TheRPGSite

Pen & Paper Roleplaying Central => Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion => Topic started by: RPGPundit on August 19, 2020, 02:33:34 PM

Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on August 19, 2020, 02:33:34 PM
The problem with the D&D "Combat Wheelchair" isn't that it's "unrealistic" (at least not in ren-faire fantasy like the Forgotten Realms), it's that it isn't really about ttrpg play at all.



Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 19, 2020, 02:38:37 PM
Agreed. Arguments for realism are a lost cause. I find people just gravitate to 'realism' as a talking point for some reason.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 02:41:40 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit;1145531
The problem with the D&D "Combat Wheelchair" isn't that it's "unrealistic" (at least not in ren-faire fantasy like the Forgotten Realms), it's that it isn't really about ttrpg play at all.


Like most things, it's what you make with it rather than the motives of other people for being interested in the topic to begin with.

To me, wheelchairs in D&D is just an opportunity to get creative with a new concept.

It am thinking up spells that spellcasters would research to help a wheelchair get over difficult terrain, or lower it's weight so it can be more easily hoisted up a rope. I am imagining things a combat wheelchair with magic and machinery added to it might be able to do. I am imagining other magical and mundane modifications which could happen for other physical disabilities, like blindness or a missing limb. I am thinking if this kind of stuff can better allow for long-term injury to PCs due to incurable magical damage. I am imagining what kind of magical damage would be incurable such as curses, partial disintegration, disease, anti-magic attacks, etc.. I am considering if birth defects would "heal" only back to what they were originally, making healing spells ineffective for that kind of disability. I am going down all sorts of avenues of creation for this concept which I hadn't before.

You can dwell on the negative, you can fret over the motivations of other people who you will never know and never encounter at a game table. Or, you can focus on the cool stuff you can make with it. I'd rather do the later.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Slipshot762 on August 19, 2020, 04:38:57 PM
does the price of the wheelchair exceed the price for healing magic?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 19, 2020, 05:02:57 PM
I demand magic pressure socks, a magic blood glucose reader, and a magic blood pressure cuff.  I demand them in the name of creativity and imagination!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Razor 007 on August 19, 2020, 05:22:16 PM
Wheelchair of Levitation.

5 charges per day.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Razor 007 on August 19, 2020, 05:22:57 PM
Quote from: Slipshot762;1145547
does the price of the wheelchair exceed the price for healing magic?

Exactly.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 19, 2020, 06:02:02 PM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145535
Like most things, it's what you make with it rather than the motives of other people for being interested in the topic to begin with.

To me, wheelchairs in D&D is just an opportunity to get creative with a new concept.

It am thinking up spells that spellcasters would research to help a wheelchair get over difficult terrain, or lower it's weight so it can be more easily hoisted up a rope. I am imagining things a combat wheelchair with magic and machinery added to it might be able to do. I am imagining other magical and mundane modifications which could happen for other physical disabilities, like blindness or a missing limb. I am thinking if this kind of stuff can better allow for long-term injury to PCs due to incurable magical damage. I am imagining what kind of magical damage would be incurable such as curses, partial disintegration, disease, anti-magic attacks, etc.. I am considering if birth defects would "heal" only back to what they were originally, making healing spells ineffective for that kind of disability. I am going down all sorts of avenues of creation for this concept which I hadn't before.

You can dwell on the negative, you can fret over the motivations of other people who you will never know and never encounter at a game table. Or, you can focus on the cool stuff you can make with it. I'd rather do the later.

Including but not limited to Narrow passages that suddenly become less narrow to allow the +1 Combat Wheelchair to pass-thru, cobblestone roads suddenly as smooth as modern paved roads... In short Wheelchair accessible dungeons.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jeff37923 on August 19, 2020, 06:52:04 PM
My answer is in another thread here (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42524-Combat-Wheelchairs-and-how-to-make-them-work-in-medieval-settings&p=1145560&viewfull=1#post1145560).
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 19, 2020, 06:58:42 PM
Many people use "realism" when they mean "verisimilitude".

Realism is true to reality. Verisimilitude is the quality of appearing to be true or real.

AKA, there's no realism in comic books or movies based on comics, but there's verisimilitude in a good comic book movie as you feel the comic book has come to life.

Verisimilitude requires elements in a fiction to make sense within the known confines of that fiction. We know the tropes / traits of dungeons and combat with monsters, and +1 combat wheelchairs of representation can't mix with that without dumping enough magic to eliminate all aspects of the wheelchair.

But this D&D Twitter idiocy has nothing to do with gaming and everything to do with fetishism and virtue signalling. They've run out of white knighting ideas to save those poor non-white gamers, so now they're onto "saving" the disabled.

Next up, morbidly obese PCs can never suffer any penalties. 400lbs humans dodge just a quickly as 180lb humans, and of course, have equal endurance and equal outcomes in any athletic endeavor.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Manic Modron on August 19, 2020, 07:05:02 PM
A person who is actually in a wheel chair wants to try and make something so they can have a fantasy hero version of themselves to adventure about in and it is all white knights and virtue signals and "not about ttrpg playing at all"  instead of letting them play the game in a way fun for them.

This is apparently worth a lot of time being varying degrees of upset about because they are doing things wrong.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on August 19, 2020, 07:06:19 PM
I feel that the point isn't necessarily realism but the ability to give those bound by a wheelchair in real life an opportunity to forget real life and enjoy the game. One thing that I came to realize is that a large percentage of people that are avid gamers, do so to escape reality. When I started figuring that out it made me a bid depressed to be honest, because it almost makes you feel guilty of being a "normal" person by society's standards when there's so much suffering out there.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Chris24601 on August 19, 2020, 07:55:42 PM
I'd be more inclined to suggest a custom built saddle and a well-trained donkey as a genuinely realistic way for a cripple to travel.

Make them someone who's profession doesn't depend upon physical prowess like a scribe, scholar, religious or, in fantasy, a wizard and you might even have an interesting character concept. Once you're able to cast a fireball or two into an enemy cavalry charge, few lords who'd employ a house wizard would particularly care that their particular wizard needs to be carried into position on the back of a beast.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 08:11:03 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145553
Including but not limited to Narrow passages that suddenly become less narrow to allow the +1 Combat Wheelchair to pass-thru, cobblestone roads suddenly as smooth as modern paved roads... In short Wheelchair accessible dungeons.

Of course that would be a barrier. But then, you better not have a large sized monster anywhere on the other side of that narrow passageway. We already have the narrow passage issue with large sized PCs, and large pets/mounts/hirelings/allies. Not sure how this would be meaningfully different. Like the large PC, you're going to need a teleport spell or something else to get the larger PC through, whether it's based on their natural size or the chair or whatever.

As for cobblestone roads, I guess you didn't read what you quoted? It's literally the first sentence of the second paragraph.

Look you don't have to be into the idea. But it's OK that I am. It's inspiring my imagination about a new concept to me with D&D. Shit all over that inspiration if you like, but I think it can be cool stuff. And I don't give a shit about the motives of the people who introduced the idea or your motives for opposing it or the politics of it all or and of that shit when it comes to "I think this is a cool imaginative line of inquiry for my game".
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 19, 2020, 08:25:58 PM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145575
Of course that would be a barrier. But then, you better not have a large sized monster anywhere on the other side of that narrow passageway. We already have the narrow passage issue with large sized PCs, and large pets/mounts/hirelings/allies. Not sure how this would be meaningfully different. Like the large PC, you're going to need a teleport spell or something else to get the larger PC through, whether it's based on their natural size or the chair or whatever.

As for cobblestone roads, I guess you didn't read what you quoted? It's literally the first sentence of the second paragraph.

Look you don't have to be into the idea. But it's OK that I am. It's inspiring my imagination about a new concept to me with D&D. Shit all over that inspiration if you like, but I think it can be cool stuff. And I don't give a shit about the motives of the people who introduced the idea or your motives for opposing it or the politics of it all or and of that shit when it comes to "I think this is a cool imaginative line of inquiry for my game".

Heal spells do exist, why would anyone need a wheelchair? It makes exactly zero sense, thought YOU would virtue signal your virtue by finding it inspiring. Good for you.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 19, 2020, 08:26:37 PM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145565
This is apparently worth a lot of time being varying degrees of upset about because they are doing things wrong.


Before the internet, when the basement dwellers gibbered and masturbated in the corner nobody mistook them for the champions of the new cultural revolution. But now we have the internet where the freakshow has gotten entire companies to jump on command.  

Disabled heroes aren't new. Pirates with peglegs, hooks and one-eye are stereotypical to the point that a pirate with all his bits is almost an oddity. Alien Resurrection had an engineer in a wheelchair (with faster than light travel) back in 1997. Professor X first appeared in his wheelchair in 1963 and the closest Aquaman came to cool was when they replaced his hand with a harpoon.

But D&D Twitter isn't about "letting them play in a fun way". It's more reeking bullshit from the morons who kept screaming "orcs are black people" until WotC took the knee.


Quote from: FelixGamingX1;1145566
One thing that I came to realize is that a large percentage of people that are avid gamers, do so to escape reality.


Humans engage in entertainment for escapism. Guys who wear their team jersey on game day are LARPing just like the girls wearing fairy wings at RenFaire. Escapism is the whole point of any work of fiction.

People don't need to be suffering anything to seek out and enjoy escapism. It's natural to the human condition and I suspect its not confined to humans either. Cats know their tails aren't really prey, but happily throw themselves about "chasing" and "pouncing" on their own tails.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 08:31:38 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145580
Heal spells do exist, why would anyone need a wheelchair? It makes exactly zero sense, thought YOU would virtue signal your virtue by finding it inspiring. Good for you.

Because I have NEVER been happy with the default heal rules in 5e D&D. Shit I posted a huge thread on ENWorld about my dislike for those rules during the playtest and emailed the authors 6 years ago about my distaste for them. I don't like you can nearly die and then be perfectly full normal after 8 hours rest. I don't like that the system has no way to account for long term injuries. I don't like the super healing spells and the regeneration spells as they stand. I don't like that the system has no way to deal with being born with a disability. I don't like that the system has no curses or anti-magic attacks or warlock sacrificial pacts or things like that which would create an un-healable injury.

These rules help me formulate houserules to deal with some of the challenges changing the default healing system would entail. You are welcome to not use someone else's houserules in your game. Nobody is going to break into your game and force you to use their house rules.

I am not signalling anything by telling you I like the idea, any more than you are signalling to your posse here that you dislike the idea. Fuck, who here would I be signalling if I were? Believe it or not, I can like something you don't like without agendas being necessary for me to like it. If you are cool with the default healing system for D&D, good for you. I am not. I never was.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 19, 2020, 08:38:34 PM
Lets see if some finally get the objections:

Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: hedgehobbit on August 19, 2020, 09:22:15 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1145581
Professor X first appeared in his wheelchair in 1963 and the closest Aquaman came to cool was when they replaced his hand with a harpoon.
Professor X is a good example as his wheelchair was symbolic of his physical weakness which was paired with his powerful mental abilities. You didn't see Professor X rolling around the battlefield punching Magneto in the face. That would have been a joke.

The combat wheelchair doesn't empower disabled people. It just turns them into a sight gag.

But my main issue is that it's an obvious modern device. I'd have the same reaction to a Magic Communication Tablet that looked and worked exactly like a cell phone.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 19, 2020, 09:27:40 PM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145565
A person who is actually in a wheel chair wants to try and make something so they can have a fantasy hero version of themselves to adventure about in and it is all white knights and virtue signals and "not about ttrpg playing at all"  instead of letting them play the game in a way fun for them.

This is apparently worth a lot of time being varying degrees of upset about because they are doing things wrong.

Cool. Show me one player with that sort of mobility issue who wants to PLAY that mobility issue in game.

This is fetish, pure and simple.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: DocJones on August 19, 2020, 09:36:21 PM
I'd allow the combat wheelchair.  OTOH player is likely to attract hordes of rust monsters.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Manic Modron on August 19, 2020, 09:39:05 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1145581
Before the internet, when the basement dwellers gibbered and masturbated in the corner nobody mistook them for the champions of the new cultural revolution. But now we have the internet where the freakshow has gotten entire companies to jump on command.  
...
But D&D Twitter isn't about "letting them play in a fun way". It's more reeking bullshit from the morons who kept screaming "orcs are black people" until WotC took the knee.
This is literally about a disabled girl who made something fun for herself and who put it out on the internet in case anybody else wants to use it for their own games.

Maybe some people in wheelchairs don't want something like this.  Maybe some of them do.  At least one certainly does.  Room for both, is all I'm saying.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145580
Heal spells do exist, why would anyone need a wheelchair?

Because  crippling injuries or congenital defects aren't necessarily covered by getting a bunch of hit points back or getting diseases cured.  Even Regenerate will just grow legs back, might not help if they didn't work before.  Your houserules may vary, but I have never had standard grade D&D healing fix everything under the sun.



But, I've wasted enough time on puzzling over why this is worth the vitriol it is getting.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Manic Modron on August 19, 2020, 09:39:58 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1145595
Cool. Show me one player with that sort of mobility issue who wants to PLAY that mobility issue in game.

The one who made it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 09:41:25 PM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145598
But, I've wasted enough time on puzzling over why this is worth the vitriol it is getting.

It's apparently a badwrongfun houserule.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 19, 2020, 09:57:26 PM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145598
This is literally about a disabled girl who made something fun for herself and who put it out on the internet in case anybody else wants to use it for their own games.

And ergo its immune to criticism. Its a stupid item. By itself largely innocous, but its a symbol of the times. When any sort of creative practicality or willingness to express ideas beyond what you see in front of yourself is suppressed in favor of being embodied by your disabilities or your POC or SOCJUS virtues. Currently media is being devoured by writers throwing away everything for pandering. This is another such element. If we where not in such times would largely be ignored.

Quote from: Mistwell;1145600
It's apparently a badwrongfun houserule.
Its just an iconic example of a virtue signally one and the type of audience WOTC attempts to attract. These sorts of "housrules" have a way of becoming non-houserules.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 10:17:26 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145605
Its just an iconic example of a virtue signally one and the type of audience WOTC attempts to attract. These sorts of "housrules" have a way of becoming non-houserules.

Right. Badwrongfun houserule. Gotcha. Putting houserules in quotes, like it's a nefarious secret houserule that's really the rules as written posing as a houserule in the future or something. It's wrongthink and WOTC is guilty of a futurecrime. Understood.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: sureshot on August 19, 2020, 10:21:33 PM
I would allow a combat wheelchair at my tables except those using them should not expect to find flat even surfaces on ever corner of whatever campaign world I am running in. nor expect or demand that the enemy ignore their disability in game. Orcs will attack the healthy character as easily as they will attack a character in a wheelchair. I will freely allow someone to play a character with a disability. I will not give such a character any special consideration at my table. Non-negotiable or up for any kind of debate. The same way the character with no social skills and low Charisma is not going to be as good as the character with good social skills and decent charisma.

That being said the bullshit about not criticizing something needs to stop. Don't want criticism directed at your work don't put it out on the Internet to see let alone be criticized. Trying to pull an equally larger bullshit guilt trip is a lame and transparent to silence criticism/
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 19, 2020, 10:47:54 PM
Quote from: sureshot;1145612
I would allow a combat wheelchair at my tables except those using them should not expect to find flat even surfaces on ever corner of whatever campaign world I am running in. nor expect or demand that the enemy ignore their disability in game. Orcs will attack the healthy character as easily as they will attack a character in a wheelchair. I will freely allow someone to play a character with a disability. I will not give such a character any special consideration at my table. Non-negotiable or up for any kind of debate. The same way the character with no social skills and low Charisma is not going to be as good as the character with good social skills and decent charisma.

That being said the bullshit about not criticizing something needs to stop. Don't want criticism directed at your work don't put it out on the Internet to see let alone be criticized. Trying to pull an equally larger bullshit guilt trip is a lame and transparent to silence criticism/

But she belongs to {insert "oppressed" group here}!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Manic Modron on August 19, 2020, 10:59:23 PM
I had more of a post about this, again because apparently I haven't wasted enough time thinking about how absolutely baffling it is to get worked up about somebody else's game.

I wasn't sure I got the appeal of an adventurer class wheelchair set up.  I don't think that if I was suddenly stricken with such a condition that I'd want to do anything but play things that can fucking well fly because fuck this chair.  I'd probably want a hover chair if at all possible if there somehow wasn't an option.  

But then, maybe if I was I'd like to spend some time in a version of myself that could do amazing things with the benefit of applied thaumaturgy.  Maybe if I was more athletic I'd scoff at the idea of being carted about by a Tensers Disk instead of moving around under as much of my own power as I could manage.  Maybe I wouldn't want articulated golem legs doing my work for me.  At least, not all the time.

Somebody taking the time and effort to make a Paralympic version of an adventurer is interesting from several angles: aesthetically, mechanically, and also from the viewpoint of somebody I just can't come close to relating to.

If it wasn't for this thread or the other one, I might not have been able to consider it in anything other than a vague "Huh.  Neat, I guess" sort of disinterest.

All the fuming against the very concept being done around here has genuinely helped me have a better view about the whole thing.  It likely won't show up in a game of mine, but in case there is the opportunity, I can now see where the path of it could lead.

Like a zen koan, only with more bile, you have broken me out of a normal stretch of thinking and as such, I suppose I must thank you.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 19, 2020, 11:01:03 PM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145611
Right. Badwrongfun houserule.
You know dipshit the reaction is the splash it makes with the WOTC employees not the person themselves.

WOTC is talking about what customers deserve to play its games. WOTC is talking about which parts to cut to get points with a mob. WOTC is shoving Woke into its stuff to appear trendy. WOTC is printing and telling people how they should think and what kind of game is wrong or not. Don't put this bullshit 'Oh whatever did they do?' crap on me.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 19, 2020, 11:13:46 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145620
You know dipshit the reaction is the splash it makes with the WOTC employees not the person themselves.

Right. Wrongthink leads to futurecrime. It is literally politically incorrect from your point of view, and is a dangerous opinion which might influence people to like that idea and do more with it in the future. Must stop the dangerous idea before it grows. I totally get it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: bat on August 19, 2020, 11:20:52 PM
From what I have seen those running with this idea see themselves as saviours of the day. On Twitter I saw a woman call magical fixes "gross" (why?), I have seen Tenser's Floating Disk dismissed as not meant to carry living beings (you can't homebrew a spell?) and a poll in which you were told to agree that it was useful and if you disagreed to "keep it to yourself because nobody wants to hear you" (tolerance! )
At the end of the day it is your game, use it or don't.  I commented on YouTube with my reply which at least shut up the Facebook thread I saw it in.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Manic Modron on August 19, 2020, 11:32:54 PM
Quote from: sureshot;1145612
That being said the bullshit about not criticizing something needs to stop. Don't want criticism directed at your work don't put it out on the Internet to see let alone be criticized. Trying to pull an equally larger bullshit guilt trip is a lame and transparent to silence criticism/

This is absolutely true, yes.  Don't say something, especially online, if you aren't at least expecting it to be challenged.

Something created by a person within a certain community isn't immune from criticism, even if they are creating something for that community.  There could be all kinds of things wrong with it.  But some of the accusations leveled against this are based on it somehow being virtue signaling and not having anything to do with real gaming which since it WAS created by somebody who games for like minded gamers, that accusation doesn't seem to hold any water.  For all I can see this girl is actually just putting out things she likes and some of the blowback is based on some sort of idea that she doesn't REALLY like it, it is just for effect.

Other accusations are that it can't work for certain campaign assumptions, which is true, but not universally so.   Lion and Dragon would be a shitty place to try and shove something like this into.  So would settings like Lankmar or Conan or a number of other settings.  But having a setting that allows for dungeoneering as essentially a full impact sport in a world that can create mitigating devices for conditions magic can't yet cure?  Hell, if you have a group for that, wheel-rugby it right up.

You have people who say that they wouldn't want to play that completely ignoring the people grateful for the creation.  People who are demanding that their opinions be given the same value as those they are discarding out of hand.  True, you also have some people who actually ARE just saying "you just don't like disabled people," which also sucks ass because it is assuming a motivation that might not exist.

Sometimes some of you seem to be so worked up about fighting the the worst examples of SJWs imaginable that it doesn't matter who you lash out at on the way.  It might not automatically make you as bad as them, but the phrase about what people who fight monsters have to be careful of comes to mind.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Krugus on August 19, 2020, 11:47:03 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1145595
Cool. Show me one player with that sort of mobility issue who wants to PLAY that mobility issue in game.

