Just fielding a scenario. The Maimed critical injury removes a limb. The effects prevent the character from doing anything requiring that limb, and "all other actions gain [setback]."

Say a PC loses (or chooses to begin without) one arm, and the player, for one reason or another, chooses not to replace the limb and remains one-armed. Would the character sustain this critical injury without being able to heal it (thus subjecting them to the +10 modifier on crit rolls), or remove the injury but keep the effect?

Alternatively, would you apply a different effect entirely?

Healing the critical injury doesnt restore the limb, but it would remove the +10

Healing the critical injury doesnt restore the limb, but it would remove the +10

Yup.

The +10 represents this...

I'd remove the injury and keep the effect, or at least the part of it that says he can't perform actions that require the use of that limb (like wielding a two-handed weapon if you're missing an arm). I'd ignore the part about adding a setback die to all other actions, though; that seems to me like more of an effect resulting from pain and shock and blood loss when losing a limb, not something that's meant to last perpetually.

Yep,

I agree too.

Sure losing a limb will prohibit you the use of that limb permanently, but once you "heal up" you'll be able to adapt to the loss. (At least most people can). So having a setback dice permanently doesn't make sense.

Alright, I can work with that.

I will choose to be a voice of dissent in this case for specific scenarios. If our PC for example needs to climb a rope or mountain or swim, I'd still use that setback die because with one arm it makes doing those actions very hard at best.

My next question is: At which point was this limb removed? This could have an effect on using long guns and other two handed weapons. If it were above the elbow keep it, if at or below I'd remove it for long gun use because the remaining bit of arm can be used to balance things.

Yes this is overcomplicated, my group happens to be fans of realism so this is what I know.

I'd remove the injury and keep the effect, or at least the part of it that says he can't perform actions that require the use of that limb (like wielding a two-handed weapon if you're missing an arm). I'd ignore the part about adding a setback die to all other actions, though; that seems to me like more of an effect resulting from pain and shock and blood loss when losing a limb, not something that's meant to last perpetually.

I disagree. Try clapping. Tying shoes. Zipping a coat. People do, but it's always harder for them. A setback represents that.

I agree with everyone here.

Seriously, once the crit is healed, I can see arguments for removing the setback for situations where the second arm isn’t needed and wouldn’t be used even if you had it, and I can see reasons why you should still have the setback if the arm wasn’t there but would have otherwise been used.

If you were to have one hand tied behind your back and then you tried to tie your shoes, you should definitely get at least one setback for that.

I guess it all comes down to how much realism you want in your game, and how much you want to be thinking all the time about whether or not the second arm being present would or would not otherwise affect the attempt.

I'd remove the injury and keep the effect, or at least the part of it that says he can't perform actions that require the use of that limb (like wielding a two-handed weapon if you're missing an arm). I'd ignore the part about adding a setback die to all other actions, though; that seems to me like more of an effect resulting from pain and shock and blood loss when losing a limb, not something that's meant to last perpetually.

I disagree. Try clapping. Tying shoes. Zipping a coat. People do, but it's always harder for them. A setback represents that.

I'm with you on this, but I don't think a setback die is enough in situations like climbing a rope. The setback die from the critical specifies "all actions", which is a bit harsh. My suggestion would be to forego the setback die and instead add either several setback dice or another difficulty die for situations like rope climbing and the like. I never meant that the character shouldn't suffer penalties, but they should be specific to missing an arm and not general penalties to everything, like Knowledge checks.

All a Setback represents is an environmental difficulty typically, nothing catastrophic. You're always encumbered till you aren't, I'd say you're always one armed until you're not.

Clapping one handed is always harder whether your opposite shoulder hurts or not....

Case-by-case basis with the narrative in mind is probably a good bet. Depending on the encounter and the challenges this PC will face within it, if the lack of an arm would be an impediment, put a setback die in the pool. (Or if it's detailed manual dexterity-type work under duress, two.) If your player can offer an interesting explanation in advance, maybe you wouldn't have to throw in a setback. If it's REALLY good, don't be afraid to offer a boost or a free experience point.

That setback only applies to Brawn and Agility actions, right? Does losing an arm really hinder your Knowledge (Underworld), Perception, Vigilance, or Negotiation (to use an example from each of the other four Characteristics)?

Having been maimed for ~6 months I for one can say that it almost helps with negotiation and charm checks cause people suck and only help out cripples for being crippled. I found it to be rather insulting that a person would hold a door due to a cast or dressing but not for having two hands full of child/tool box/groceries/etc. Perception can depend on what you're using to perceive things. After I was rebuilt and relearning to use my body part, I couldn't do things like feel many objects. After a few months feeling returned, the flip side is you can argue that the other part of the body becomes more sensitive. You could also consider adding setback dice for the fact this is a recent happening and the PC will still try to do things with the maimed limb.

The rest it wouldn't effect much, I agree.

That setback only applies to Brawn and Agility actions, right? Does losing an arm really hinder your Knowledge (Underworld), Perception, Vigilance, or Negotiation (to use an example from each of the other four Characteristics)?

The CRB, at least for Edge of the Empire, specifically applies it to all actions. I suppose there are arguments for and against that logic. But the injury doesn't prohibit the application of talents that remove Setback, so there is that.

Case-by-case is probably best, as usual, with emphasis on the physical characteristics/skills.

That setback only applies to Brawn and Agility actions, right? Does losing an arm really hinder your Knowledge (Underworld), Perception, Vigilance, or Negotiation (to use an example from each of the other four Characteristics)?

The CRB, at least for Edge of the Empire, specifically applies it to all actions. I suppose there are arguments for and against that logic. But the injury doesn't prohibit the application of talents that remove Setback, so there is that.

Case-by-case is probably best, as usual, with emphasis on the physical characteristics/skills.

Yeah, I just think that the idea that C3PO would have trouble with linguistics while his legs are removed is pretty absurd. Extending that to an old soldier that lost his leg in war and now has trouble with Knowledge (Warfare) checks proves equally absurd.