
A creature that has blindsight can clearly see creatures or objects within a specified range and within line of effect, even if they are invisible or obscured. The creature otherwise relies on its normal vision. I recommend a blindsight range of 3 squares. 15 feet is far enough to manage combat.
Then impose the following conditional circumstances:
- Stench attacks (even unsuccessful ones) blind you (in addition to the normal effects it might have).
- Successful sonic attacks blind you.
- When fighting in the presence of rain, rushing water (rapids or waterfalls), or crowds of more than 10 creatures, you are still considered to grant total concealment to your opponents. This is because there is too much confusion. (Consequence: -5 to hit).
Reasonable?
i know what you are trying to do, like the blind demon in ninja scroll, or daredevil... so:
very reasonable... maybe some tremorsense?
i think blindsight + tremorsense gests the best out of it
I also wouldn't be comfortable with giving a character true blind-sight. The character is going to be pretty powerful at that point, since you gain a lot of advantage (immune to gaze, able to basically ignore enemies that turn invisible or stealth, and of course immune to enemies that inflict the "blind" condition), without having very much disadvantage (if any).
I would be comfortable with having the character being actually blind, all of the time, and getting the Blind Fighting feat at level 1 for free. This puts you at an advantage occasionally (when you are fighting opponents that actually have good stealth checks and try to hide and when you are fighting opponents with gaze attacks), but most of the time it's a significant disadvantage (as you'll still be taking a -5 penalty to anything not adjacent to you and a -10 penalty to ALL your perception checks). The character is still weaker for this "tradeoff" in my estimation, but not so much so that I'd worry about it being dead weight to the party.
Also, as a side note, I'm not sure if anyone's mentioned this already but as far as the game mechanics are concerned, you can tell where enemies are (from memory and sounds) as long as they aren't making stealth checks. Now if you're blind, anyone can make stealth checks against you anytime they move because they automatically have total concealment, but most enemies probably aren't going to bother.
Step 1: make your character as normal.
Step 2: draw or download a picture of a character with a blindfold on.
Step 3: Have fun!
This.
very reasonable... maybe some tremorsense?
I would not grant tremorsense. That is a very specialized power and does not really fit a normal PC race. Blind folks may be able to feel cars driving by or feel music through the floor, but take away their hearing and the could not tell you the direction of the source.
You do not suffer from the blind condition except:
When a creature deals thunder damage to you, you suffer the effects of being blinded until the end of the creature's next turn.
When you take thunder damage from another source such as a trap, you suffer the effects of being blinded until the end of your next turn.
I think that would pretty much cover the flavor and mechanics.
You are at the mercy of the DM for perception checks that require spotting rather than hearing something. A generous DM might be inclined to apply -10 penalty to spot, and +10 penalty to listen using perception.
You would have to metagame certain visual clues. You're facing 8 goblins. These two have javelins and are wearing animal hides, this one has a totem in one hand, and this one is wearing chainmail and grips a waraxe in both hands. These four are dressed in worn out leathers and are wielding rusty short swords. Technically the blind guy didn't see any of that, but since the other players already know the controller, the brute and the minions, there is really no reason the blind guy needs to be denied this knowledge.
That's kind of like saying "How does a strong and tough fighter work in a fantasy setting? Much like this guy:"
Superheroes ≠ adventurers.
They do in this edition of the game. Or is the ablity to hurl fire and lightning no longer super human? What about being able throw 9 daggers with enough accuracy to blind 9 targets within the space of 6 seconds? How about breathing fire every 5 minutes, and with a feat ebing able to spit that fire out to 50 feet, and then it explodes? None of that is superhero stuff? (all doable by a 4th level 4e character.)
I seem to recall on many different occasion you vehemently arguing that realism had no place in D&D becuase it was "heroic high fanatasy." Why the change of heart?
So you hereby concede that every 3.5E character is a superhero, too?
*sigh* If it'll make you happy.
You want a completely blind fighter?
1) Just say he's blind (fluff)
2) Say he's immune to all effects from 1), but otherwise vulnerable to blindness.
Done.
The members of your order, as part of their vows, bind their eyes when they become acolytes. The divine power of their gods allows them to see so long as their eyes are bound with a properly sanctified wrapping. Over time they become truly blind, and cannot see without the bindings, or perhaps the bindings are integral to there oaths, and should they be voluntarily parted from it they cannot use their powers until they have ceremonially cleansed themselves and been blindfolded once again.
By fluffing it up and just roleplaying without taking any mechanical hits, you can come up with interesting limitations or 'features' by voluntary choice. For example, while your sight of the world is normally colored heavily by the divine nature of your power, when you swear your oath of enmity, that enemy becomes highlighted by a glowing aura that draws you to him. Perhaps you can only see clearly the area immediately around yourself and immediately around your oath of enmity target, your god guides your hand when swearing your oath, choosing your foe for you.
The no\light armor would also fit perfectly with many of the myths surrounding a blind sword-master, and could be made into a character with compelling flavor.
As a Player I would never ask to play this trope.