This is fetish, pure and simple.


So true.  My wife's sister-in-law has lived almost her entire life in a wheel chair and when we play RPG's with her all of her characters ALL OF THEM are built for speed.   She would never play a character that was bound to a wheel chair.  ever.   So those people think otherwise can go fuck themselves.  With a stick.  Covered in barbed wire.  While they are On fire..
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Slambo on August 20, 2020, 01:19:36 AM
No ones really.talking about how OP the actual item is. Its much better than having legs. Thats generally the problem with it. Rather than being about playing a disabled character its more like a massive boon. Though i guess eveyone in the party could just ride one. Cause it has no downsides, but it comes with a bunch of buffs.

Also if you read the document it comes from its very obviously a more political statement than anything. It also seems to think that granting an extra attack at level 5 is fine but it grants it to any class, it also lets you get +2 ac...in addition to your sheild or magic armor, grants half cover as well. And grants advantage on spell saves vs. The elemental damage types...it also deals 1d6+1d4+2 damage and gives whatever you attack disadvantage in its attacks. Granted many of these are upgrades, but they're ridiculously cheap for 5e.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Warder on August 20, 2020, 02:56:10 AM
Just imagine a whole band of wheelchaired heroes charging at orcs during the LOTR movies. Imagine hobbits in those wheelchairs. Just imagine. Only dont do it close to me cause i might get upset. Usually when i drive back home from my work i see a man sitting in the same spot out in the open, he has only one leg. He always looks truly miserable and probably has no money to pay for a prosthetic. Just imagine somebody coming up to him and telling him he could just imagine a combat wheelchair. It would be fun for him they would say. Just imagine his reaction.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 20, 2020, 03:32:47 AM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145565
A person who is actually in a wheel chair wants to try and make something so they can have a fantasy hero version of themselves to adventure about in and it is all white knights and virtue signals and "not about ttrpg playing at all"  instead of letting them play the game in a way fun for them.

This is apparently worth a lot of time being varying degrees of upset about because they are doing things wrong.


I think more the problem was how its represented and the likely why. Alone one or the other might not be so onerous. Together its annoying to one degree or another.

And as a handicapped person I can tell you that Yes. It annoys us too.

Theres a few threads now on how to do this better. And thats the main thing about this fora. We may criticize. But we also point out ways to make things like this work.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Pat on August 20, 2020, 08:06:53 AM
Quote from: Slipshot762;1145547
does the price of the wheelchair exceed the price for healing magic?

If you don't have magic item shops, who would even know?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: sureshot on August 20, 2020, 08:12:52 AM
Maniac Modron you make a good point. I think and I maybe wrong is that it's not so much the concept of the fantasy wheelchair so much that it's way too strong as an item. At most it should allow character move from point a to point B and that is it. An extra attack a bonus to AC why not just give it perfect flying of 100 Ft at first level. It's wanting to play a character with flaws while then trying to cheat the system without any negatives to those flaws. When called out on trying to cheat the system in their favor get triggered, offended, and call everyone ableist.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 20, 2020, 08:25:50 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit;1145531
The problem with the D&D "Combat Wheelchair" isn't that it's "unrealistic" (at least not in ren-faire fantasy like the Forgotten Realms), it's that it isn't really about ttrpg play at all.


I was pleasantly suprised with your take on this one, Pundit.  It does seem that it is not about the Wheelchair at all.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Cloyer Bulse on August 20, 2020, 08:49:53 AM
In a medieval or post-apocalyptic quasi-medieval world there isn't going to be much in the way of paving, most villages will have muddy roads, caves obviously are not paved, and dungeons are likely to be very rough and uneven, not to mention filled with traps, stairs, ladders, cave-ins, etc., so a wheelchair would be completely useless. It's an utterly moronic idea. It's a concept likely made up by urban millennials who have no sense of reality and are completely inept tacticians.

It makes more sense to have a pet ogre haul someone around (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ-UZ4DvYBg). Ogres can fight, run, and traverse obstacles. And they are easily replaced.

A key distinction between pre-industrial and modern is the use of man or animal power instead of machines. In fact, with plentiful slave labor, machines are inferior and inefficient.

A cheap, primitive wheelchair can be cobbled together, but it's likely to be a piece of shit. Modern wheelchairs are the product of an industrial society with machines, computers, and factories -- a massive infrastructure which took centuries to build and takes millions of laborers and managers to maintain. Not to mention the massive infrastructure it takes to create and maintain roads and sidewalks. Without regular maintenance, a modern city would literally disintegrate in a few short years and be consumed by nature.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 20, 2020, 09:21:28 AM
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4777[/ATTACH]
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 20, 2020, 09:25:52 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145618
But she belongs to {insert "oppressed" group here}!

She, full stop - assuming her gender, that is. It's an attention grab, both at and away from the gaming table, putting herself and her physical condition front and center.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Darrin Kelley on August 20, 2020, 09:27:27 AM
I'm saying this as a disabled person in real life. So anyone who pounces on me for being insensitive are way off base.

Adventurers in a fantasy RPG are not physically disabled. Anyone who is physically disabled would be viewed as a liability to the whole adventuring condition. This is why people who lose limbs and such retire from adventuring. Because they aren't able to do it anymore. This is not being cruel to the disabled person. This is being honest about the adventuring condition.

This isn't exclusive to the medieval authentic side of fantasy RPGs. But it exists with all of the others. Medieval fantasy is not kind to the disabled. And it never has been.

So this +1 Wheelchair of whatever is something I find deeply offensive. Anyone in such a contraption are the first target the uncivilized would go after. They would be the first person killed off. Which is horrible. But that is part of the condition. The lame animal is the first to get eaten.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 20, 2020, 09:31:36 AM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145623
Right. Wrongthink leads to futurecrime. It is literally politically incorrect from your point of view, and is a dangerous opinion which might influence people to like that idea and do more with it in the future. Must stop the dangerous idea before it grows. I totally get it.
No, I actually am intellectually honest and think its a bad mindset to be in the first place. Fuck it, Il say its a weak form of thought. Wrongthink in my opinion.
Just as much as you judge me for thinking Wrong. Everything has a degree of judging thought and intention. So get off your high horse.

I don't believe in acting based around thought, but I'm sure as shit allowed to judge somebody for their thought process. Which is again what your doing to me.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 20, 2020, 09:56:00 AM
Quote from: Manic Modron;1145599
The one who made it.

Learn a bit about "the one who made it" - "the one who made it" isn't in a wheelchair.  The one who made it is self-diagnosed with such a mild form of Ehlers-Danlos - so mild that it doesn't impact her life in any way, other than giving her the abilithy to virtue signal by appropriating disability, and using it to get sham jobs like "disability consultant" and "sensitivity reader - she's the "disabled" version of Rachel Dolezal.

A wheelchair user did not create this, you twat.  But the creator has no problem attacking wheelchair users who have dared to criticized this nonsense, as "ableist", which goes even further to show you what kind of a trash person they are.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Alderaan Crumbs on August 20, 2020, 10:17:02 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1145595
Cool. Show me one player with that sort of mobility issue who wants to PLAY that mobility issue in game.

This is fetish, pure and simple.


I thought this same thing (only applying it to mental illness) when reading the free teaser for the upcoming supplement We Are All Mad Here, for MCG's Cypher System RPG. It's a fairy tale book to run such games in Cypher. Cool. No problem there.

The included setting is about playing mentally ill people whose conditions empower them and the book has over four pages dedicated to making the game safe for that. It uses all the politically phrasing, to include mentioning that classic fairy tales use ableist language. It has advice on being safe, to include the GM having an out if needed. It has multiple sidebars, one of which has a suicide hotline phone number! It mentions that the book isn't a medical manual and to seek professional help if needed as well as stating that you shouldn't make fun of mental illness...even though that is literally what they are doing making a game centered around playing mentally ill PCs!

The cognitive dissonance is astounding and while I know only a few mentally ill people, none of them enjoy it. Of them, those who game certainly don't see their illness as a superpower nor want it as a focal point of their fun.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2020, 10:54:38 AM
Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1145666
I'm saying this as a disabled person in real life. So anyone who pounces on me for being insensitive are way off base.

Darrin, to be fair, you're pretty insensitive to tons and tons of stuff. I mean, dude, it's not like you've built up a reputation for years of being a ray of sunshine and rainbows. You being disabled does not, in any way, assure people you will not be insensitive about that topic as well. You're a pretty equal opportunity grouch. :)
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 20, 2020, 11:01:14 AM
Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1145666
I'm saying this as a disabled person in real life. So anyone who pounces on me for being insensitive are way off base.

Adventurers in a fantasy RPG are not physically disabled. Anyone who is physically disabled would be viewed as a liability to the whole adventuring condition. This is why people who lose limbs and such retire from adventuring. Because they aren't able to do it anymore. This is not being cruel to the disabled person. This is being honest about the adventuring condition.

This isn't exclusive to the medieval authentic side of fantasy RPGs. But it exists with all of the others. Medieval fantasy is not kind to the disabled. And it never has been.

So this +1 Wheelchair of whatever is something I find deeply offensive. Anyone in such a contraption are the first target the uncivilized would go after. They would be the first person killed off. Which is horrible. But that is part of the condition. The lame animal is the first to get eaten.

Unfortunate, but true.

Are there exceptions? Well, there's that Vistani werewolf hunter with the fake leg in Curse of Strahd, but we went through WHY she doesn't (and shouldn't) show it off; it's a vulnerability and a down card she can put into play if needed. ('The werewolf grabs her leg in its maw, and then looks confused as there's no blood, just the crunch of wood. It has enough time to look offended before she draws a crossbow loaded with a silver bolt and shoots it in the face.')
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2020, 11:06:32 AM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145668
No, I actually am intellectually honest and think its a bad mindset to be in the first place. Fuck it, Il say its a weak form of thought. Wrongthink in my opinion.

OK, so we agree you're firmly in 1984 mode now. Someone has committed a thoughtcrime.

Quote
Just as much as you judge me for thinking Wrong. Everything has a degree of judging thought and intention. So get off your high horse.

Oh no, simple disagreement is not in fact what's going on here. You're doing more than judging it not your thing and stupid.

"I think the rule is stupid and would not use it as a houserule in my game" is disagreement.

"I think expressing this opinion is dangerous because others might hear that opinion, agree with it, and do more with it leading to the bad opinion growing, and so we must stop the opinion from spreading like a cancer before that happens" is what you're doing.

You'd be fine if someone used this houserule quietly on their own, but their sin was expressing this opinion in the open where others can talk about it and agree with it and tell others about it. You appear to think it's your duty to stop the wrongthink from spreading to others who might like it. That is not simple disagreement.  That's you trying to stop the growth of something which runs contrary to your political orthodoxy. That's political correctness.

Quote
I don't believe in acting based around thought, but I'm sure as shit allowed to judge somebody for their thought process. Which is again what your doing to me.

Of course you are. But you're not just judging it. You're taking the authoritarian politically correct "stop the wrongthink from spreading!" stance. There are tons and tons and tons of houserules out there that people talk about that you disagree with and think are stupid and nonsense. But you don't rant about them like it's an issue of ethics for society. No this is not just judgement. I don't know if you're just not admitting to yourself what this is or just being disingenuous.

It would be nice if you stopped the bullshit "I just disagree with this houserule" nonsense. That is not what you're doing my man. Simple houserule disagreement does not get a half dozen videos and multiple threads and this level of rage and personal attacks against anyone who says they like the houserule. Naw, this is what political correctness looks like. It's just uncomfortable for you to consider the possibility you're engaging in the very thing you've opposed for so many years.

For example, I said I liked the houserule, I explained why, it's based on a very long established issue I have with 5e that this addresses, I expanded on it in different ways some of which have little to do with wheelchairs, etc.. And I got personally attacked for it, it's assumed I like it for bad motives, and it's assumed everything I am saying about it must be a lie and my reasons must be nefarious and secret signalling (though it's completely unclear who here I'd be signalling). THAT is what political correctness looks like - it's not judgement about the houserule, it's judgement of sin for my liking a Dangerous Idea Which Must Be Stopped At All Costs.

And my usual response stands: Fuck your orthodoxy.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 20, 2020, 11:11:51 AM
Quote from: kythri;1145671
Learn a bit about "the one who made it" - "the one who made it" isn't in a wheelchair.  The one who made it is self-diagnosed with such a mild form of Ehlers-Danlos - so mild that it doesn't impact her life in any way, other than giving her the abilithy to virtue signal by appropriating disability, and using it to get sham jobs like "disability consultant" and "sensitivity reader - she's the "disabled" version of Rachel Dolezal.

A wheelchair user did not create this, you twat.  But the creator has no problem attacking wheelchair users who have dared to criticized this nonsense, as "ableist", which goes even further to show you what kind of a trash person they are.

So, it was made by your regular Baizuo pretending to speak for others who didn't elect it and then silencing those others because it knows better. Every. Single. Fucking. Time.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 20, 2020, 01:16:25 PM
Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1145666
I'm saying this as a disabled person in real life. So anyone who pounces on me for being insensitive are way off base.

Adventurers in a fantasy RPG are not physically disabled. Anyone who is physically disabled would be viewed as a liability to the whole adventuring condition. This is why people who lose limbs and such retire from adventuring. Because they aren't able to do it anymore. This is not being cruel to the disabled person. This is being honest about the adventuring condition.

This isn't exclusive to the medieval authentic side of fantasy RPGs. But it exists with all of the others. Medieval fantasy is not kind to the disabled. And it never has been.

So this +1 Wheelchair of whatever is something I find deeply offensive. Anyone in such a contraption are the first target the uncivilized would go after. They would be the first person killed off. Which is horrible. But that is part of the condition. The lame animal is the first to get eaten.

Id say more that normally a disabled person might be a liability. But in a fantasy setting theres times when either being disabled is a rare boon, or this is literally the only person available.

example A: Medusa vs blind person. Siren or Harpy vs deaf person. Rare, but happens.
example B: A groups being formed to investigate some disturbance in the local ruins and the only cleric on hand is wheelchair bound (or some magical conveyance). Either you go in without any healing or you go in knowing you may have to haul this guy as needed to negotiate some hard terrain.

Or finding a workaround could become a quest unto itself. Magical glass or gem eyes to restore sight. Magical limbs to restore movement or combat ability. And so on. Or even just a item pr person able to cast a spell able to restore them.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 20, 2020, 01:28:06 PM
If you want to explore this idea THAT badly, I have a solution for you.

Play a Pathfinder oracle. No, seriously. While the benefits help somewhat, some of the curses can be inconvenient as hell.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Brad on August 20, 2020, 05:36:48 PM
Oh hey look, stupid ass idea causes even more division. Goal achieved, I guess.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 20, 2020, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145687
OK, so we agree you're firmly in 1984 mode now. Someone has committed a thoughtcrime.

Again mr high horse that logic is universally applicable. Including to you. Judging my judgement requires judgement on your end and disaproval of how I think as well.
"If you say something is bad thats like 1984 tyranny! Your like tripple worse then dictators that burned books! Expressing distaste is like triple hitler! If you dislike something that means your obviously gonna infringe on their rights and freedoms!".
Its also the same level as dumb hyperbole that you accuse me of doing as well. Lets just calm down and stop with the accusatory looks.

Im saying that I dislike people wrapping themselves in identification. I think that in part has been instilled by the current culture and I find that an overall unhealthy attitude. It demotes focus on yourself as an individual, and prioritizes your own victimhood and misfortune over proactivity. I don't like this attitude being widespread, and being promoted. And it does indeed make it towards the contents of future books and such.

How is disliking this attitute any more of a 'Thoughtcrime' then me say judging the attitude the creators of the new Star Trek have when they say they just freely discard the previous stuff and focus on what appeals to them more? JJ abrams discarding cannon and just doing lower tier stuff led to more spinoffs focusing on discarding cannon and just doing lower tier stuff. And now we are at a Rick & Morty knockoff.

Quote
And my usual response stands: Fuck your orthodoxy.


A usual response belies an orthadoxy in it of itself dipshit.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 20, 2020, 08:55:55 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145751
Again mr high horse that logic is universally applicable. Including to you. Judging my judgement requires judgement on your end and disaproval of how I think as well.
"If you say something is bad thats like 1984 tyranny! Your like tripple worse then dictators that burned books! Expressing distaste is like triple hitler! If you dislike something that means your obviously gonna infringe on their rights and freedoms!".
Its also the same level as dumb hyperbole that you accuse me of doing as well. Lets just calm down and stop with the accusatory looks.

Im saying that I dislike people wrapping themselves in identification. I think that in part has been instilled by the current culture and I find that an overall unhealthy attitude. It demotes focus on yourself as an individual, and prioritizes your own victimhood and misfortune over proactivity. I don't like this attitude being widespread, and being promoted. And it does indeed make it towards the contents of future books and such.

How is disliking this attitute any more of a 'Thoughtcrime' then me say judging the attitude the creators of the new Star Trek have when they say they just freely discard the previous stuff and focus on what appeals to them more? JJ abrams discarding cannon and just doing lower tier stuff led to more spinoffs focusing on discarding cannon and just doing lower tier stuff. And now we are at a Rick & Morty knockoff.



A usual response belies an orthadoxy in it of itself dipshit.

Are you seriously denying there is a dominant orthodoxy on this forum which is anti-SJW?

Again, all I said was I liked the houserule and it sparked my imagination and helped with an issue I've had with my game. And multiple people jumped on me essentially calling me a liar and a virtue signaler and questioned my motives. I was called names (like you just did, again), and the accusation is this is Dangerous Ideas because WOTC might like it also.

That's not the same as my position at all. Which was simply "I like this and I have no issue if you don't."

Recognize you are, essentially, The Man in this debate. You're representing the orthodoxy of this forum in your position, and making it clear dissent is more than just dissent but must be crushed and demeaned and attacked.

You're making a Political Correctness argument. I am not. I don't care what houserules you like or don't like. You do however care that I dared say I like this one. Are you really not seeing the difference?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 21, 2020, 12:57:50 AM
Climbing a wall with a wheelchair:

Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 01:17:02 AM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145773
Climbing a wall with a wheelchair:


Made of the most modern alloys. You sure this is the hill you want to die on? Since he can't use his feet how the fuck does he use his hands to fend off any attack?

Again, I'm perfectly okay with the stupid idea, but it can't be just like having legs bot don't at the same time.

In a high fantasy setting there's tons of ways of having someone who can't use his legs (without healing him for some reason) be mobile, and all of them are more practical, cool and fun than this stupidity.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 21, 2020, 01:31:33 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145776
Made of the most modern alloys. You sure this is the hill you want to die on?

You sure my posting it means what you think it means? It sure isn't some fucking hill I am dying on. Drama much?

 
Quote
Again, I'm perfectly okay with the stupid idea, but it can't be just like having legs bot don't at the same time.

In a high fantasy setting there's tons of ways of having someone who can't use his legs (without healing him for some reason) be mobile, and all of them are more practical, cool and fun than this stupidity.

Again, I can find something cool that you do not find cool. We can have differing tastes without this being some dramatic thoughtcrime snowball to SJW rules volcanic mountain ant hill.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 01:44:46 AM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145777
You sure my posting it means what you think it means? It sure isn't some fucking hill I am dying on. Drama much?

 


Again, I can find something cool that you do not find cool. We can have differing tastes without this being some dramatic thoughtcrime snowball to SJW rules volcanic mountain ant hill.

"Thoughtcrime"? Drama much? Me criticizing you isn't accusing you of a thoughtcrime, especially since I'm not making a moral judgement unlike others do of those who find this idea stupid. Or like you are doing to me right the fuck now.

Yes, you have a right to your opinion and your tastes and to express them, just like I have a right to tell you your ideas are stupid.

Now come back and make another moral judgement of my position while saying I'm the one doing it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 21, 2020, 01:45:40 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145776
Made of the most modern alloys. You sure this is the hill you want to die on? Since he can't use his feet how the fuck does he use his hands to fend off any attack?

Modern Alloys?  Pfft, its not even Damascus steel or Mithril.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 21, 2020, 08:27:04 AM
Maybe if you made it out of bone and enchanted it with animate dead, it would carry you independently?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 08:51:02 AM
Quote from: Brad;1145737
Oh hey look, stupid ass idea causes even more division. Goal achieved, I guess.


Have to agree here. Why is it wrong to maybe want to play a handicapped character?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 21, 2020, 08:54:17 AM
Quote from: Omega;1145805
Have to agree here. Why is it wrong to maybe want to play a handicapped character?

Why is it right to maybe want to play a handicapped character?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 08:57:12 AM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145759
Are you seriously denying there is a dominant orthodoxy on this forum which is anti-SJW?


Theres a huge gaping wound of difference between SJWs and actual social helping.

I'll repeat this again.

Through all iterations through the decades of this idiocy. Not one single SJW has ever actually helped us and has in fact more often harmed us in one form or another byt "speaking for us" and making us look like unreasonable attention whores. Or turning us into a token trophy or quota checkmark on a virtue list.

It takes people with genuine concern getting out there and doing something to get changes made where they really need made.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 09:02:19 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1145801
Maybe if you made it out of bone and enchanted it with animate dead, it would carry you independently?

That and many other options. A basic Animate Object spell in D&D can serve even. Hell with the 5e version you can make a chair that can walk around and negotiate obstacles like a quadruped. No need for wheels even. And thats at the most basic. Your animated bone conveyance is spot on.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 09:14:41 AM
Quote from: RandyB;1145807
Why is it right to maybe want to play a handicapped character?

Why are you stupid? I doubt you can answer that one though...

But sure. Lets play your little troll game because its actually beneficial to real posters. Not you.

Why? Havent we discussed that enough allready? Obviously you didnt read any of that so why the hell should I repeat myself?

But heres some more reasons.

1: Becoming disabled during gameplay. In D&D alone theres various things that can leave a character disabled. Especially if higher level healing magics are rare, or expensive, or both. The PC or player might want to soldier on and at least complete the quest on hand. Or be in a situation where they have no choice and must carry on as is. This includes starting an adventurer right after such an accident and proceeding from there.

2: Because the player things it will be interesting. Or, from experience with this as a DM, challenging. Not everyone out there min/maxes and char-ops the game to death.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RollingBones on August 21, 2020, 09:21:00 AM
Quote from: RandyB;1145807
Why is it right to maybe want to play a handicapped character?

Because a legless gnome wizard (both drunk and without lower legs) casting fireballs from the back of a mastiff running around the dungeon is the ultimate shenanigans?

Now if only I can convince a DM to let him ride a blink dog...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Zalman on August 21, 2020, 09:28:42 AM
I wonder how all the defenders of this concept would feel about an able person asking to play a disabled character. I mean, since it's so "OK" and all. So far, all I'm really seeing is the idea that a player would want to play themselves in the game, and therefore including wheelchairs is inclusive.

Is your defense only about "inclusiveness", or is there something in there about, you know, gaming?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 21, 2020, 09:50:24 AM
OK. I'll split the hair.

Quote from: Omega;1145811
But heres some more reasons.

1: Becoming disabled during gameplay. In D&D alone theres various things that can leave a character disabled. Especially if higher level healing magics are rare, or expensive, or both. The PC or player might want to soldier on and at least complete the quest on hand. Or be in a situation where they have no choice and must carry on as is.

This is legit. This kind of outcome should be part of the risk that the PCs face. But this is a legit case because it represents player agency in how they continue playing in response to in-game events. Retiring the PC is also a valid option.

Quote from: Omega;1145811
This includes starting an adventurer right after such an accident and proceeding from there.

2: Because the player things it will be interesting. Or, from experience with this as a DM, challenging. Not everyone out there min/maxes and char-ops the game to death.

In the context of the original issue - "combat wheelchair" - this is snowflakism. There are fun alternatives discussed in this thread and it's parallel. But the blanket idea "it's OK to play a handicapped character", especially in today's cultural climate, is an invitation to "representation" and snowflakism, whether intended as such or not.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 09:53:51 AM
Quote from: Zalman;1145813
I wonder how all the defenders of this concept would feel about an able person asking to play a disabled character. I mean, since it's so "OK" and all. So far, all I'm really seeing is the idea that a player would want to play themselves in the game, and therefore including wheelchairs is inclusive.

Is your defense only about "inclusiveness", or is there something in there about, you know, gaming?

That was a feature in my game. Its also a feature of some superhero RPGs like TSR's MSH.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 21, 2020, 11:01:49 AM
Quote from: Omega;1145811
Why are you stupid? I doubt you can answer that one though...

But sure. Lets play your little troll game because its actually beneficial to real posters. Not you.

Why? Havent we discussed that enough allready? Obviously you didnt read any of that so why the hell should I repeat myself?

But heres some more reasons.

1: Becoming disabled during gameplay. In D&D alone theres various things that can leave a character disabled. Especially if higher level healing magics are rare, or expensive, or both. The PC or player might want to soldier on and at least complete the quest on hand. Or be in a situation where they have no choice and must carry on as is. This includes starting an adventurer right after such an accident and proceeding from there.

2: Because the player things it will be interesting. Or, from experience with this as a DM, challenging. Not everyone out there min/maxes and char-ops the game to death.


Maybe someone wants to be a quadriplegic EMT... or Firefighter... or kill the dragon at 1st level.  It's a shame that they CAN'T.  Someone else will have to pick up the burden - either taking over the job, or carrying the dead weight of someone that's in a job they are no longer qualified for.  Yes, it sucks.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Brad on August 21, 2020, 11:23:04 AM
Quote from: Omega;1145805
Have to agree here. Why is it wrong to maybe want to play a handicapped character?

Quote from: RandyB;1145807
Why is it right to maybe want to play a handicapped character?


You're both right, but that's not what this thread is about. It's about some dumbass telling us that if you don't include fucking wheelchairs and disabled people in your elf game, you're a bigot and need to be scorned and avoided like the plague.

And it's a stupid ass idea. The whole thing is stupid. I honestly think this is just some munchkin bullshit that is being passed off as "inclusive" so the retard munchkin who came up with it can force it into D&D Adventurers League.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 21, 2020, 11:40:48 AM
Quote from: LiferGamer;1145824
Maybe someone wants to be a quadriplegic EMT... or Firefighter... or kill the dragon at 1st level.  It's a shame that they CAN'T.  Someone else will have to pick up the burden - either taking over the job, or carrying the dead weight of someone that's in a job they are no longer qualified for.  Yes, it sucks.
Forget quadraplegics. A while back there was a HUGE row because the fire department of New York (FDNY) was allowing women who had not passed the physical tests to go on to become full fledged firefighters. Never mind the equipment requirements, or the ability to carry someone from a burning building; we need more diversity and women in this job!

(What REALLY sucked was that there were women who had passed the physical and qualified. Those ladies had to be SEETHING over this idiocy.)

Quote from: Brad;1145831
You're both right, but that's not what this thread is about. It's about some dumbass telling us that if you don't include fucking wheelchairs and disabled people in your elf game, you're a bigot and need to be scorned and avoided like the plague.

And it's a stupid ass idea. The whole thing is stupid. I honestly think this is just some munchkin bullshit that is being passed off as "inclusive" so the retard munchkin who came up with it can force it into D&D Adventurers League.

Brad hits the mark, spot on.

There are ways to do this but as I've been saying, this? Stinks of someone with a fetish. Kessler, call your office.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 21, 2020, 11:53:39 AM
Quote from: Brad;1145831
You're both right, but that's not what this thread is about. It's about some dumbass telling us that if you don't include fucking wheelchairs and disabled people in your elf game, you're a bigot and need to be scorned and avoided like the plague.

And it's a stupid ass idea. The whole thing is stupid. I honestly think this is just some munchkin bullshit that is being passed off as "inclusive" so the retard munchkin who came up with it can force it into D&D Adventurers League.


Yep.

The initial assertion/demand is "wheelchair in D&D". The intent is for everyone in real life who can claim and wear the hero/victim badge to have the  full spotlight in the game, to accomplish two goals - grab attention to themselves in real life, and to drive the rest of us out of a hobby that we dare to enjoy.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 21, 2020, 11:54:43 AM
Because I am a mad man, I statted up a bone chair over in the magic items thread. Come at me, peasants!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on August 21, 2020, 03:36:02 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1145658
I was pleasantly suprised with your take on this one, Pundit.  It does seem that it is not about the Wheelchair at all.


No, it really isn't. I mean, the wheelchair is silly, sure. But try to name all the things in the Forgotten Realm that are silly...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on August 21, 2020, 03:38:26 PM
Quote from: kythri;1145671
Learn a bit about "the one who made it" - "the one who made it" isn't in a wheelchair.  The one who made it is self-diagnosed with such a mild form of Ehlers-Danlos - so mild that it doesn't impact her life in any way, other than giving her the abilithy to virtue signal by appropriating disability, and using it to get sham jobs like "disability consultant" and "sensitivity reader - she's the "disabled" version of Rachel Dolezal.


Do you have links/data to back this up?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 21, 2020, 04:21:58 PM
Quote from: Zalman;1145813
I wonder how all the defenders of this concept would feel about an able person asking to play a disabled character. I mean, since it's so "OK" and all. So far, all I'm really seeing is the idea that a player would want to play themselves in the game, and therefore including wheelchairs is inclusive.

Is your defense only about "inclusiveness", or is there something in there about, you know, gaming?


That's what I tell people that want to roleplay a Wizard character.  I say are you a Wizard, Harry?  No I did not think so just stick to your 2nd level Computer Programer and do not get any big ideas.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 04:50:33 PM
Like I have said before, for this to work you need to change the world, and that's their goal, to control how you play. If you don't accommodate them you're an Istophobe of course. (https://twitter.com/feltheleb/status/1296248264443015168)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4780[/ATTACH]
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 21, 2020, 04:55:44 PM
Quote from: Brad;1145831
You're both right, but that's not what this thread is about. It's about some dumbass telling us that if you don't include fucking wheelchairs and disabled people in your elf game, you're a bigot and need to be scorned and avoided like the plague.

And it's a stupid ass idea. The whole thing is stupid. I honestly think this is just some munchkin bullshit that is being passed off as "inclusive" so the retard munchkin who came up with it can force it into D&D Adventurers League.

Greetings!

I agree, my friend. If a character loses an arm, or a leg or whatever during the campaign, the hopefully some kind of accommodation can be made--such may be entirely too difficult though, in the case of legs especially. Character mobility and ruggedness is essential to adventuring.

The party isn't a group of urban-based SJW community activists or lawyers, playing grab-ass in a courtroom, or posturing at the local Starbucks at the city park--they are adventurers. Either they can keep up, or they get left behind and retired. Time to roll up a new character. This same consideration is also true why I would not allow a character to create a handicapped character at the beginning of the campaign. As you mentioned, this whole thing is a stupid fucking idea. While some might whince and stutter at the thought, the idea is stupid, but even more stupid and pernicious is the ideological motivation running underneath the stupid fucking idea.

Why the fuck would any normal person *want* to play a dysfunctional, slow, handicapped character that has a fucking trainload of problems and conditions? We are talking about nearly adventuring SEAL teams here. They need to shut the fuck up and stop hallucinating weird fucking fantasies. Adventuring groups are for hard, rugged beasts! It's all so fucking dumb. Just another example of SJW's trying to pour shit into everything, including RPG gaming and D&D in particular.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 21, 2020, 05:36:25 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145883
Like I have said before, for this to work you need to change the world, and that's their goal, to control how you play. If you don't accommodate them you're an Istophobe of course. (https://twitter.com/feltheleb/status/1296248264443015168)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4780[/ATTACH]

How is it you don't see it's you that's trying to control my game?

I never said or implied or hinted you need to adopt this house rule.

You, and several others here, went full-on Twitter mob on me for a while there because I dared to say I liked it.

How do you not look at yourself in the mirror and see the devil you're condemning. You're that dude. You're the one who attempted to control my game. You're the one who called names and demeaned and exaggerated and went hysterical about futurecrimes of WOTC because someone said the liked a fucking houserule you don't, and how it couldn't possibly just be a houserule you don't like it had to be so much more because you disliked it so much and the motives of some people who liked it.  Wake the fuck up dude, YOU'RE THE BADDIES IN THIS SCENARIO.

Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 06:03:51 PM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145895
How is it you don't see it's you that's trying to control my game?

I never said or implied or hinted you need to adopt this house rule.

You, and several others here, went full-on Twitter mob on me for a while there because I dared to say I liked it.

How do you not look at yourself in the mirror and see the devil you're condemning. You're that dude. You're the one who attempted to control my game. You're the one who called names and demeaned and exaggerated and went hysterical about futurecrimes of WOTC because someone said the liked a fucking houserule you don't, and how it couldn't possibly just be a houserule you don't like it had to be so much more because you disliked it so much and the motives of some people who liked it.  Wake the fuck up dude, YOU'RE THE BADDIES IN THIS SCENARIO.


Except you're lying thru your teeth. As usual, From the word go I said I would even accept it at my table but would not change the world to accommodate it. And have never demanded you don't play whatever in whatever way you want (I dare you to prove I have).

What I have said is this doesn't make sense (because it doesn't) and it's stupid (because it is) and that you have a right to hold your opinion that it's cool and I have a right to criticize your opinion.

Now go and find where I'm saying you shouldn't play in whatever way you want, I'll wait.

On the other side I have provided evidence of the "moral" shaming if I choose not to accommodate this idiocy.

Which is sorta, kinda what you and others here (the others more so than you) have done to any that dares criticize the contraption.

But please, do keep on strawmaning and lying as is your way.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 21, 2020, 06:47:01 PM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145903
But please, do keep on strawmaning and lying as is your way.

I feel this is part of the modern problem of that people still believe there is a 'Truly Neutral' position. Every position advocates for some sort of worldview.
Also funny I was just saying he was hyperbolizing the position of....having a position to be that of nazis but I guess he really does believe that.

I just imagine him in 1939: "What you're upset about the germans taking Chekoslovakia? Well your the ones advocating for military actions so YOUR The bad guys in this situation! They are just reunifying with german brethren!"
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 21, 2020, 08:44:36 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1145885
Why the fuck would any normal person *want* to play a dysfunctional, slow, handicapped character that has a fucking trainload of problems and conditions? We are talking about nearly adventuring SEAL teams here. They need to shut the fuck up and stop hallucinating weird fucking fantasies. Adventuring groups are for hard, rugged beasts! It's all so fucking dumb. Just another example of SJW's trying to pour shit into everything, including RPG gaming and D&D in particular.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145923
I feel this is part of the modern problem of that people still believe there is a 'Truly Neutral' position. Every position advocates for some sort of worldview.
I agree that there is no true neutral -- but there are more than two positions that can both be wrong.

SHARK has taken an extremely broad position not just against this specific combat wheelchair option, but against disabled PCs in general. I fundamentally disagree with SHARK's premise that having disabled PCs is adding shit to play. I've had a bunch of disabled PCs in play, and they have been a lot of fun.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 08:52:52 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145923
I feel this is part of the modern problem of that people still believe there is a 'Truly Neutral' position. Every position advocates for some sort of worldview.
Also funny I was just saying he was hyperbolizing the position of....having a position to be that of nazis but I guess he really does believe that.

I just imagine him in 1939: "What you're upset about the germans taking Chekoslovakia? Well your the ones advocating for military actions so YOUR The bad guys in this situation! They are just reunifying with german brethren!"

Of all the disingenuous shits on this forum he's on the top 5
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 21, 2020, 08:55:49 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145939
I agree that there is no true neutral -- but there are more than two positions that can both be wrong.

SHARK has taken an extremely broad position not just against this specific combat wheelchair option, but against disabled PCs in general. I fundamentally disagree with SHARK's premise that having disabled PCs is adding shit to play. I've had a bunch of disabled PCs in play, and they have been a lot of fun.

So Shark's subjective opinion is wrong because your subjective opinion is that it's fun?

Why are you engaging on moral shaming?

He has a right to his opinion just like you have a right to yours.

But no, he's a terribad person for daring to disagree with you...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 21, 2020, 09:05:23 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145939
I agree that there is no true neutral -- but there are more than two positions that can both be wrong.

SHARK has taken an extremely broad position not just against this specific combat wheelchair option, but against disabled PCs in general. I fundamentally disagree with SHARK's premise that having disabled PCs is adding shit to play. I've had a bunch of disabled PCs in play, and they have been a lot of fun.

Greetings!

Yeah, that's right. Most of my groups run like teams of Marine Infantry or Navy Seals. Lots of riding, running, mountain climbing, swimming, and digging. Lots of tunnels to crawl through, shafts to rappel down, traps and chasms to negotiate. Walls to scale, rivers to cross, marshes and jungles to slog through, often while fighting every step of the way.

Slow, dysfunctional, handicapped characters would be a hopeless liability in such endeavors. Thus, in such a demanding, harsh, and unforgiving environment, handicapped characters simply don't fit in.

Handicapped *people* can certainly find ways to survive within a society, and contribute in meaningful ways to their family and community around them. Handicapped characters are however, generally entirely unsuitable for operating with an adventuring group. An Adventuring Team is much like a squad of Marine Infantry or Navy Seals. Just like in the real world, no one in their right minds would *expect* a squad of Marines or Navy Seals to take handicapped person along with them into the field. No one would even suggest it. In a similar fashion, in a harsh, brutal, unforgiving ancient world, no one would embrace the idea of bringing handicapped characters along with an Adventurer team going out into the savage wilderness, either.

Periodically, a dedicated character might lose *one* eye, or a hand, for example. Some such disabilities can occasionally be successfully dealt with on an individual, case by case basis. Generally speaking, however, severely handicapped characters are either not allowed, or if such befalls a character, they can be retired in a local village, where they can build a new life as a handicapped character. The Player then simply rolls up a new character that is healthy, vigorous, and strong. A character that is fully functional and capable of facing the harsh environment with their team, and not be a liability to the team and otherwise jeopardize the mission's success.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RollingBones on August 21, 2020, 10:26:45 PM
Just off the top of my head, some fun characters that could be considered disabled, that don't require the introduction of incongruous and complex artefacts. Because even without Combat Wheelchairs, D&D does not discriminate:

- Aforementioned half legged mastiff riding Gnome wizard.

- Blind Monk or Fighter class (Daredevil or Zaitoichi) Just give them Blindsight 20ft, & advantage on perception (hearing) checks.

- Paraplegic Ranger, modelled after Clytemnestra (Horsewoman) from DC comics. A modified Animal Companion could be played in dungeons while she keeps watch outside, or goes on to the dungeon exit.

- One armed finesse weapon dex fighter/rogue (disadvantage climbing, and no two handed weapons, but that's about it for penalties. Throw in a feat and call it even. I can already imagine them as a discharged musketeer.)

- Wildshape druid, who spends as much time as possible wildshaped for ease of locomotion. Maybe just allow permanent Wildshape, it rarely runs out in practice anyway.

- Muscle-wasted Wizard (Raistlin comes to mind, but basically every low str & con wizard ever made)

- Paladin who's quadriplegia is nullified by her blessed plate armour (think Batman's exosuit immediately post Bane)

- Asperger's Bard who can't understand that this is not the time and place for one of his songs!

- Burn-victim low dex barbarian, who wears her dragon scorched skin with pride.

- EVERY SINGLE LOW INT FIGHTER CLASS CHARACTER

It's almost endless.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mistwell on August 21, 2020, 10:52:13 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1145923
I feel this is part of the modern problem of that people still believe there is a 'Truly Neutral' position. Every position advocates for some sort of worldview.
Also funny I was just saying he was hyperbolizing the position of....having a position to be that of nazis but I guess he really does believe that.

I just imagine him in 1939: "What you're upset about the germans taking Chekoslovakia? Well your the ones advocating for military actions so YOUR The bad guys in this situation! They are just reunifying with german brethren!"

Nobody compared him to Nazis. "Are we the baddies" is a comedy thing. And it's funny. But, it's a joke.

Sometimes a houserule is just a houserule and really isn't advocacy. I have a worldview on disabilities, but it's not as relevant as the fact I like these rules for a issue in my games. My saying I like a houserule you do not like is not an invitation for you to make up shit about my hidden motives and then bash me for that made up shit.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 21, 2020, 11:01:07 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1145939
I agree that there is no true neutral -- but there are more than two positions that can both be wrong.

SHARK has taken an extremely broad position not just against this specific combat wheelchair option, but against disabled PCs in general. I fundamentally disagree with SHARK's premise that having disabled PCs is adding shit to play. I've had a bunch of disabled PCs in play, and they have been a lot of fun.