As a DM, I would give 2 options, Either you're not "really blind" it's just flavor and roleplay(no benefits or penalties) or, You ARE "really Blind" and you get all benefits and penalties. I would however recommend not playing into the idea as it is retarded. I was blind since birth, but instead of leaving me to be a simple farmer or to the wolves, some master of a particular martial arts scooped me up and trained me to be the ultimate fighting machine despite my blindness! BS. I'd love to see this actually tried. Pick a blind kid, and take it away to a training sudio(or more in keeping with the trope, a distant mountain) and train this kid in as many forms of martial arts as it can handle. Then when it's 25 pit it against sighted blackbelts in solo and group fights to see how well it does. Only if it is at least as successful as a similarly trained sighted fighter would this stand up as even reasonable for a background.
And while I too subscribe to PC's are better than the majority of the people in the world.... I also subscribe to realism. Being able to shoot fire from your eyes isn't unreal, it's magic. Being blind is real, and unless there is a reason that you're not effected by blindness like real blind people as defined by the rules to the point where blindness is only your schtick, you should be fully affected. i mean honestly -10 perception isn't even hard to over come, training, decent wisdom, skill focus, maybe alertness, low level items, plenty of backgrounds, level... 5+3+3+2+2+2+1= +18 at level 2, and that's not even trying... The other stuff is just as easy, -5 only applies to non area effect powers, combat advantage is pretty major but there are items that stop damage and you can always go defensive. Heck the best blind character could easily be a wizard.
I seem to recall on many different occasion you vehemently arguing that realism had no place in D&D becuase it was "heroic high fanatasy." Why the change of heart?
No change of heart. Heroic stories are different from superheroic stories, generally by scale. For instance:
Heroic
Superheroic
Here's a comparative from a single universe:
Heroic
Superheroic
The only way D&D might fit in the realm of superheroic fantasy would be if the players could play as gods (not demigods... we're talking real gods). I could see St. Cuthbert running amok a-la Thor. However, even the most powerful 4th Edition PC doesn't fit into the same scale as characters who can heal from all wounds within seconds (without rest in superhero comics, should you want to bring up healing surges), or run at the speed of light, or lift mountains.
Though not technically blind, she fought better when blindfolded because her eyes betrayed her.
Been a while since I've seen this one, but I believe he was somehow linked to his hawk.
I also wouldn't be comfortable with giving a character true blind-sight. The character is going to be pretty powerful at that point, since you gain a lot of advantage (immune to gaze, able to basically ignore enemies that turn invisible or stealth, and of course immune to enemies that inflict the "blind" condition), without having very much disadvantage (if any).
I don't believe it would be too overpowering. You are talking one character that can tell where your invisible foe is. All others in the party would still be at a disadvantage.
The disadvantage is sound. As seen with Daredevil. If nothing else is taken from him, this should be the one thing.
Yes, it will probably catch the villian off guard. But ideally, anyone who encounters said blind guy will consider him less of a threat and not fully appreciate their capability.
But the same can be said of the villians. A typical group doesn't fully appreciate Improved Invisibility until its used against them.
I would be comfortable with having the character being actually blind, all of the time, and getting the Blind Fighting feat at level 1 for free. This puts you at an advantage occasionally (when you are fighting opponents that actually have good stealth checks and try to hide and when you are fighting opponents with gaze attacks), but most of the time it's a significant disadvantage (as you'll still be taking a -5 penalty to anything not adjacent to you and a -10 penalty to ALL your perception checks). The character is still weaker for this "tradeoff" in my estimation, but not so much so that I'd worry about it being dead weight to the party.
That is definitely one way of doing it. Without play testing it, I have no way of determining its effectiveness.
Another option I might include (for 3.5 anyway) is the use of Listen checks, and possibly give the character the scent ability. I think the listen check or scent ability would have to be used to determine a successful strike. Not sure the best way to determine but probably off of the targets AC or even versus a Move Silently check (this could draw combat out more).
Imo this fits the established world of fantasy noir. A blind person who is a highly capable fighter is in many fantasy stories and martial art fantasies in particular. In addition many times while being trained in fantasy settings the teacher will tell the student to let go and sense the fight rather then use their eyes. Most famous being Obi Wan trainning Luke. There was also another story where a teacher was testing a younger martial artist but the wind was blowing dust in the teacher's eyes, so the younger one blindfolded himself to ensure it was a fair fight.
The bonus from being able to do things blind as if he could see (which for the most part is what everyone else can do already and so is not really a bonus) is offset by his inability to see. He can't read, can't use ranged weapons and attacks outside of alimited distance, will move slower in difficult terain (possibly being hampered in a crowded battlefield) and suffer a -10 to perception checks as well. And although he can maybe see invisible creatures, he will still often fail to see clearly visible creatures who are outside his range of blindsense (which will be very often)
Simple. Ask for blindsense, or blindsight, as an alternative to being actually blind.
So in essence get immunity to all blinding effects and vision-based attacks for free.
As an observation I like to encourage players to come up with interesting characters, backstories, etc, and would work with someone to make something like this work.
However, there have to be some penalties involved with being blind - the trick will be to find a balance between the "realistic" penalties and not making the character unplayable. Character disabilities can add flavour, but can strain credibility. A one-legged adventurer would be challenging to run. A quadripalegic adventurer would be ridiculous.