Agreed. My favorite Jojo is the crippled one. During a time period without wheelchairs who has to master a horse instead (https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IQaxSHXu3rQ/Valm356kGkI/AAAAAAAAEX4/dKbW6a_e1t8/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Johnny%2BJoestar.jpg). The more disadvantaged the protagonist the more satisfying the wins.

But its about execution. That Jojo didn't get a friggin wheelchair stand and zoomed around in the desert.
Quote from: Mistwell;1145950
My saying I like a houserule you do not like is not an invitation for you to make up shit about my hidden motives and then bash me for that made up shit.

But me saying there are house rules I dislike is to makeup fascistic motives about me? You wanna throw shit, but you puss at receiving it.

Earth To mistwell: Disliking something, even a pattern of thought =/= Totalitarian thought control no more then you throwing a fit is an act of aggression towards me.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Slambo on August 21, 2020, 11:40:53 PM
I was surprised when i read that part that he took so long to get use if his legs back since it was teased so early on.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 21, 2020, 11:58:58 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit;1145877
No, it really isn't. I mean, the wheelchair is silly, sure. But try to name all the things in the Forgotten Realm that are silly...


Killer pillows.

Or more aptly. Things that seem silly. Till they eat you alive.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 22, 2020, 12:07:55 AM
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1145883
Like I have said before, for this to work you need to change the world, and that's their goal, to control how you play. If you don't accommodate them you're an Istophobe of course. (https://twitter.com/feltheleb/status/1296248264443015168)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4780[/ATTACH]

And this is what vexes the absolute hell out of us handicapped people. Stuff like this, statements like these make us look like unreasonable nutcases because to an outsider it look like one of us, and sometimes IS one of us that has been brainwashed. As said, a few years back I met a hearing impaired gal who was on a crusade to stop people calling us deaf because "that is a slur". And had to sit her down and explain why it isnt. And even if it were, why trying to remove the word would not change anything at all and just make matters worse.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Valatar on August 22, 2020, 01:56:46 AM
My issue isn't with PCs who can't use their legs, it's that a wheelchair would be a fucking stupid way to try to deal with it for people needing high mobility in bad terrain in a fantasy world.  A PC with mobility issues is an invitation to come up with actually creative ways to deal with that, and anyone whose go-to is, "Hurr, magic wheelchair," is a cretin.  Show me someone riding trained dire monkeys.  Show me a golem that's a chair with a bunch of legs on it.  Show me a gondola held aloft by a bunch of mini-beholders.  Show me anything that's halfway cool and creative and you have my full support.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Valatar on August 22, 2020, 02:08:10 AM
Just as an old example, I had a halfling psion forever ago.  He had no particular disability other than being a halfling, but being small made him naturally slower than the rest of the party.  He was, however, an eeeeevil halfling psion, so he had a solution to this: a steady stream of mind-wiped humanoids who'd carry him around in a backpack, all of whom he referred to only as "Mule", and who would randomly be a different person now and then, with no mention of what had happened to the last one.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: EOTB on August 22, 2020, 03:04:45 AM
I'm going to zig where people are zagging a bit on this one.

And I get why people are zagging.  In skimming the thread I don't disagree with the reasons people give for opposing it, that have little to do with wheelchairs per se.

But if talking about this in terms of a culture war struggle, if I'm on the other side and I know that I've aroused a dedicated opposition that will react fervently against whatever I do; that are primed to see beyond the face value of whatever odd demand I make next

Then I will entice them to take the rhetorical field in the most unsympathetic stance I can imagine.  If two sides are battling for the middle - a middle so saturated on macro-news that we know most never go beyond the headline - then I want the middle to see a headline like "alt-right gamers pitch fit over poor girl who wanted a cool D&D wheelchair in their game."

Unlike other fields of rhetorical combat, this is an impotent field.  The odds of combat wheelchairs being adopted in games approaches absolute zero.  The number of gamers in that middle 30% who desire to escape to a combat wheelchair fantasy are nil.  This is not like other issues.  

But even if it has no chance of impacting the hobby long-term, the image of scathing denunciations for those discussing combat wheelchairs is a rhetorical win.  Not for you.  

This is one that should be allowed to fade out to yawning silence.  The two-week rule would have nuked this into a memory hole it would never escape from.  Never choosing your battles eventually means certainly joining a fight where a victory gains the privilege of winning horrible optics.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 22, 2020, 03:05:34 AM
Quote from: Omega;1145960
And this is what vexes the absolute hell out of us handicapped people. Stuff like this, statements like these make us look like unreasonable nutcases because to an outsider it look like one of us, and sometimes IS one of us that has been brainwashed. As said, a few years back I met a hearing impaired gal who was on a crusade to stop people calling us deaf because "that is a slur". And had to sit her down and explain why it isnt. And even if it were, why trying to remove the word would not change anything at all and just make matters worse.

Carlin had a routine about changing the language, what do they accomplish? What REAL effort do they do? (Speaking of the activists) Nothing and none. Ah, but in exchange they get to scream "Look, look how virtuous I am!".

They have a while working on all the "communitehs" based on disabilities. So now self diagnosed Autists speak for us people in the spectrum, and so on ad nauseum.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 22, 2020, 05:32:13 AM
Quote from: EOTB;1145972
then I want the middle to see a headline like "alt-right gamers pitch fit over poor girl who wanted a cool D&D wheelchair in their game."


Any reaction other than clapping for their idiocy incites headlines like that.

I've got zero interest in what the mushy middle thinks anymore. If they haven't figured out that "alt-right" means "anyone who doesn't bow to this week's nutcase propaganda", then they're already a lost cause.


Quote from: EOTB;1145972
This is one that should be allowed to fade out to yawning silence.  The two-week rule would have nuked this into a memory hole it would never escape from.  Never choosing your battles eventually means certainly joining a fight where a victory gains the privilege of winning horrible optics.


"Horrible optics" have the advantage of furthering the divide in the hobby.

There is no kumbaya reconciliation in the future. The culture war results in submission or division.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Jaeger on August 22, 2020, 06:08:56 AM
Quote from: Mistwell;1145535
Like most things, it's what you make with it rather than the motives of other people for being interested in the topic to begin with.

To me, wheelchairs in D&D is just an opportunity to get creative with a new concept.

It am thinking up spells that spellcasters would research to help a wheelchair get over difficult terrain, or lower it's weight so it can be more easily hoisted up a rope. I am imagining things a combat wheelchair with magic and machinery added to it might be able to do. I am imagining other magical and mundane modifications which could happen for other physical disabilities, like blindness or a missing limb. I am thinking if this kind of stuff can better allow for long-term injury to PCs due to incurable magical damage. I am imagining what kind of magical damage would be incurable such as curses, partial disintegration, disease, anti-magic attacks, etc.. I am considering if birth defects would "heal" only back to what they were originally, making healing spells ineffective for that kind of disability. I am going down all sorts of avenues of creation for this concept which I hadn't before.

You can dwell on the negative, you can fret over the motivations of other people who you will never know and never encounter at a game table. Or, you can focus on the cool stuff you can make with it. I'd rather do the later.

Quote from: Mistwell;1145895
How is it you don't see it's you that's trying to control my game?

I never said or implied or hinted you need to adopt this house rule.

You, and several others here, went full-on Twitter mob on me for a while there because I dared to say I liked it.

How do you not look at yourself in the mirror and see the devil you're condemning. You're that dude. You're the one who attempted to control my game. You're the one who called names and demeaned and exaggerated and went hysterical about futurecrimes of WOTC because someone said the liked a fucking houserule you don't, and how it couldn't possibly just be a houserule you don't like it had to be so much more because you disliked it so much and the motives of some people who liked it.  Wake the fuck up dude, YOU'RE THE BADDIES IN THIS SCENARIO.


LOL!

I admire your technique Sir.

I salute you!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 22, 2020, 05:10:06 PM
Taking a wheelchair into a dungeon, makes about as much sense as taking an elephant into one. Just asking for something to go wrong.

Even before getting to the dungeon theres that not so little problem of wilderness travel.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: BoxCrayonTales on August 22, 2020, 05:27:37 PM
The game simply isn't designed to accommodate characters with disabilities. That's unfortunate, but it cannot be changed without rewriting it into a new game.

Somebody should make a "Dungeons & Disabilities" game where all PCs are disabled and this is accounted for in the rules.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 22, 2020, 06:17:13 PM
I've said similar in another thread (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42524-Combat-Wheelchairs-and-how-to-make-them-work-in-medieval-settings&p=1146013&viewfull=1#post1146013), but since it is split, I'm addressing SHARK's specific issues here.

Quote from: jhkim
SHARK has taken an extremely broad position not just against this specific combat wheelchair option, but against disabled PCs in general. I fundamentally disagree with SHARK's premise that having disabled PCs is adding shit to play. I've had a bunch of disabled PCs in play, and they have been a lot of fun.

Quote from: SHARK;1145944
Handicapped *people* can certainly find ways to survive within a society, and contribute in meaningful ways to their family and community around them. Handicapped characters are however, generally entirely unsuitable for operating with an adventuring group. An Adventuring Team is much like a squad of Marine Infantry or Navy Seals. Just like in the real world, no one in their right minds would *expect* a squad of Marines or Navy Seals to take handicapped person along with them into the field. No one would even suggest it. In a similar fashion, in a harsh, brutal, unforgiving ancient world, no one would embrace the idea of bringing handicapped characters along with an Adventurer team going out into the savage wilderness, either.

In the real world, no one would *expect* a squad of Marines or Navy Seals to take along a 98-pound weakling and bookworm. They would be a liability to the rest of the team, especially if they also didn't have particularly good fighting skills. But in D&D, adventuring parties regularly take along such a character. The reason why is that a wizard has magical power that compensates for their lack of physical skill and ability.

The same can easily be true of a character with a disability. When I include a disabled character in a campaign, I make sure that the PC is an equal contributor to the others - not a liability, but also not overpowered. This is straightforward given magic and game mechanics. I just adjust the level of their other abilities until they're roughly an equal contributor. RoliingBones gave a bunch of examples in his post:

Quote from: RollingBones;1145948
Just off the top of my head, some fun characters that could be considered disabled, that don't require the introduction of incongruous and complex artefacts. Because even without Combat Wheelchairs, D&D does not discriminate:

- Aforementioned half legged mastiff riding Gnome wizard.

- Blind Monk or Fighter class (Daredevil or Zaitoichi) Just give them Blindsight 20ft, & advantage on perception (hearing) checks.

- Paraplegic Ranger, modelled after Clytemnestra (Horsewoman) from DC comics. A modified Animal Companion could be played in dungeons while she keeps watch outside, or goes on to the dungeon exit.

- One armed finesse weapon dex fighter/rogue (disadvantage climbing, and no two handed weapons, but that's about it for penalties. Throw in a feat and call it even. I can already imagine them as a discharged musketeer.)

- Wildshape druid, who spends as much time as possible wildshaped for ease of locomotion. Maybe just allow permanent Wildshape, it rarely runs out in practice anyway.

- Muscle-wasted Wizard (Raistlin comes to mind, but basically every low str & con wizard ever made)

- Paladin who's quadriplegia is nullified by her blessed plate armour (think Batman's exosuit immediately post Bane)

- Asperger's Bard who can't understand that this is not the time and place for one of his songs!

- Burn-victim low dex barbarian, who wears her dragon scorched skin with pride.

- EVERY SINGLE LOW INT FIGHTER CLASS CHARACTER

It's almost endless.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 22, 2020, 08:19:58 PM
Hate to say it... But I'm quite happy to avoid 'very' disabled characters in game. I just don't want the hassles of lugging someone around, or something that breaks my immersion or even fun for my players. Bear in mind however, that I'd never play a high fantasy setting, so a magical artifact wheelchair is a ridiculous concept. Sure, do it for a wacky setting like in D&D that's fair enough.

For low level stuff... I'm fine with a character who loses an eye, hand or even has to use a peg leg. But there will be consequences. Of course we've been doing this as I said before with WFRP for years.

Dare Devil and shit won't fly in my games either as that's a bit too 'superhuman'.

On the other hand I'm very happy to accommodate a disabled player, but I may not allow them play a paraplegic or something that could disrupt the gaming experience for the group.

I've seen a lot of SJW's say stuff like.... 'But this adds rich character detail to your characters and games'. That and their 'really interesting' morally ambiguous Orcs. EEEEvil Orcs are boring apparently. SJWs can go play with quadriplegic unicorns and best of luck to them!

Sorry, but I'm quite happy having boring games, in that case. Go me!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 22, 2020, 08:57:45 PM
Greetings!

Well, I typically run harsh, brutal worlds where handicapped people in an adventuring team simply are not going to fit in well, generally speaking. As far as that goes, 98-lb weaklings aren't likely to make it, either. Everyone on a team is assumed to be mobile, independent, and functional, capable of dealing reasonably well with most physical obstacles and environments. A Wizard that can't swim or climb a rope is likely to be sent back and searches done until the party finds a Wizard that can swim and climb a rope. No one gets carried anywhere.

Most people don't have access to special labs and uber magic super hero gear, doodads, and technology.

Severely handicapped characters don't fit well into the games I run. They likely get retired to a town somewhere, and a new character is rolled up. That's the breaks.

Absent a whole super-industry of magic and technology to *make* such handicapped characters otherwise functional and allegedly not a liability--it re-orientates the team's focus on how to constantly accommodate and deal with the handicapped character's problems and limitations--instead of getting on with the mission, and jumping crazily into adventure. I don't see that as a positive dynamic, and I don't think most players at the table would be overjoyed about it either. A character having a weird, glass eye, or a metal claw hand, is one thing. More severe handicaps become more problematic, and are generally dealt with as I mentioned.

If you like superhero blind characters, or characters confined to a wheelchair, or quadriplegics, great. In my world if they weren't safely locked away in a town somewhere, they would be eaten, or otherwise swiftly killed.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 22, 2020, 09:18:19 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146039
Greetings!

Well, I typically run harsh, brutal worlds where handicapped people in an adventuring team simply are not going to fit in well, generally speaking. As far as that goes, 98-lb weaklings aren't likely to make it, either. Everyone on a team is assumed to be mobile, independent, and functional, capable of dealing reasonably well with most physical obstacles and environments. A Wizard that can't swim or climb a rope is likely to be sent back and searches done until the party finds a Wizard that can swim and climb a rope. No one gets carried anywhere.

Well that sounds like Bullshit SHARK.  Like asking a Fighter to read an ancient language written on the side of a tomb.  Oh you cant?  Well you are out, lets look for a Fighter that can because this is a harsh, brutal world where everyone has to pull their own weight.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 22, 2020, 09:33:14 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146039
Greetings!

Well, I typically run harsh, brutal worlds where handicapped people in an adventuring team simply are not going to fit in well, generally speaking. As far as that goes, 98-lb weaklings aren't likely to make it, either. Everyone on a team is assumed to be mobile, independent, and functional, capable of dealing reasonably well with most physical obstacles and environments. A Wizard that can't swim or climb a rope is likely to be sent back and searches done until the party finds a Wizard that can swim and climb a rope. No one gets carried anywhere.

Most people don't have access to special labs and uber magic super hero gear, doodads, and technology.

Severely handicapped characters don't fit well into the games I run. They likely get retired to a town somewhere, and a new character is rolled up. That's the breaks.

Absent a whole super-industry of magic and technology to *make* such handicapped characters otherwise functional and allegedly not a liability--it re-orientates the team's focus on how to constantly accommodate and deal with the handicapped character's problems and limitations--instead of getting on with the mission, and jumping crazily into adventure. I don't see that as a positive dynamic, and I don't think most players at the table would be overjoyed about it either. A character having a weird, glass eye, or a metal claw hand, is one thing. More severe handicaps become more problematic, and are generally dealt with as I mentioned.

If you like superhero blind characters, or characters confined to a wheelchair, or quadriplegics, great. In my world if they weren't safely locked away in a town somewhere, they would be eaten, or otherwise swiftly killed.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Suddenly reminded of an adventure where my 1st level psychic bollixed a DC 5 Climb check and nearly killed himself before he got hold of the rope.

Vast psionic power, hilariously incompetent on a physical level. Good times.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 22, 2020, 09:35:21 PM
Quote from: Shasarak;1146043
Well that sounds like Bullshit SHARK.  Like asking a Fighter to read an ancient language written on the side of a tomb.  Oh you cant?  Well you are out, lets look for a Fighter that can because this is a harsh, brutal world where everyone has to pull their own weight.

Greetings!

Reading an ancient language isn't essential for every member of a adventuring team, Shasarak. Possessing basic mobility and functionality is an essential though.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 22, 2020, 09:38:45 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146046
Suddenly reminded of an adventure where my 1st level psychic bollixed a DC 5 Climb check and nearly killed himself before he got hold of the rope.

Vast psionic power, hilariously incompetent on a physical level. Good times.

Greetings!

Oh yeah! I love it when the Players blow simple, physical challenges. "I fumbled my Climb roll!" "Ahhhh....I crash to the ground, and hit the rocks? Really? Oh, man!":D

Hilarious stuff!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 22, 2020, 10:16:55 PM
SHARK -

If you don't want to have disabled characters in your games, that's fine. It's your game - run it how you like. But your reasoning doesn't make sense and doesn't match with my experience.

Quote from: SHARK;1146039
Severely handicapped characters don't fit well into the games I run. They likely get retired to a town somewhere, and a new character is rolled up. That's the breaks.

Absent a whole super-industry of magic and technology to *make* such handicapped characters otherwise functional and allegedly not a liability--it re-orientates the team's focus on how to constantly accommodate and deal with the handicapped character's problems and limitations--instead of getting on with the mission, and jumping crazily into adventure. I don't see that as a positive dynamic, and I don't think most players at the table would be overjoyed about it either. A character having a weird, glass eye, or a metal claw hand, is one thing. More severe handicaps become more problematic, and are generally dealt with as I mentioned.

If you like superhero blind characters, or characters confined to a wheelchair, or quadriplegics, great. In my world if they weren't safely locked away in a town somewhere, they would be eaten, or otherwise swiftly killed.

This doesn't make sense. So... Daredevil is a weakling who would be swiftly killed in your campaign? Why? He's not weak or a liability. I'm not saying that you need to accept such a character, but your claim that the team's focus would have to turn into accommodating him is bullshit.

In my experience, it's not difficult to come up with balanced characters. Some systems have a built-in system for disadvantages, but even without a built-in system, I as GM can adjust character balance to balance things out.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 22, 2020, 10:24:18 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146060
I as GM can adjust character balance to balance things out.

That's true... But personally, if I've written a scenario about say a haunted village at the top of a frozen mountain. I'm not going to change the fabric of the story to accommodate a wheelchair.

I'd would suggest to the player to play a character that is able to traverse and survive in such a hostile environment.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 22, 2020, 10:32:21 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146060
SHARK -

If you don't want to have disabled characters in your games, that's fine. It's your game - run it how you like. But your reasoning doesn't make sense and doesn't match with my experience.


This doesn't make sense. So... Daredevil is a weakling who would be swiftly killed in your campaign? Why? He's not weak or a liability. I'm not saying that you need to accept such a character, but your claim that the team's focus would have to turn into accommodating him is bullshit.

In my experience, it's not difficult to come up with balanced characters. Some systems have a built-in system for disadvantages, but even without a built-in system, I as GM can adjust character balance to balance things out.


Great example, yes sir. Daredevil, a "blind" character that has echolocation so strong, far reaching and fine tuned he sees better with it than people with 20/20 vision using binoculars...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 22, 2020, 10:46:04 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146060
SHARK -

If you don't want to have disabled characters in your games, that's fine. It's your game - run it how you like. But your reasoning doesn't make sense and doesn't match with my experience.


This doesn't make sense. So... Daredevil is a weakling who would be swiftly killed in your campaign? Why? He's not weak or a liability. I'm not saying that you need to accept such a character, but your claim that the team's focus would have to turn into accommodating him is bullshit.

In my experience, it's not difficult to come up with balanced characters. Some systems have a built-in system for disadvantages, but even without a built-in system, I as GM can adjust character balance to balance things out.

Greetings!

I don't care about *DareDevil*. I don't have crazy, superhero characters typically in my games. Handicapped characters--as I've mentioned several times now--are in fact, sans special magic and tech--entirely liabilities. They get a glass eye, a metal claw hand--that's about it. Anything more severe, they're fucked. There's no magic gizmos for them, there's no special accommodations for them. They can't keep up, and endure a harsh, brutal world. They have so many limitations and restrictions, they are done. How does that not make sense? Most adventuring teams expect to run, swim, climb, dig, jump across chasms, scale mountain cliffs, rappel down cliffsides, quickly move along narrow ledges, kick in doors, kick ass and take names.

Characters that are blind, strapped to wheelchairs, or otherwise suffer under severe handicaps are generally fucked, and would typically be swiftly killed and eaten. To avoid that fate, most are simply retired to somewhere safe, and a new character is rolled up that is strong, healthy, and physically rugged, flexible, and mobile.

I don't tend to "balance" anything out. In my campaigns, there is no sympathy, no coddling, no special treatment. It is a harsh and brutal world. They either keep up, or they get eaten and slaughtered. To survive, they must stay back in the town or city, with the women, the kiddies, and the old people, protected by strong walls and strong men. Severely handicapped characters are fucked. They have been severely crippled, and do good to just survive in a quiet, safe place far from danger and stress.

And the whole idea of *Daredevil* *Laughing* Daredevil doesn't exist in my campaigns, nor are there "superhero" type characters. A blind character is a total liability. They're BLIND. They don't get special powers for being blind. They get to live in a garden villa somewhere like assisted living, with teenaged girls to lead them around and cook for them.

I note that Omega, Exploited, GeekyBugle, Spinachcat, and many others seem to understand what I'm saying quite well.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 23, 2020, 12:55:19 AM
A disability is a liability, but so is not being a perfect god good at all things.

I hate arguments about realism because reality as a whole is generally boring and uneventful. We "Focus" on certain parts of reality where exceptional things happened. In most wars most people actually didn't do much and the battle ended after like 5% of the people panicked and the rest routed. In most wars nobody even aims to kill. They get a wound and then spend 3 months in a hospital.

Im not saying its unreasonable to want to have a game that stresses physical excelence, but its not really a more realistic display of reality then anything else thats fictional. Its about as realistic as daredevil because they both are fictional. IE 100% unrealistic.

In reality 99.99999999999% of the time what is done by an adventuring team of 5 in a game is done by a team of 50 professionals over a X10 extended timespan of the event. And even the rare 5 man team that does only does their one thing once and goes back to being part of the team of 50 professionals. But we overlook this part of "Realism" because we want to hand out with the people we like and play pretend. I don't find it somehow more "Realistically dignified' then a combat wheelchair.

But Daredevil is a really bad example of a disabled hero because hes not really disabled, especially in the way the sight should impact him, IE in his perception.

A wheelchair bound hero might work as something like a wizard with a tensers floating disk style thing for a chair. Its still a hinderance, but some people like playing with a challenge.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Sadras on August 23, 2020, 03:37:13 AM
So what I find most hypocritical about this is you get your anti-realists advocating for 4e's gamist style (which is absolutely fine) but then they go and support integrating realistic physically AND mentally disabled characters. None of that can be construed as offensive at all. :rolleyes:
So I make an off the cuff remark on Enworld that hey if you want that much realism in your D&D where we are representing bi-polar disorder PCs and the like, why not introduce gender based ability capping [you know like the mechanic in 1e]. Well of course the Wokeratti mods on that politically insufferable leaning site decide - that is sexist.

So mechanising real life mental issue is A-ok, suggesting using an a 1e mechanic is sexist. What does that say about their view on 1e players?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 23, 2020, 05:08:27 AM
One of the reasons I like OD&D is the 3D6 down the line for characters. The end result is often mages who are as physically capable as most of the party, but just smarter. The random chargen meant most mages weren't 98 lb nerds, but equal to the average human.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 23, 2020, 06:29:02 AM
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1146012
The game simply isn't designed to accommodate characters with disabilities. That's unfortunate, but it cannot be changed without rewriting it into a new game.

Somebody should make a "Dungeons & Disabilities" game where all PCs are disabled and this is accounted for in the rules.


D&D can handle it in various ways depending on the edition. Bemusingly older editions had more options than newer ones. 5e at least has some options for limb loss and disabled limps.

This could be anything from a loss in an appropriate stat, to other sorts of negatives to combat or movement depending on the situation. Theres also been some articles and bits squirreled away in modules and magazines for options to cover impairments of one form or another.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 23, 2020, 06:34:57 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1146048
Greetings!

Reading an ancient language isn't essential for every member of a adventuring team, Shasarak. Possessing basic mobility and functionality is an essential though.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


You dont get to adventure if you can not speak friend and enter.

QED
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 23, 2020, 07:16:37 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1146066
I don't care about *DareDevil*. I don't have crazy, superhero characters typically in my games.
SHARK

This... I mean, what has Dare Devil a super, got to do with a fantasy D&D? I've not read DD for years, but to my recollection he was far superior to someone with sight when in came to hand to hand combat.

I think it's really up to the GM's style along with the groups. If you want to make your blind character, effectively a superhero, then just customize your game. Simple as that... I'll just leave those shenanigans out of my game.

One thing I'd also say (and I know very little about 5e's lore). But the Curse of the Strahd (or whatever the fuck it's called). Now will have a NPC where she no longer hides her disability or something?  Retro fixing a scenario is just so fucking corporate. Also, why change that about the character? That's her personal view of 'her' disability (for good or ill). What if someone, who's disabled, relates to that? So their story is not taken into consideration? So no psychological nuances then?

This is why I firmly stick to the OSR or WFRP (early editions). I hate all this playground politics and corporate lick asses that couldn't care less in reality.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 23, 2020, 08:25:06 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1146066
I don't care about *DareDevil*. I don't have crazy, superhero characters typically in my games. Handicapped characters--as I've mentioned several times now--are in fact, sans special magic and tech--entirely liabilities.
SHARK - I understand that you don't have superheroes per se, but presumably your game does have magical abilities, right? For example, there is a warlock invocation "Devil's Sight" which grants the ability to see in normal and magical darkness to 120 feet. Further, a warlock with a familiar can see through their familiar's eyes. Even without any special magic, there are many magical options that grant senses or sight. As an alternate example, a blind druid could wildshape into seeing forms.

Again, it's your choice if you don't want to allow players in your game to take a disabled character as a PC. Your game, your rules.

But your claim is that all such characters are *inherently* helpless and weak pushovers, which doesn't make sense to me given that there is magic that exists in your world. Wouldn't it be possible for a blind warlock or druid to exist that was not weak and helpless? For example, would it be possible for the PCs to encounter a high level blind druid who would be a formidable opponent if they tried to cross him? Presumably a 15th level druid would be a dangerous opponent even if their human form was weak.


Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146085
But Daredevil is a really bad example of a disabled hero because hes not really disabled, especially in the way the sight should impact him, IE in his perception.

A wheelchair bound hero might work as something like a wizard with a tensers floating disk style thing for a chair. Its still a hinderance, but some people like playing with a challenge.
The fact that Daredevil isn't functionally weak or limited is exactly why I used him as an example. SHARK's claim is that all disabled characters in his world are weak and helpless -- despite the fact that his world has magic. That doesn't make sense to me. Even if there aren't superheroes per se, magic allows characters like Daredevil to exist.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: HappyDaze on August 23, 2020, 10:08:34 AM
Quote from: The Exploited.;1146107
This... I mean, what has Dare Devil a super, got to do with a fantasy D&D? I've not read DD for years, but to my recollection he was far superior to someone with sight when in came to hand to hand combat.

Well, in 5e (and 4e) fantasy D&D, it really plays out more like fantasy supers than it does like a gritty fantasy game (e.g., WFRP). I'm sure somewhere out there is a third-party race with senses like DareDevil...mostly just Blindsight and Advantage on Perception by 5e rules.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 23, 2020, 01:36:24 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146066
Greetings!

I don't care about *DareDevil*. I don't have crazy, superhero characters typically in my games. Handicapped characters--as I've mentioned several times now--are in fact, sans special magic and tech--entirely liabilities. They get a glass eye, a metal claw hand--that's about it. Anything more severe, they're fucked. There's no magic gizmos for them, there's no special accommodations for them. They can't keep up, and endure a harsh, brutal world. They have so many limitations and restrictions, they are done. How does that not make sense? Most adventuring teams expect to run, swim, climb, dig, jump across chasms, scale mountain cliffs, rappel down cliffsides, quickly move along narrow ledges, kick in doors, kick ass and take names.

Characters that are blind, strapped to wheelchairs, or otherwise suffer under severe handicaps are generally fucked, and would typically be swiftly killed and eaten. To avoid that fate, most are simply retired to somewhere safe, and a new character is rolled up that is strong, healthy, and physically rugged, flexible, and mobile.

I don't tend to "balance" anything out. In my campaigns, there is no sympathy, no coddling, no special treatment. It is a harsh and brutal world. They either keep up, or they get eaten and slaughtered. To survive, they must stay back in the town or city, with the women, the kiddies, and the old people, protected by strong walls and strong men. Severely handicapped characters are fucked. They have been severely crippled, and do good to just survive in a quiet, safe place far from danger and stress.

And the whole idea of *Daredevil* *Laughing* Daredevil doesn't exist in my campaigns, nor are there "superhero" type characters. A blind character is a total liability. They're BLIND. They don't get special powers for being blind. They get to live in a garden villa somewhere like assisted living, with teenaged girls to lead them around and cook for them.

I note that Omega, Exploited, GeekyBugle, Spinachcat, and many others seem to understand what I'm saying quite well.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


Again, I reference the Pathfinder oracle if people are that gods-be-damned desperate to play a 'disabled' PC. At least they'll get divine spellcasting out of it, but some of the oracular curses are -brutal-. Clouded vision makes your oracle unable to target enemies beyond six squares, for example.

This actually came up in a campaign where the oracle was a relatively new class for both players and GM, and after the first time the oracle's blindness caused some problems, the GM took pity and let the player swap it out for speaking in tongues instead.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 23, 2020, 02:16:30 PM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146132
Again, I reference the Pathfinder oracle if people are that gods-be-damned desperate to play a 'disabled' PC. At least they'll get divine spellcasting out of it, but some of the oracular curses are -brutal-.
So it sounds like Pathfinder oracles as written can be underpowered. I don't see that this shows anything about the general case. It would be trivial to change the rules so that Pathfinder oracles are overpowered instead, for example - and there is therefore some set at which they are balanced.

It's not like Pathfinder oracles are the only option for disabled PC. Coming from decades of playing GURPS, HERO, and other RPGs with similar mechanics for character weaknesses, I've had a lot of PCs with various disabilities.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Jaeger on August 23, 2020, 06:27:13 PM
Quote from: Omega;1146010
Taking a wheelchair into a dungeon, makes about as much sense as taking an elephant into one. Just asking for something to go wrong.


Even before getting to the dungeon there's that not so little problem of wilderness travel.


Exactly.

All this "wheelchair into a dungeon" nonsense is exactly that. Just a big goof.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: PencilBoy99 on August 23, 2020, 08:40:35 PM
I think what's at least thought provoking about Pundit's video isn't anything about the wheelchair, but his assertion that most of these things aren't really about the thing they ostensibly say they're about.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 24, 2020, 05:34:29 AM
Quote from: The Exploited.;1146107
Retro fixing a scenario is just so fucking corporate.


If just one person complains on Twatter, WotC will "fix" the book and give you the chance to buy it twice!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 24, 2020, 06:55:21 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146208
If just one person complains on Twatter, WotC will "fix" the book and give you the chance to buy it twice!

Yeah, that's very true...

What really pisses me off, is that it's usually literally one or two gimps as you said, and the corporates go into armageddon mode. Stupid fucks!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: HappyDaze on August 24, 2020, 07:11:31 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146208
If just one person complains on Twatter, WotC will "fix" the book and give you the chance to buy it twice!

It's too bad companies don't move that fast to incorporate needed errata (although WotC is better than average on that).
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 24, 2020, 07:18:53 AM
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1146188
I think what's at least thought provoking about Pundit's video isn't anything about the wheelchair, but his assertion that most of these things aren't really about the thing they ostensibly say they're about.

Thats because half the time. They arent. Its tokenism as some call it and its been around in force since the 90s iteration of this, but started gaining traction in the 70s iteration of this nonesense.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 24, 2020, 07:20:43 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146213
It's too bad companies don't move that fast to incorporate needed errata (although WotC is better than average on that).

Surprisingly good in fact. Theyve been quietly updating the books every few print runs with fixes.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 24, 2020, 08:04:56 AM
Quote from: The Exploited.;1146211
Yeah, that's very true...

What really pisses me off, is that it's usually literally one or two gimps as you said, and the corporates go into armageddon mode. Stupid fucks!

That's the megaphone effect of social media. It LOOKS like thousands of people are supporting them when in reality it's a bare handful.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Chris24601 on August 24, 2020, 08:30:32 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146222
That's the megaphone effect of social media. It LOOKS like thousands of people are supporting them when in reality it's a bare handful.

Not just that, there are dedicated troll farms for it.

Though not a game specific example, a relevant anecdote is that when Rush Limbaugh was being subjected to a cancel campaign where thousands of messages a day were flooding his sponsors and stations, he paid to investigate the sources and discovered that the ENTIRE cancel campaign was just TEN people using bogus internet accounts to appear like thousands upon thousands of outraged listeners.

If you don't think tiny numbers of the perpetually outraged aren't doing the same thing in the field of RPGs (and entertainment in general) then you're delusional. They are the fringe of the fringe and see nothing wrong with using lies and distortions so long as "justice" is achieved. The biggest con they pull, amplified by the internet and a willing media, is to present themselves as the majority when they're probably 1% or less of a given population.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 24, 2020, 09:33:39 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146222
That's the megaphone effect of social media. It LOOKS like thousands of people are supporting them when in reality it's a bare handful.

Yeah mate, it was the same with the whole Oriental adventures debacle. A few posts from a single muppet and Wotc go all Chernobyl. It's pathetic... Because once it starts, who know where it will stop. That's the main reason I don't touch any of their products.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 24, 2020, 10:25:44 AM
Quote from: RPGPundit;1145878
Do you have links/data to back this up?


Twitter feed (twitter.com/mustangsart), Instagram (instagram.com/mustangsart) and other social media.  I gathered this information from going back and reading her posts before this all blew up.  She claims to have hEDS (hypermobile Ehler-Danlos Syndrome), and early posts discussion her "diagnosis" are clearly self-diagnosis, inasmuch as all of the complaints about her providers refusing to diagnose her to her satisfaction, and fishing for a provider who will diagnose her as she desires.  Her Instagram contains numerous pictures of her actively engaged in bipedal locomotion with groups of her friends to dispel any potential claims of her being in a wheelchair.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Pat on August 24, 2020, 10:42:45 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146222
That's the megaphone effect of social media. It LOOKS like thousands of people are supporting them when in reality it's a bare handful.

That has an impact, but companies have always been risk averse. They rarely take a moral stand on issues, because their board has a legal duty to put the company's financial interests ahead of their personal ones. They tend to react strongly to bad press, and want to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, so they're easy to sway by activists.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 24, 2020, 10:57:09 AM
Quote from: Pat;1146239
That has an impact, but companies have always been risk averse. They rarely take a moral stand on issues, because their board has a legal duty to put the company's financial interests ahead of their personal ones. They tend to react strongly to bad press, and want to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, so they're easy to sway by activists.

Yeah, but when they realize the 'activists' are not near as numerous as people claim, they tend to get a bit more spine.

There's also the question of these 'shakedowns', which are very reminiscent of Jesse Jackson's grift a few decades ago where he'd offer to supply 'diversity hires' to a company in exchange for not calling for a boycott/sanctions against them.*

* those of us who live in sane worlds might consider this extortion.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 24, 2020, 12:48:07 PM
It seems to me that there are still actual differences of position on the topic of characters with disabilities. SHARK hasn't replied about his position - but there are other disagreements.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales
The game simply isn't designed to accommodate characters with disabilities. That's unfortunate, but it cannot be changed without rewriting it into a new game.

Somebody should make a "Dungeons & Disabilities" game where all PCs are disabled and this is accounted for in the rules.
Quote from: Omega;1146102
D&D can handle it in various ways depending on the edition. Bemusingly older editions had more options than newer ones. 5e at least has some options for limb loss and disabled limps.

This could be anything from a loss in an appropriate stat, to other sorts of negatives to combat or movement depending on the situation. Theres also been some articles and bits squirreled away in modules and magazines for options to cover impairments of one form or another.
I agree with Omega that D&D doesn't have any fundamental problem with disabilities such as limb loss. It's handled in other games similar to D&D. To be fair, D&D does tend to assume that wounds don't affect a character's ability at all -- but that's not absolute. There have been special case rules for limb loss, as Omega notes.

There is the issue that there is no mechanic for balancing characters who have any sort of flaws or weaknesses at character generation time. Many games like Savage Worlds, Unisystem, and GURPS have character flaws that give points to gain other benefits in character creation. But I don't think that is fundamentally built into the system. I've seen plenty of optional rules for adding character flaws into various games including D&D.

But the more old-school way is "rulings, not rules" - where the GM just makes a judgement call about how to handle a character, rather than tacking on a mechanical point system.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 24, 2020, 04:44:26 PM
Quote from: The Exploited.;1146211
Yeah, that's very true...

What really pisses me off, is that it's usually literally one or two gimps as you said, and the corporates go into armageddon mode. Stupid fucks!


WotC are just doing what they wanted to do all along.  Look at Chris Perkins Twitter, someone who self indentifys as a magical unicorn does not need much convincing.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 24, 2020, 06:41:03 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146253
It seems to me that there are still actual differences of position on the topic of characters with disabilities. SHARK hasn't replied about his position - but there are other disagreements.

Greetings!

Jhkim, dude, you really didn't read anything I have said in *several* posts? My position is unclear to you? Really?:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on August 24, 2020, 06:51:20 PM
D&D 5E’s next sourcebook Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything finally allows players to make characters without racial traits.

"According to Jeremy Crawford, principal rules designer for Dungeons & Dragons, this addition is part of D&D publisher Wizards of the Coast’s efforts to address the problematic elements of the RPG in order to make it more accessible."

"Crawford confirmed to Dicebreaker that the new rules will appear in "multiple locations" outside of Cauldron of Everything, including D&D's organised play programme Adventurers League: "It’s important to us that these new options for customising your character’s origin be made accessible to as many Dungeons & Dragons fans as possible."

https://www.dicebreaker.com/games/dungeons-and-dragons-5e/news/tashas-cauldron-of-everything-sourcebook-announced (https://www.dicebreaker.com/games/dungeons-and-dragons-5e/news/tashas-cauldron-of-everything-sourcebook-announced)
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 24, 2020, 06:53:30 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146290
Jhkim, dude, you really didn't read anything I have said in *several* posts? My position is unclear to you? Really?:D

I did read your posts, and I replied to you with questions about your campaign world in Post #120 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42567-1-Combat-Wheelchair-of-quot-Representation-quot&p=1146114&viewfull=1#post1146114). Here was what I wrote:

Quote from: jhkim;1146114
SHARK - I understand that you don't have superheroes per se, but presumably your game does have magical abilities, right? For example, there is a warlock invocation "Devil's Sight" which grants the ability to see in normal and magical darkness to 120 feet. Further, a warlock with a familiar can see through their familiar's eyes. Even without any special magic, there are many magical options that grant senses or sight. As an alternate example, a blind druid could wildshape into seeing forms.

Again, it's your choice if you don't want to allow players in your game to take a disabled character as a PC. Your game, your rules.

But your claim is that all such characters are *inherently* helpless and weak pushovers, which doesn't make sense to me given that there is magic that exists in your world. Wouldn't it be possible for a blind warlock or druid to exist that was not weak and helpless? For example, would it be possible for the PCs to encounter a high level blind druid who would be a formidable opponent if they tried to cross him? Presumably a 15th level druid would be a dangerous opponent even if their human form was weak.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 24, 2020, 07:23:22 PM
Have we run out of "oppressed people" for the freaks to fetishize, uh I mean save?

Are we down to kid fuckers and people who suck off their dogs? Maybe those guys who wear diapers and pretend they're babies?

Which do we pencil in for September's edition of "What's new in D&D?"


Quote from: Gagarth;1146291
"Crawford confirmed to Dicebreaker that the new rules will appear in "multiple locations" outside of Cauldron of Everything, including D&D's organised play programme Adventurers League: "It's important to us that these new options for customising your character's origin be made accessible to as many Dungeons & Dragons fans as possible."


Everyone can min/max for total snowflakeness!!

Its truly hysterical the same people demanding "black people have black voices!" and outraged if anyone doesn't fit into their narrow definition of people & behavior based on skin color are the same worthless garbage who want every PCs to be the most special of the special snowflakes.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: sureshot on August 24, 2020, 07:40:25 PM
It's not even the wheelchair so much that they want to have one and an entire factory of cakes to eat as well.

It's not enough that it takes them from Point A to Point B. The same fantasy wheelchair cannot have any penalties. As that is apparently wanting to be Abelist. Not just positives yet better than anything in a fantasy world. Extra attacks, AC bonus etc.. With the DM having rebuild his world around said rules at least in Adventurer League. With Wotc bending the knee at every opportunity I will never join let alone go near a League game. Player wants a disability then they ge ther flaws and perks of having one. If it makes me Ableist than so be it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 24, 2020, 07:43:51 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146292
I did read your posts, and I replied to you with questions about your campaign world in Post #120 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42567-1-Combat-Wheelchair-of-quot-Representation-quot&p=1146114&viewfull=1#post1146114). Here was what I wrote:

Greetings!

Well, "It's Possible"--there could be a "blind" Warlock, or a handicapped Druid in the campaign, somewhere--though it certainly isn't probable. I mentioned that I would review such characters--whether NPC's or Player Characters--on an individual, case by case basis. If a "Blind" Warlock can use a spell at will to see perfectly well, well, then they aren't really blind then, are they? The same thing goes for a shape-changing Druid. It seems to me such particular examples would likely work better if such characters were non-disabled for whatever length of their career, and then became disabled, from which such a character could then take various steps and actions to mitigate their disabled condition. However, someone born with a severe handicap is not likely to become some kind of adventurer.

Beyond such "corner cases" the reality remains that severely handicapped characters would be weak and helpless, and pose as a distinct liability to any adventuring team. In general, most handicapped characters have problems that make them entirely unsuitable for a career as an adventurer.

Of course, handicapped characters are often seduced into embracing the Dark Gods, who offer them promises of relief from their disfigurements and ailments, and give them a vision of a new, glorious life! Such cults and such rewards for devotion to the Dark Gods and strange philosophies are always popular with the disabled, the diseased, the insane, and the poor.

Righteous characters realize that suffering is a reality, and an opportunity for them to serve as an example of righteousness, morality and humility to their families and communities. They learn to embrace their lives of struggle and suffering while embracing humility, dignity, and grace.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 24, 2020, 07:51:57 PM
Quote from: sureshot;1146297
It's not even the wheelchair so much that they want to have one and an entire factory of cakes to eat as well.

It's not enough that it takes them from Point A to Point B. The same fantasy wheelchair cannot have any penalties. As that is apparently wanting to be Abelist. Not just positives yet better than anything in a fantasy world. Extra attacks, AC bonus etc.. With the DM having rebuild his world around said rules at least in Adventurer League. With Wotc bending the knee at every opportunity I will never join let alone go near a League game. Player wants a disability then they ge ther flaws and perks of having one. If it makes me Ableist than so be it.

Greetings!

Yeah, my friend. The whole fetishization of disabled characters is pretty weird. No, no special abilities, no compensation. No "Balancing" doodads and special uber powers. My world is harsh and brutal, and handicapped characters experience huge handicaps and problems just with struggling to live a normal life, let alone adventuring. It's stupid. People strapped into fucking wheelchairs are not going out trying to fight monsters. They would be swiftly slaughtered and eaten!

*Smart* characters strapped into wheelchairs--or people that are blind, or paralyzed on one side, or suffering from some severe disability--they struggle to just get by in normal life. Most die early in life, or live in squalor and poverty amidst the unwashed masses. Such handicapped characters that are more fortunate manage to live in a assisted living center, where teenaged girls lead them around gardens and cook for them.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 24, 2020, 07:54:29 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146298
Beyond such "corner cases" the reality remains that severely handicapped characters would be weak and helpless, and pose as a distinct liability to any adventuring team. In general, most handicapped characters have problems that make them entirely unsuitable for a career as an adventurer.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


Thats what I disagree with. Weaker, less helpful-yes. But utterly no. As I said adventuring teams are not fully logical. In practice what they do should leave them handicapped sooner than later.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 24, 2020, 08:04:33 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146303
Thats what I disagree with. Weaker, less helpful-yes. But utterly no. As I said adventuring teams are not fully logical. In practice what they do should leave them handicapped sooner than later.

Greetings!

Well, certainly. I mentioned previously that some characters can continue if say, they have a glass eye, an eyepatch, or a metal claw hand. Severe handicaps, being blind, losing both legs, and such, create enormous problems. Generally speaking, in my campaigns, such characters that become severely handicapped--as their adventuring careers are very dangerous!--are likely to retire, and roll up a new character.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 24, 2020, 08:28:45 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146306
Greetings!

Well, certainly. I mentioned previously that some characters can continue if say, they have a glass eye, an eyepatch, or a metal claw hand. Severe handicaps, being blind, losing both legs, and such, create enormous problems. Generally speaking, in my campaigns, such characters that become severely handicapped--as their adventuring careers are very dangerous!--are likely to retire, and roll up a new character.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Makes sense. Quit while you have a head. Regardless combat wheelchairs are dumb. Just make a exoskeleton if you have the resources at that point.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: sureshot on August 24, 2020, 09:45:25 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146302
Greetings!

Yeah, my friend. The whole fetishization of disabled characters is pretty weird. No, no special abilities, no compensation. No "Balancing" doodads and special uber powers. My world is harsh and brutal, and handicapped characters experience huge handicaps and problems just with struggling to live a normal life, let alone adventuring. It's stupid. People strapped into fucking wheelchairs are not going out trying to fight monsters. They would be swiftly slaughtered and eaten!

*Smart* characters strapped into wheelchairs--or people that are blind, or paralyzed on one side, or suffering from some severe disability--they struggle to just get by in normal life. Most die early in life, or live in squalor and poverty amidst the unwashed masses. Such handicapped characters that are more fortunate manage to live in a assisted living center, where teenaged girls lead them around gardens and cook for them.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

It's a much older issue. Imo it started at least a decade ago with the insistence on some players to want to play weak characters. We are not talking one or twice or even occasionally all the time. While expecting the party to cover for their flaws. Refuse to take a high Str or just any Str past ten for a fighter while expecting the party to be pack mules because they can't carry anything. Or 3 Charisma and be just as good in social encounters as the character who made the party face. The first happened continually until the player ragequit because we as the players collectively told him that we would no longer carry his stuff. He then tried "it's a team game" sure except again my character and everyone else is not a pack mule.

In any case many of them will be sadly disillusioned if they think they are going to strut their stuff, walk into a new group and expect to dictate terms. Woke Forums are not like reality many will refuse to give them the wheelchairs and they will be shown the door if they try the Ableist bullshit.

I have played weak characters sometimes I don't enjoy as much as playing my usual characters. If I play a Fighter style character I take decent Str and Con I don't min-max as it is simply not worth the extra points imo. The obsession to do so all the time no way I have better things to do.

Many campaign worlds will simply not allow the level of customization that the fantasy wheelchair allows. I can see it in Eberron, possibly the Forgotten Realms. Dragonlance though it will be more something along the lines of Get smart or Inspect Gadget. Dark Sun good luck.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 24, 2020, 09:49:26 PM
Quote from: kythri;1146238
Instagram contains numerous pictures of her actively engaged in bipedal locomotion with groups of her friends to dispel any potential claims of her being in a wheelchair.


Not to knock down your investigation any. But a costuming friend of mine suffered from a lifelong debilitating disease that near the end of her far too short life left her wheelchair bound more and more. She could stand and walk around. But it was not something she could do for extended periods.

This person on the other hand, considering her other antics, yeah thats rather telling that shes walking around so. Could be she can stand for short periods or with support. But who knows at this point. NEVER cast suspicion on yourself when claiming to be disabled because every little thing will be scrutinized.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 24, 2020, 10:05:48 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146253
I agree with Omega that D&D doesn't have any fundamental problem with disabilities such as limb loss. It's handled in other games similar to D&D. To be fair, D&D does tend to assume that wounds don't affect a character's ability at all -- but that's not absolute. There have been special case rules for limb loss, as Omega notes.

There is the issue that there is no mechanic for balancing characters who have any sort of flaws or weaknesses at character generation time. Many games like Savage Worlds, Unisystem, and GURPS have character flaws that give points to gain other benefits in character creation. But I don't think that is fundamentally built into the system. I've seen plenty of optional rules for adding character flaws into various games including D&D.


1: re:wounds. In AD&D if your character goes to zero or negative HP they start bleeding out and even if revived will be a wreck unable to do much at all till they've had alot of bed rest.

2: 2e D&D introduced some flaws and disabilities in one of the books, Skills & Powers has some for example that can be taken at chargen. Nothing serious though, but it provides a foundation of examples.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 24, 2020, 11:20:56 PM
Humans are really fragile. Hitting them with swords, axes and arrows either kills them or breaks them, often quite badly.

But D&D has always been about "fantasy superheroes", certainly after 5th level even in the TSR editions.


Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146303
In practice what they do should leave them handicapped sooner than later.


AKA, RuneQuest.

Or Warhammer once your Fate points run out.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 25, 2020, 01:13:33 AM
I feel like people are using the one example ("I don't like this one implementation of combat wheelchairs in D&D") as a wedge to argue against *all* character disabilities - when that's something that's been in gaming for decades, with lots of fun play. In general, it seems like some people are talking as if (a) disabled PCs are some theoretical new possibility that is only possible now with 2020 liberal activism, and (b) disabled characters are so weak that the GM has to twist his adventures to make them even easier.

Both of those assumptions are nonsense. The example I had of a PC in a wheelchair was from a HERO campaign I ran in 1989. Having character flaws including disabilities might be rare in D&D, but it's been built into many other RPG systems for decades. HERO was one of the first systems to feature this, but it's in tons of other systems since then - World of Darkness, Deadlands, Savage Worlds, and dozens of others. It's certainly not some new invention by millennials.

Further, in those systems, character flaws don't mean the PC is weak -- nor that the GM coddles the players by making things easy for them. In the 1989 HERO campaign, included superpowers, but it was closer to Watchmen than Superfriends. The PC in question (codenamed "Current") was shot through the chest at point-blank range, which was how he ended up in a wheelchair. This happened in the second half of the campaign when we were escalating up to a climactic conflict that was resolved using nuclear weapons. The PCs were all superpowered badasses, including Current, and they were dealing with serious and deadly foes, and I never pulled my punches.

In these games, if a PC has a major flaw, I rarely worry that they're too weak. More often, I'm concerned that they are overly powerful in their field from being highly specialized. As another example, I have twice played a PC who as a drunken master kung fu specialist -- combined with alcoholism. That was a major flaw and there were a lot of situations where he wasn't much help, but he was an extremely powerful martial artist who far outshone the others in combat. I'm pretty sure the GMs had to beef up the opposition after seeing me in action.


Quote from: jhkim;1146292
I did read your posts, and I replied to you with questions about your campaign world in Post #120 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?42567-1-Combat-Wheelchair-of-quot-Representation-quot&p=1146114&viewfull=1#post1146114).

Quote from: SHARK;1146298
Well, "It's Possible"--there could be a "blind" Warlock, or a handicapped Druid in the campaign, somewhere--though it certainly isn't probable. I mentioned that I would review such characters--whether NPC's or Player Characters--on an individual, case by case basis. If a "Blind" Warlock can use a spell at will to see perfectly well, well, then they aren't really blind then, are they? The same thing goes for a shape-changing Druid. It seems to me such particular examples would likely work better if such characters were non-disabled for whatever length of their career, and then became disabled, from which such a character could then take various steps and actions to mitigate their disabled condition. However, someone born with a severe handicap is not likely to become some kind of adventurer.

Beyond such "corner cases" the reality remains that severely handicapped characters would be weak and helpless, and pose as a distinct liability to any adventuring team. In general, most handicapped characters have problems that make them entirely unsuitable for a career as an adventurer.

In general, most characters aren't suited for life as an adventurer, just like most people in the real world aren't cut out to be on a Navy SEAL team. They just don't have the necessary qualifications, nor are they willing to risk their lives to that degree. Hell, most people in the military aren't suitable for being on a Navy SEAL team - they are a highly elite force. In a fantasy world, it's extremely rare for anyone to be a wizard or sorcerer or paladin. But player characters regularly are.

In almost all RPGs, player characters are always "corner cases". A typical peasant or woodcutter character would also be purely a liability to a SEAL team. Further, a shape-shifting druid isn't at all a rare case among PCs. If anything, it's one of the most common character types that I've seen in D&D 5E.

In short, most characters in the game-world are weak - and they would be a liability to a SEAL team. It's the rare exceptional characters who get to be player characters and go on adventures.


Quote from: SHARK;1146302
The whole fetishization of disabled characters is pretty weird. No, no special abilities, no compensation. No "Balancing" doodads and special uber powers. My world is harsh and brutal, and handicapped characters experience huge handicaps and problems just with struggling to live a normal life, let alone adventuring. It's stupid. People strapped into fucking wheelchairs are not going out trying to fight monsters. They would be swiftly slaughtered and eaten!


I think you're fundamentally mixing up what is *in-game* and is *out-of-game* -- as if talking tough about how you play your elf-games proves how you're really tough. But that's just Internet tough guy posturing -- especially since you've already admitted that disabled characters like warlocks and druids *are* potentially powerful.

In my D&D world, humans in general are weak and frail compared to dragons. Most humans wouldn't qualify to be on a SEAL team, and even a SEAL team couldn't deal with a dragon without modern weapons. But PCs aren't average humans. When my players create characters, they create heroes who special abilities and rare powers like spell-casting and shape-shifting. That's not fucking coddling them - that's laying out the basis on which I will challenge them. And yes, I do take steps to see that they're balanced.

I don't buy into having character creation be a contest of min-maxing. As GM, I take action so that all the PCs start out on roughly the same footing before I start throwing challenges at them. It's not fetishization or coddling to have characters be roughly balanced at creation time. That's just starting everyone out at the same starting line for the race.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Chris24601 on August 25, 2020, 01:35:07 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146330
Humans are really fragile.

Except relative to every other animal out there. Humans survive levels of pain and injury that would outright kill other species, recover a lot more quickly than other animals (scar tissue isn't pretty, but it does the job of getting us functional much faster than other species) and our endurance relative to other species is incredible (before we figured out missile weapons we hunted animals by pursuing them at a jog until they dropped dead of exhaustion/overheating).

A broken limb will cause most animals to go into shock and die, but humans survive them easily and even medieval doctors could set bones allowing the injured person to recover. People have survived falls of hundreds and even thousands of feet and in a few case even managed to walk away from it. We invented surgery centuries before we had anesthesia and some humans have managed to perform surgery on themselves and survived. Even losing a hand, foot or eye wasn't necessarily a career ender for violence-related professions.

Hell, we regularly injest poisons for entertainment and because we enjoy the taste and ritually and cosmetically pierce, scarify and tattoo ourselves.

Humans are like the Terminators of the animal kingdom and that's before we add things like armor to improve our resilience and weapons to extend our reach.

Honestly, next time I run a sci-fi game, I'll probably give most alien species +1 to two different attributes, but only humans will get +2 to Endurance. We are just that OP in that category.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 25, 2020, 02:36:55 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1146335
I feel like people are using the one example ("I don't like this one implementation of combat wheelchairs in D&D") as a wedge to argue against *all* character disabilities - when that's something that's been in gaming for decades, with lots of fun play. In general, it seems like some people are talking as if (a) disabled PCs are some theoretical new possibility that is only possible now with 2020 liberal activism, and (b) disabled characters are so weak that the GM has to twist his adventures to make them even easier.

Both of those assumptions are nonsense. The example I had of a PC in a wheelchair was from a HERO campaign I ran in 1989. Having character flaws including disabilities might be rare in D&D, but it's been built into many other RPG systems for decades. HERO was one of the first systems to feature this, but it's in tons of other systems since then - World of Darkness, Deadlands, Savage Worlds, and dozens of others. It's certainly not some new invention by millennials.

Further, in those systems, character flaws don't mean the PC is weak -- nor that the GM coddles the players by making things easy for them. In the 1989 HERO campaign, included superpowers, but it was closer to Watchmen than Superfriends. The PC in question (codenamed "Current") was shot through the chest at point-blank range, which was how he ended up in a wheelchair. This happened in the second half of the campaign when we were escalating up to a climactic conflict that was resolved using nuclear weapons. The PCs were all superpowered badasses, including Current, and they were dealing with serious and deadly foes, and I never pulled my punches.

In these games, if a PC has a major flaw, I rarely worry that they're too weak. More often, I'm concerned that they are overly powerful in their field from being highly specialized. As another example, I have twice played a PC who as a drunken master kung fu specialist -- combined with alcoholism. That was a major flaw and there were a lot of situations where he wasn't much help, but he was an extremely powerful martial artist who far outshone the others in combat. I'm pretty sure the GMs had to beef up the opposition after seeing me in action.




In general, most characters aren't suited for life as an adventurer, just like most people in the real world aren't cut out to be on a Navy SEAL team. They just don't have the necessary qualifications, nor are they willing to risk their lives to that degree. Hell, most people in the military aren't suitable for being on a Navy SEAL team - they are a highly elite force. In a fantasy world, it's extremely rare for anyone to be a wizard or sorcerer or paladin. But player characters regularly are.

In almost all RPGs, player characters are always "corner cases". A typical peasant or woodcutter character would also be purely a liability to a SEAL team. Further, a shape-shifting druid isn't at all a rare case among PCs. If anything, it's one of the most common character types that I've seen in D&D 5E.

In short, most characters in the game-world are weak - and they would be a liability to a SEAL team. It's the rare exceptional characters who get to be player characters and go on adventures.




I think you're fundamentally mixing up what is *in-game* and is *out-of-game* -- as if talking tough about how you play your elf-games proves how you're really tough. But that's just Internet tough guy posturing -- especially since you've already admitted that disabled characters like warlocks and druids *are* potentially powerful.

In my D&D world, humans in general are weak and frail compared to dragons. Most humans wouldn't qualify to be on a SEAL team, and even a SEAL team couldn't deal with a dragon without modern weapons. But PCs aren't average humans. When my players create characters, they create heroes who special abilities and rare powers like spell-casting and shape-shifting. That's not fucking coddling them - that's laying out the basis on which I will challenge them. And yes, I do take steps to see that they're balanced.

I don't buy into having character creation be a contest of min-maxing. As GM, I take action so that all the PCs start out on roughly the same footing before I start throwing challenges at them. It's not fetishization or coddling to have characters be roughly balanced at creation time. That's just starting everyone out at the same starting line for the race.

Greetings!

"Internet Tough Guy" posturing? WTF Jhkim are you babbling about? That doesn't have a damned thing to do with it, dude. As you mentioned, probably most normal people wouldn't make it as Adventurers.

Exactly. If most normal people wouldn't be likely to make it as Adventurers, what would be the likelihood of severely handicapped people making it?

As I mentioned several times now, I have a game world that is distinctly harsh and brutal, and there are not a lot of doodads and tech and whatever around to help severely handicapped characters. Characters that are blind, strapped to wheelchairs, or otherwise suffering from severe handicaps simply do not fit well within an Adventuring team, and would likely die soon and swiftly if they were to even try. Most would never even be accepted into an adventuring team, as the suggestion is ridiculous. Normal adventurers would seek to recruit team members that are physically mobile, rugged, and healthy. Most adventurers do not want to be accompanied by weak, helpless characters that have a myriad of handicaps and limitations. Such handicapped people would most likely be slaughtered swiftly out in the wilderness and eaten by monsters.

Adventuring is a profession of sorts for mobile, strong, and rugged individuals. Not handicapped characters strapped to a wheelchair.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RollingBones on August 25, 2020, 06:22:56 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1146341
Greetings!

"Internet Tough Guy" posturing? WTF Jhkim are you babbling about? That doesn't have a damned thing to do with it, dude. As you mentioned, probably most normal people wouldn't make it as Adventurers.

Exactly. If most normal people wouldn't be likely to make it as Adventurers, what would be the likelihood of severely handicapped people making it?

As I mentioned several times now, I have a game world that is distinctly harsh and brutal, and there are not a lot of doodads and tech and whatever around to help severely handicapped characters. Characters that are blind, strapped to wheelchairs, or otherwise suffering from severe handicaps simply do not fit well within an Adventuring team, and would likely die soon and swiftly if they were to even try. Most would never even be accepted into an adventuring team, as the suggestion is ridiculous. Normal adventurers would seek to recruit team members that are physically mobile, rugged, and healthy. Most adventurers do not want to be accompanied by weak, helpless characters that have a myriad of handicaps and limitations. Such handicapped people would most likely be slaughtered swiftly out in the wilderness and eaten by monsters.

Adventuring is a profession of sorts for mobile, strong, and rugged individuals. Not handicapped characters strapped to a wheelchair.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Then again, most INT dump stat fighters wouldn't even pass the ASVAB.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on August 25, 2020, 06:42:51 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146330
Humans are really fragile. Hitting them with swords, axes and arrows either kills them or breaks them, often quite badly.

But D&D has always been about "fantasy superheroes", certainly after 5th level even in the TSR editions.




AKA, RuneQuest.

Or Warhammer once your Fate points run out.

In Pavis a Runequest/Glorantha city there is a tavern called Gimpy's owned by 3 retired peg legged ex-adventurers. No doubt when the Neo-Marxists at Nu-Chaosium get done with the woke rewrite they will no longer be retired.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mishihari on August 25, 2020, 06:54:24 AM
Quote from: Chris24601;1146337
Except relative to every other animal out there. Humans survive levels of pain and injury that would outright kill other species, recover a lot more quickly than other animals (scar tissue isn't pretty, but it does the job of getting us functional much faster than other species) and our endurance relative to other species is incredible (before we figured out missile weapons we hunted animals by pursuing them at a jog until they dropped dead of exhaustion/overheating).

A broken limb will cause most animals to go into shock and die, but humans survive them easily and even medieval doctors could set bones allowing the injured person to recover. People have survived falls of hundreds and even thousands of feet and in a few case even managed to walk away from it. We invented surgery centuries before we had anesthesia and some humans have managed to perform surgery on themselves and survived. Even losing a hand, foot or eye wasn't necessarily a career ender for violence-related professions.

Hell, we regularly injest poisons for entertainment and because we enjoy the taste and ritually and cosmetically pierce, scarify and tattoo ourselves.

Humans are like the Terminators of the animal kingdom and that's before we add things like armor to improve our resilience and weapons to extend our reach.

Honestly, next time I run a sci-fi game, I'll probably give most alien species +1 to two different attributes, but only humans will get +2 to Endurance. We are just that OP in that category.

I think Spinachat has it right, humans are really fragile, especially compared to other animals.  According to one source (and it's on the internet so of course it's true) it takes 11 pounds of pressure to collapse a human trachea.  Compare that to a crocodile or a tiger, just for starters.  We're the Earth's alpha predators because of our intelligence and technology, not physical toughness, IMO.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2020, 07:10:13 AM
Quote from: Chris24601;1146337
Except relative to every other animal out there. Humans survive levels of pain and injury that would outright kill other species, recover a lot more quickly than other animals (scar tissue isn't pretty, but it does the job of getting us functional much faster than other species) and our endurance relative to other species is incredible (before we figured out missile weapons we hunted animals by pursuing them at a jog until they dropped dead of exhaustion/overheating).

Um... what humans are these? Relative to every other animal out there humans are appallingly fragile and can NOT survive things many animals can. The exceptions are the freak outlier cases where someone is damages in what should be a catastrophic way, but circumstance says otherwise and they live. My great grandfather for example was shot in the head and lived and continues his law enforcement career to retirrment. Then he died to slipping on ice and falling 2 or 3 ft. No. Really. That is how his long adventuring story ended.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 25, 2020, 07:12:15 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1146335
I feel like people are using the one example ("I don't like this one implementation of combat wheelchairs in D&D") as a wedge to argue against *all* character disabilities - when that's something that's been in gaming for decades, with lots of fun play. In general, it seems like some people are talking as if (a) disabled PCs are some theoretical new possibility that is only possible now with 2020 liberal activism, and (b) disabled characters are so weak that the GM has to twist his adventures to make them even easier.

Yeah this "no one should ever play a disabled character!" line is really grating.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 25, 2020, 07:57:20 AM
Quote from: Omega;1146348
Um... what humans are these? Relative to every other animal out there humans are appallingly fragile and can NOT survive things many animals can. The exceptions are the freak outlier cases where someone is damages in what should be a catastrophic way, but circumstance says otherwise and they live. My great grandfather for example was shot in the head and lived and continues his law enforcement career to retirrment. Then he died to slipping on ice and falling 2 or 3 ft. No. Really. That is how his long adventuring story ended.

How many people do you see survive a broken leg versus what happens to a horse with a broken leg?

Granted, Chris is quoting a well-known copypasta, but he's not wrong. When it comes to stamina and long-distance running, humans smoke other critters across the board. Now, how we -got- there is another matter for argument (I tend to like Marvin Harris's suggestions).
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 25, 2020, 09:15:45 AM
Humans where alpha predators for thousands of years before the invention of clothing,
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Chris24601 on August 25, 2020, 11:44:02 AM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146365
Humans where alpha predators for thousands of years before the invention of clothing,
Indeed. Pursuit predation is a thing and why I specifically referenced The Terminator... because the hunting method was essentially chase the critter and make it run, then jog along behind it and come at them again every time they stopped running and thought they were safe.

Because of how quadrupedal respiration works the animal starts to overheat and needs to stop, but then before it can rest, the humans caught up to them again and made it run. Eventually the critter just couldn't run anymore and the humans then poked it with pointy sticks or threw rocks at it until it died (accurate throwing is another uniquely human trait owing to the structure of our shoulders, hands and wrists).

All because of the efficiency of bipedal movement and our ability to sweat and breathe independently of our running stride allowed us to go a lot further without tiring. Horses, wolves and hyenas can manage sustained runs totaling about 12.5 miles (20 km) in a day. Humans can manage 26 miles (42 km) in a couple of hours and ultra marathons of 60+ miles (100 km) or more are within human ability.

The only thing close to our level of endurance is specialized breeds in specialized conditions (ex. Huskies in an Alaskan winter; which helps them bleed off the the heat; will do 60+ miles when prodded by humans)... other than that, we're frankly ridiculous outliers in the animal kingdom for our combo of big brains, ability to throw things accurately, and our ability to keep going and going where other animals would fall over and die.

We basically have racial bonuses to Int, Dex (the throwing stuff part) and Con (the stamina and shock resistance parts anyway) compared to most animals.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2020, 12:27:07 PM
Humans are fragile compared to other animals, at least in one sense: Physical strength. The idea that chimps are 5-8 times as strong as humans has been debunked, (https://slate.com/technology/2009/02/how-strong-is-a-chimpanzee-really.html) but pound for pound they're still at least twice as strong, and it's not just brachiator arm strength, it's leg strength too. I've seen various explanations for this, ranging from a side effect of neoteny to trading strength for precision.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Chris24601 on August 25, 2020, 01:43:02 PM
Quote from: Pat;1146381
Humans are fragile compared to other animals, at least in one sense: Physical strength. The idea that chimps are 5-8 times as strong as humans has been debunked, (https://slate.com/technology/2009/02/how-strong-is-a-chimpanzee-really.html) but pound for pound they're still at least twice as strong, and it's not just brachiator arm strength, it's leg strength too. I've seen various explanations for this, ranging from a side effect of neoteny to trading strength for precision.
A lot of just comes down to one of the trade-offs for our insane endurance is we traded a lot of our fast-twitch muscles (good for explosive force like sprinting or smacking things really hard) for slow-twitch ones (good for sustained activity like long-distance running). The proportions of them in humans are MUCH higher than any other animal species on Earth.

In a biological sense humans are actually hyper-specialized to do one type of hunting really really well... its just that type of hunting allowed for all sorts of secondary follow-on benefits;

- the same bipedal gait and efficiencies that allowed us to outlast animals as we pursued them also gave us the energy efficiency to have surplus power for our oversized brains.

- the same higher intelligence that allowed us to coordinate using language and track using environmental trails also allowed for us to pass knowledge across generations and apply the abstract thought of reading tracks and spoor and broken branches to determine the prey's location to matters beyond hunting.

- the same articulation that allows us to grab and throw accurately also gives us the precision to craft more sophisticated tools than other species.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Pat on August 25, 2020, 01:54:24 PM
Quote from: Chris24601;1146387
A lot of just comes down to one of the trade-offs for our insane endurance is we traded a lot of our fast-twitch muscles (good for explosive force like sprinting or smacking things really hard) for slow-twitch ones (good for sustained activity like long-distance running). The proportions of them in humans are MUCH higher than any other animal species on Earth.
There's a gene that chimps have, ACTN3, which is related to the different kinds of muscle fibers. Humans also have it, though in some people it's turned off. Top sprinters tend to have two working versions of the gene, while top marathon runners tend to have it turned off entirely.

Edit: Another way of looking at human endurance is to measure the fastest animal over various distances. The cheetah wins the sprint, but humans eventually catch up and pass all the other animals. In between are various animals, most notably the pronghorn. Which is one of the fastest animals in the world, but has far more endurance than the cheetah, and is able to sustain a decent percentage of its top speed for hours.

The pronghorn is a curiosity, because it's insanely overengineered for its current environment, which has no predators that have even a snowball's chance in hell of catching it. But it evolved running from the giant cheetahs[1] of North American (Miracinonyx), though they died out about 12,000 years ago, leaving the pronghorn as a super-fast curiosity. There are some rewilding proposals that suggest importing the cheetah to North America, to bring back that dynamic.

[1] Technically, Miracinonyx is not a cheetah. It's more closely related to the puma than the African cat. They were definitely cheetah-like, but that's an example of convergent evolution, not descent.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4858926/
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 25, 2020, 02:51:45 PM
Quote from: SHARK;1146341
As I mentioned several times now, I have a game world that is distinctly harsh and brutal, and there are not a lot of doodads and tech and whatever around to help severely handicapped characters. Characters that are blind, strapped to wheelchairs, or otherwise suffering from severe handicaps simply do not fit well within an Adventuring team, and would likely die soon and swiftly if they were to even try. Most would never even be accepted into an adventuring team, as the suggestion is ridiculous. Normal adventurers would seek to recruit team members that are physically mobile, rugged, and healthy. Most adventurers do not want to be accompanied by weak, helpless characters that have a myriad of handicaps and limitations. Such handicapped people would most likely be slaughtered swiftly out in the wilderness and eaten by monsters.


Except that you already admitted that disabled characters *can* be powerful in your world because of magic -- you just called them "corner cases".

Let me put it this way --

I'm not running D&D currently, but the last full campaign that I ran was in an extremely harsh and unforgiving world. It was a world undergoing an apocalypse as huge numbers of dragons were sweeping over the surface of the world. Within the game world, the PCs would recruit powerful characters to stand with them to protect the last survivors of civilization. If a player had wanted to play a "corner case" of a powerful, strong character that had a disability, then I would let them. If I did so, then that character would be subjected to all of the same rigor as the others, and they would be overall the equal of the other PCs. Such characters are possible in the world, so I would allow them to be played as a PC.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 25, 2020, 03:39:30 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146399
Except that you already admitted that disabled characters *can* be powerful in your world because of magic -- you just called them "corner cases".

Let me put it this way --

I'm not running D&D currently, but the last full campaign that I ran was in an extremely harsh and unforgiving world. It was a world undergoing an apocalypse as huge numbers of dragons were sweeping over the surface of the world. Within the game world, the PCs would recruit powerful characters to stand with them to protect the last survivors of civilization. If a player had wanted to play a "corner case" of a powerful, strong character that had a disability, then I would let them. If I did so, then that character would be subjected to all of the same rigor as the others, and they would be overall the equal of the other PCs. Such characters are possible in the world, so I would allow them to be played as a PC.

Greetings!

In my campaign, Players are of course free to choose to create a handicapped character. They are not however, "equal". They must endure the challenges and suffering which go along with whatever disability or condition they have. In my campaigns, Player characters do not start out as "powerful, strong" characters. They start out as normal humans, or whatever race they are. If they survive, and are smart, they can hope to someday become a powerful character. Handicapped characters have enormous disadvantages, and life in a harsh and brutal world is even more harsh and brutal for handicapped characters.

There is no coddling, no special perks, no special abilities.

There is no mercy.:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 25, 2020, 06:58:51 PM
Quote from: jhkim
I'm not running D&D currently, but the last full campaign that I ran was in an extremely harsh and unforgiving world. It was a world undergoing an apocalypse as huge numbers of dragons were sweeping over the surface of the world. Within the game world, the PCs would recruit powerful characters to stand with them to protect the last survivors of civilization. If a player had wanted to play a "corner case" of a powerful, strong character that had a disability, then I would let them. If I did so, then that character would be subjected to all of the same rigor as the others, and they would be overall the equal of the other PCs. Such characters are possible in the world, so I would allow them to be played as a PC.
Quote from: SHARK;1146409
In my campaign, Players are of course free to choose to create a handicapped character. They are not however, "equal". They must endure the challenges and suffering which go along with whatever disability or condition they have. In my campaigns, Player characters do not start out as "powerful, strong" characters. They start out as normal humans, or whatever race they are. If they survive, and are smart, they can hope to someday become a powerful character. Handicapped characters have enormous disadvantages, and life in a harsh and brutal world is even more harsh and brutal for handicapped characters.
The point about "powerful" seems like wordplay to me. My point is that I have the PCs start out as roughly equal in power and strength. I don't, for example, have one PC start out as an average peasant and another PC start out as the equivalent of a SEAL team member (like a healthy, strong noble knight trained for combat).  Realistically, nobles were healthier, stronger, and better trained than peasants. But starting PCs are individuals who aren't going to reflect that average. A starting PC who comes from a poor background will be an exceptional individual, not an average peasant. They'll be roughly equal in ability to a starting PC from a rich background.

For me, the challenges are what happens *after* play starts. Character creation isn't a competition. I know in some games, the players game and try to come up with the most powerful option, and that's part of the game. I don't run things that way. For example, if a player finds a loophole in the rules that is overpowered, then I'll adjust things to make them more balanced. If a player asks for an option that isn't in the rules as written (like a different race or background), then I'll work with them and come up with an option that is roughly equal power.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: DocJones on August 25, 2020, 08:51:22 PM
I just read the combat wheelchair PDF.

I almost didn't finish the document after reading the first Q&A...

""But it can float up and down stairs! Isn't that unfair?"
No, unless you plan on making all the able bodied characters
at level 1 also remain on ground floors only and never go up
and down stairs and into dungeons. If you were planning on
doing that then that's fair."


I realized the person writing the answer was an asshole.

Now I could not find any disadvantages at all in using it.  
Meaning there's no reason non-disabled characters wouldn't pick it as equipment as well.
What a joke.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 26, 2020, 12:11:34 AM
Quote from: DocJones;1146462
I just read the combat wheelchair PDF.

I almost didn't finish the document after reading the first Q&A...

""But it can float up and down stairs! Isn't that unfair?"
No, unless you plan on making all the able bodied characters
at level 1 also remain on ground floors only and never go up
and down stairs and into dungeons. If you were planning on
doing that then that's fair."


I realized the person writing the answer was an asshole.

Now I could not find any disadvantages at all in using it.  
Meaning there's no reason non-disabled characters wouldn't pick it as equipment as well.
What a joke.

Ooooo... so here we go, if you have someone that wants one, add it to the campaign.  I've got a different angle.  Since the quasi-official one is BETTER than being 'abled'...

Anyone familiar with the Potsdam Giants (https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/history-of-war/the-potsdam-giants-how-the-king-of-prussia-bred-an-army-of-super-soldiers/)?

So here you go:  You've got a crazy-ass short monarch who wants an elite 'calvary' unit, but he's self-conscious so wants to look them in the eye.  He has been buying up all the 'superchairs' that he can get his hands on, but its not enough.  

He also wants his soldiers to be able to fight dismounted, so he's not -actually- hiring/recruiting/press ganging people that 'need' the chairs, he's having them killed and stealing the chairs.

Hell, everyone would want one.  Nobles would all have them.  That orc chief?  He likes his magic elevator.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Mishihari on August 26, 2020, 01:31:47 AM
Quote from: DocJones;1146462
I just read the combat wheelchair PDF.

I almost didn't finish the document after reading the first Q&A...

""But it can float up and down stairs! Isn't that unfair?"
No, unless you plan on making all the able bodied characters
at level 1 also remain on ground floors only and never go up
and down stairs and into dungeons. If you were planning on
doing that then that's fair."


I realized the person writing the answer was an asshole.

Now I could not find any disadvantages at all in using it.  
Meaning there's no reason non-disabled characters wouldn't pick it as equipment as well.
What a joke.

This reminds me of my theory about why we find so many folks like this in the hobby.  They already live in a fantasy world, so RPGs are just the next logical step.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 26, 2020, 06:47:19 AM
I agree with jhkim in general about disabled characters in RPGs, especially something like D&D. Sure, the precise details will differ, but in most D&D settings it is not at all beyond the realm of possibility or even probability to get hold of a magical replacement for a lost hand or eye (the X of Vecna have been around for decades in the game at this point), or just be good enough at something else that putting up with the disability is worth it. I'd almost certainly rather have a level 16 Wizard who can't walk on my team than replace him with a level 5 Wizard who is more physically fit. At some point you reach a level where you simply can't shop around for someone else with the same level of skill, you've got one option and that is it.

But one thing that bugs me about the way some people talk about the combat wheelchair or similar things is representation. Like "well, I'm X and if X isn't represented in the game then that is clearly bad". I have a very common disability, nearsightedness. I'm also somewhat overweight. Why would I want to play that in an escapist game? If we're playing some modern murder mystery or Call of Cthulhu maybe that could be fun, but I would never feel like I was missing something if I couldn't play an overweight guy with glasses in D&D. Even if I wanted to play some sort of wish fulfillment version of myself rather than try to play a completely different character, why would that wish fulfillment version still have bad eyes and an extra 20 kg of fat?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: sureshot on August 26, 2020, 08:41:47 AM
Quote from: Blankman;1146527
Even if I wanted to play some sort of wish fulfillment version of myself rather than try to play a completely different character, why would that wish fulfillment version still have bad eyes and an extra 20 kg of fat?

You would be called a bad person or ableist for wanting to play a better version of yourself. I feel the same way and suffer the same issues you have (bad eyesight and being overweight). Why would I want to make a character with the same issues I have in real life. I play D&D to escape reality not live reality.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Brad on August 26, 2020, 10:13:43 AM
Quote from: DocJones;1146462
I just read the combat wheelchair PDF.

I almost didn't finish the document after reading the first Q&A...

""But it can float up and down stairs! Isn't that unfair?"
No, unless you plan on making all the able bodied characters
at level 1 also remain on ground floors only and never go up
and down stairs and into dungeons. If you were planning on
doing that then that's fair."


I realized the person writing the answer was an asshole.

Now I could not find any disadvantages at all in using it.  
Meaning there's no reason non-disabled characters wouldn't pick it as equipment as well.
What a joke.

https://i.imgur.com/MA3rMjc.gif
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Ghostmaker on August 26, 2020, 10:53:21 AM
Quote from: DocJones;1146462
I just read the combat wheelchair PDF.

I almost didn't finish the document after reading the first Q&A...

""But it can float up and down stairs! Isn't that unfair?"
No, unless you plan on making all the able bodied characters
at level 1 also remain on ground floors only and never go up
and down stairs and into dungeons. If you were planning on
doing that then that's fair."


I realized the person writing the answer was an asshole.

Now I could not find any disadvantages at all in using it.  
Meaning there's no reason non-disabled characters wouldn't pick it as equipment as well.
What a joke.


Are you familiar with the lore around beholders and how they build their lairs? Specifically, they don't bother with stairs. Or ladders. Just circular shafts they can go up and down in.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 26, 2020, 11:15:32 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146543
Are you familiar with the lore around beholders and how they build their lairs? Specifically, they don't bother with stairs. Or ladders. Just circular shafts they can go up and down in.

That's why my wheelchair fires grappling hooks from the arm-mounted crossbows, duh.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: DocJones on August 26, 2020, 11:40:27 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1146543
Are you familiar with the lore around beholders and how they build their lairs? Specifically, they don't bother with stairs. Or ladders. Just circular shafts they can go up and down in.


Well apparently these wheelchairs have "beacon stones" which allow them to float or actually move the chair in any direction.
The chairs are pretty much indestructible requiring 3 critical hits to break, although they come with a set of tinkers tools so the owner can  immediately repair them.
Dispel magic doesn't work on the "beacon stones" either and the stones only work for their owner.
It's the best magic item since Baba Yagas hut. j/k

Not to mention all the addons.
I think I'll allow them but they'll cost 50,000 GP.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 26, 2020, 11:44:03 AM
It's not like devices that can function similarly to wheelchairs don't already exist in D&D either. Flying carpets and broomsticks are a staple of fantasy, and the apparatus of Kwalish is there in both my AD&D 2e DMG and the 5e one. 5e also has the Saddle of the Cavalier (you can never be dismounted unwillingly if sitting in it, perfect if you can go most places on a mount), wings of flying, winged boots and probably more mobility enhancing stuff I'm not thinking of right now. Having an object be shaped like an actual modern wheelchair is much more weird than simply having a magical object that offsets not being able to walk.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: DocJones on August 26, 2020, 12:06:38 PM
Quote from: Blankman;1146557
It's not like devices that can function similarly to wheelchairs don't already exist in D&D either. Flying carpets and broomsticks are a staple of fantasy, and the apparatus of Kwalish is there in both my AD&D 2e DMG and the 5e one. 5e also has the Saddle of the Cavalier (you can never be dismounted unwillingly if sitting in it, perfect if you can go most places on a mount), wings of flying, winged boots and probably more mobility enhancing stuff I'm not thinking of right now. Having an object be shaped like an actual modern wheelchair is much more weird than simply having a magical object that offsets not being able to walk.

This is true, but all of those items are quite out of reach for 1st level characters.  In order for 1st level disabled characters to get one of these magical items, your D&D world would have to implement social justice "equity", where characters of privilege would have to pay for these items to give to 1st level adventurers.

Next thing you know, 1st level half-orc fighters will be demanding vorpal blades in reparations for years of oppression.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Jaeger on August 26, 2020, 04:24:57 PM
Quote from: Blankman;1146527
...
But one thing that bugs me about the way some people talk about the combat wheelchair or similar things is representation. Like "well, I'm X and if X isn't represented in the game then that is clearly bad". I have a very common disability, nearsightedness. I'm also somewhat overweight. Why would I want to play that in an escapist game? ...

It's all a ruse so that they can introduce the +1 Copulation Wheelchair of "Reproduction"

And no one will bat an eye.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 26, 2020, 05:29:31 PM
Quote from: DocJones;1146565
This is true, but all of those items are quite out of reach for 1st level characters.  In order for 1st level disabled characters to get one of these magical items, your D&D world would have to implement social justice "equity", where characters of privilege would have to pay for these items to give to 1st level adventurers.

Next thing you know, 1st level half-orc fighters will be demanding vorpal blades in reparations for years of oppression.

Sure, but then the weird thing is having it available/expected for 1st level characters (I skimmed the pdf of the thing, is it meant for 1st level characters?), not the existence of such a thing in itself.

Quote from: Jaeger;1146571
It's all a ruse so that they can introduce the +1 Copulation Wheelchair of "Reproduction"

And no one will bat an eye.

I don't get it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 26, 2020, 08:54:56 PM
I've mostly been talking about disabled characters in general rather than Thompson's combat wheelchair extension. Previously, I hadn't read it through and I never like to comment on material that I haven't read. I've now read the whole thing, though, and I have a bunch of problems with it - even though I would consider having a paraplegic PC as well as one who used some sort of wheelchair. That one write-up still isn't a judgement of all possible disabled PCs in all games, though.

Quote from: Blankman;1146527
I agree with jhkim in general about disabled characters in RPGs, especially something like D&D. Sure, the precise details will differ, but in most D&D settings it is not at all beyond the realm of possibility or even probability to get hold of a magical replacement for a lost hand or eye (the X of Vecna have been around for decades in the game at this point), or just be good enough at something else that putting up with the disability is worth it. I'd almost certainly rather have a level 16 Wizard who can't walk on my team than replace him with a level 5 Wizard who is more physically fit. At some point you reach a level where you simply can't shop around for someone else with the same level of skill, you've got one option and that is it.

Exactly. Especially given that wizard's powers aren't tied to their physique.


Quote from: Blankman;1146527
But one thing that bugs me about the way some people talk about the combat wheelchair or similar things is representation. Like "well, I'm X and if X isn't represented in the game then that is clearly bad". I have a very common disability, nearsightedness. I'm also somewhat overweight. Why would I want to play that in an escapist game? If we're playing some modern murder mystery or Call of Cthulhu maybe that could be fun, but I would never feel like I was missing something if I couldn't play an overweight guy with glasses in D&D. Even if I wanted to play some sort of wish fulfillment version of myself rather than try to play a completely different character, why would that wish fulfillment version still have bad eyes and an extra 20 kg of fat?

I don't see the need for all games to represent all types of characters. This is something that I think is handled best by the free market. People publish different games with different character types, and players either like them or they don't. I'm not going to judge you for not wanting to play a nearsighted, overweight character -- but if you wanted to, then that's fine too. It's just a game.

There are people who identify with nearsightedness, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most popular fantasy series in the last few decades had a hero who was a nerdy kid who wore glasses (Harry Potter). I think a lot of kids identified with that, which drove a lot of its popularity.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 26, 2020, 10:03:48 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146607
There are people who identify with nearsightedness, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most popular fantasy series in the last few decades had a hero who was a nerdy kid who wore glasses (Harry Potter). I think a lot of kids identified with that, which drove a lot of its popularity.

The significance of "Identification" I find is a largely manufactured one. To a certain element yeah its nice to see an element of yourself in somebody else.
But similarly to how commercials make you crave something you don't really need, I find identification to be a massively manufactured piece of BS made by race hucksters and people with social justice degrees.

Harry Potter is actually a great example as its the most popular with women. Who I assume are not all secret trannies.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: VisionStorm on August 26, 2020, 10:56:27 PM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146611
The significance of "Identification" I find is a largely manufactured one. To a certain element yeah its nice to see an element of yourself in somebody else.
But similarly to how commercials make you crave something you don't really need, I find identification to be a massively manufactured piece of BS made by race hucksters and people with social justice degrees.


The idea of "RePrEsEnTaTiOn" was pretty much cooked up in academia decades ago, but it unfortunately has been making its way into culture since then (I used to hear about it from time to time as a teen, mainly in school and later in college), so some people buy into it because they already poisoned the well. It's one of those things that sounds plausible, despite the lack of evidence, and it sounds like it's meant to "help" people, so people default to accepting it cuz "what are you some kind of bigot? Why don't you want X group to have their own character?" Except that X group can never have their own character, cuz each character is distinct individual that isn't just interchangeable with anyone of their same sex, race or sexual orientation.

I rarely play characters my own sex and even more rarely play characters my same race. I rarely relate to characters my same race in media. The only Hispanic character I remember liking more than most other characters in a series is Diego from the Umbrella Academy, and that's because he's into martial arts and is sort of the sneaky fighter type, which is one of my go to character types in RPGs and I practice martial arts IRL. But I'd probably still pick Vanya first (or maybe Allison) if I was playing an RPG based on the Umbrella Academy cuz female characters with quasi-magic powers are always my first pick in RPGs.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146611
Harry Potter is actually a great example as its the most popular with women. Who I assume are not all secret trannies.


Exactly. Hell, the entire series was written by a woman. How tha hell did she even manage that if we rely on characters looking like us in order to relate with them?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GeekyBugle on August 26, 2020, 10:56:49 PM
Quote from: jhkim;1146607
I've mostly been talking about disabled characters in general rather than Thompson's combat wheelchair extension. Previously, I hadn't read it through and I never like to comment on material that I haven't read. I've now read the whole thing, though, and I have a bunch of problems with it - even though I would consider having a paraplegic PC as well as one who used some sort of wheelchair. That one write-up still isn't a judgement of all possible disabled PCs in all games, though.


Exactly. Especially given that wizard's powers aren't tied to their physique.



I don't see the need for all games to represent all types of characters. This is something that I think is handled best by the free market. People publish different games with different character types, and players either like them or they don't. I'm not going to judge you for not wanting to play a nearsighted, overweight character -- but if you wanted to, then that's fine too. It's just a game.

There are people who identify with nearsightedness, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most popular fantasy series in the last few decades had a hero who was a nerdy kid who wore glasses (Harry Potter). I think a lot of kids identified with that, which drove a lot of its popularity.

Which is why Superman is really popular all around the world, since all his fans are really white Kryptonian orphans raised on Kansas...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 27, 2020, 03:44:48 AM
Quote from: Chris24601;1146337
Except relative to every other animal out there.


Except we don't fight animals much in D&D. We fight monsters, other men, and often humanoids of greater strength.

The human body fairs poorly when another human subjects it to sharpened steel backed with velocity.


Quote from: Omega;1146349
Yeah this "no one should ever play a disabled character!" line is really grating.


If a player said, "I want to play a PC with all 3s in their ability scores except a 9 in their class requirement", I'd let them. They might even have fun doing it, but nothing is going to change in my setting to accommodate them. And when they have take -3 penalties, there wouldn't be any concern for their complaints or upset.  

What's clearly being demanded is accommodation of the bizarre. Both Stephen Hawking and Conan must be equal in melee. Helen Keller and Shakespeare must be equally capable of diplomacy and oratory. It's this entirely insane demand of "equity of outcomes" that's been poisoning our schools and academia, and of course, fuels all their anti-merit and anti-capitalist agendas.

I've played lots of Warhammer 1e. Sometimes you run out of Fate points and suffer a crit, and now your PC gets maimed. Most times, I've noticed players don't want to play a sub-optimal character because now that PCs can't do what they previously did. A hook doesn't clone a hand, a pegleg won't be equal to a working leg, and that glass eye isn't helping your awareness. I suspect Gygax understood this and its why D&D skips permanent wounds for abstract HPs.

As a player, I've enjoyed playing horrid beggars in Stormbringer, but never once did I expect the GM to toss my character magical goodies to negate the disadvantages of playing a broken street beggar. I chose to turn a dangerous RPG into double hardcore mode for myself so it was on my shoulders to accept the downsides of MY choice.


Quote from: Mishihari;1146506
This reminds me of my theory about why we find so many folks like this in the hobby.  They already live in a fantasy world, so RPGs are just the next logical step.


Bingo.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on August 27, 2020, 05:53:17 AM
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?
By Leona maple sensitivity reader, queer South Asian woman, and, an intersectional feminist!

"Do you truly want your game to have racism/ableism/-ism in it? While it’s not strictly necessary, I have absolutely been approached by people working on their home games to make sure they’re not contributing to harmful tropes while they play. No project is too small or too big for a sensitivity reader."

https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 27, 2020, 06:07:02 AM
Quote from: Gagarth;1146640
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?

Sensitivity readers ensure that only approved racism and ableism are in materials. All the better to spread this mental disease. Oh, and line their own pockets by convincing people they neeeeed this service.

Its much akin to how artists pushed more and more for colour art and more art in books. It was not because players wanted it and it sure as hell was not selling more books. But they convinced enough that it did and lined their own pockets. The push got harder once the CCG bubble burst.

Same ol salm ol. Old tactics applied to new product.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: The Exploited. on August 27, 2020, 07:36:01 AM
Quote from: Gagarth;1146640
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?
"


If you were to listen to one of these so-called 'sensitivity readers' you'd end up with an rpg about two pages long. Imagine one of these schmucks around for Tolkien's era.

Make the game YOU want to make, and if you make a mistake you can apologize afterwards.

Plus, even if you were inclined to be 'overly' politically correct. You could find out all the info on the net, or drop a few questions on TBP or some such place. But paying someone just seems like a ludicrous thing to do. Incidentally, it's funny how all these sensitivity readers are always looking for donations on paypal or have a patreon. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ imo
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 27, 2020, 07:47:54 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1146607
I've mostly been talking about disabled characters in general rather than Thompson's combat wheelchair extension. Previously, I hadn't read it through and I never like to comment on material that I haven't read. I've now read the whole thing, though, and I have a bunch of problems with it - even though I would consider having a paraplegic PC as well as one who used some sort of wheelchair. That one write-up still isn't a judgement of all possible disabled PCs in all games, though.


Exactly. Especially given that wizard's powers aren't tied to their physique.
Depending on what game you play (in The Fantasy Trip for instance Wizards fuel magic directly with their Strength attribute, meaning a physically stronger wizard has more magical power). But yeah, for D&D a Wizard's power does not come from their body.


Quote from: jhkim;1146607
I don't see the need for all games to represent all types of characters. This is something that I think is handled best by the free market. People publish different games with different character types, and players either like them or they don't. I'm not going to judge you for not wanting to play a nearsighted, overweight character -- but if you wanted to, then that's fine too. It's just a game.

Oh, I agree with that. You do you. I just find it odd to be something to scream about wanting included in official art, game rules and such. In some games it would be odd if left out (any game set in the modern world and involving characters in more regular professions for instance), but I think we can get by fine with most depictions of at least heroes and villains in D&D art being able bodied and in good shape (with occasional exception like a Monk with a scarred over eye or a one-handed druid or what have you).

Quote from: jhkim;1146607
There are people who identify with nearsightedness, though. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most popular fantasy series in the last few decades had a hero who was a nerdy kid who wore glasses (Harry Potter). I think a lot of kids identified with that, which drove a lot of its popularity.

I mean, apart from the scar, I looked pretty much exactly like Harry Potter as a kid (I was the same age as Harry when the first books came out too), I even had a red-headed best friend. But my younger sister got just as into it (more eventually, as the series progressed) and she didn't look like Harry Potter. Also, Potter isn't exactly nerdy. He wears glasses sure, but apart from that where is the nerdiness? He plays in organized sports, becoming team captain eventually, and his best academic subject is basically self defense, while he finds history and similar subjects incredibly tedious. He also doesn't seem to have any interest in say fantasy or science fiction or the like. Basically, all you have at that point is glasses=nerdy, which is a conception we have in parts of Europe and North America (the stereotypical smart kid in Japanese media for instance does not usually wear glasses).

In fact, I often find fictional characters that are clearly meant to be like me in order to appeal to me kind of unappealing. If someone is constantly talking up their nerd interests I find myself going "shut up and get on with the story." I would not have considered Buffy (from Buffy the Vampire Slayer) a more relatable character to me if she had been a fan of D&D, wore glasses and listened to Queen and Fleetwood Mac instead of trip hop. It would have just felt weirdly pandering.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: tenbones on August 27, 2020, 10:33:28 AM
Let us think of the 10% of the population that is totally not represented in D&D...

Left-handed people.

Not once is there positive representation of left-handed people NOT ONCE. No left-handed wheel-chair brakes on Combat Wheelchairs. WTF? It's like we don't exist. Left-handed scissors in the Village Hommlet? NONE!!!! Why no left-handed writing system in D&D? No left-handed bard representation with their lutes strung backwards!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 27, 2020, 11:00:39 AM
Quote from: tenbones;1146666
Let us think of the 10% of the population that is totally not represented in D&D...

Left-handed people.

Not once is there positive representation of left-handed people NOT ONCE. No left-handed wheel-chair brakes on Combat Wheelchairs. WTF? It's like we don't exist. Left-handed scissors in the Village Hommlet? NONE!!!! Why no left-handed writing system in D&D? No left-handed bard representation with their lutes strung backwards!

Left handed people have a well-known advantage in melee combat. Where is that advantage in the rules!!!!!

Disclaimer: I am strongly right-handed.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 27, 2020, 12:21:56 PM
Quote from: tenbones;1146666
Let us think of the 10% of the population that is totally not represented in D&D...

Left-handed people.

Not once is there positive representation of left-handed people NOT ONCE. No left-handed wheel-chair brakes on Combat Wheelchairs. WTF? It's like we don't exist. Left-handed scissors in the Village Hommlet? NONE!!!! Why no left-handed writing system in D&D? No left-handed bard representation with their lutes strung backwards!

If its any consolation. Star Frontiers has handedness, and ambidexterity.

Joking aside.

What these cultists glibly cover up is the little fact that you can play about anything in D&D and most other RPGs as long as you are creative and the DM OKs it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 27, 2020, 12:50:07 PM
Quote from: Omega;1146679
If its any consolation. Star Frontiers has handedness, and ambidexterity.

Joking aside.

What these cultists glibly cover up is the little fact that you can play about anything in D&D and most other RPGs as long as you are creative and the DM OKs it.


...and we never needed the publishers permission OR 'guidance' to do so.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on August 27, 2020, 03:26:14 PM
With regards to representation -- I'm skeptical about all the psychological theory around it. My point in bringing up Harry Potter was as a counter-example to Blankman's idea that there was no identification with nearsightedness. It was intended as a counter to a psychological interpretation - not intended to back any particular psychological theory.

From my view -- people like what they like. If some people want to have a wheelchair-using PC in their game, that's fine. If some people don't want to have that, that's fine too. They're entitled to like what they like in games. To the extent that someone is arguing "Everyone *has* to have wheelchair-using PCs in your game" - then I am against that.


Quote from: jhkim
I don't see the need for all games to represent all types of characters. This is something that I think is handled best by the free market. People publish different games with different character types, and players either like them or they don't. I'm not going to judge you for not wanting to play a nearsighted, overweight character -- but if you wanted to, then that's fine too. It's just a game.
Quote from: Blankman;1146645
Oh, I agree with that. You do you. I just find it odd to be something to scream about wanting included in official art, game rules and such. In some games it would be odd if left out (any game set in the modern world and involving characters in more regular professions for instance), but I think we can get by fine with most depictions of at least heroes and villains in D&D art being able bodied and in good shape (with occasional exception like a Monk with a scarred over eye or a one-handed druid or what have you).

I agree that we can get by. On the other hand, we can also get by with some disabled heroes being depicted.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: tenbones on August 27, 2020, 05:42:07 PM
Quote from: RandyB;1146668
Left handed people have a well-known advantage in melee combat. Where is that advantage in the rules!!!!!

Disclaimer: I am strongly right-handed.

That's why I give all Left handed PC's +2 to hit. But everyone starts with d100 Sanity loss.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: tenbones on August 27, 2020, 05:43:48 PM
Quote from: Omega;1146679
If its any consolation. Star Frontiers has handedness, and ambidexterity.

Joking aside.

What these cultists glibly cover up is the little fact that you can play about anything in D&D and most other RPGs as long as you are creative and the DM OKs it.

/gasp - but that would be asking for permission and establishing a hierarchy outside of the WotC Holistic Universal Tactical command (W.H.U.T.)
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shasarak on August 27, 2020, 06:25:03 PM
Quote from: tenbones;1146701
That's why I give all Left handed PC's +2 to hit. But everyone starts with d100 Sanity loss.

Any game where my character can die during the creation process gets a thumbs up from me.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 27, 2020, 07:01:55 PM
I want Shark and RPGPundit as my sensitivity readers!

They'll root out any political correctness and you'll get a redline and a rant!


Quote from: tenbones;1146666
Let us think of the 10% of the population that is totally not represented in D&D...

Left-handed people.

D&D has tieflings! Everyone knows lefties are demon spawn.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 28, 2020, 01:41:29 AM
Quote from: jhkim;1146696
From my view -- people like what they like. If some people want to have a wheelchair-using PC in their game, that's fine. If some people don't want to have that, that's fine too. They're entitled to like what they like in games. To the extent that someone is arguing "Everyone *has* to have wheelchair-using PCs in your game" - then I am against that.

Apart from the rampant hysteria of some people about this, I guess the thing that there could be debate about is what stuff should be included in officially published material. I thought the super wheelchair was dumb in a fantasy context, but that is mainly to do with that it feels very modern and incongruent. Like you say, if someone else wants to use it in their game, rock on. But I don't think it should be included in the core game books, because it feels out of place. A magical eye that you can put in if you lack an eye on the other hand? That feels less out of place to me. So the only thing I would say is I don't think magic wheelchairs should be in the DMG, but mainly for the fact I don't think they fit in the base expectations of the game, which people then branch out from.

Quote from: jhkim;1146696
I agree that we can get by. On the other hand, we can also get by with some disabled heroes being depicted.

I thought that was what I wrote.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: tenbones on August 28, 2020, 10:32:11 AM
But that's not why it exists.

The creator did it to virtue signal. It's *dumb*.

But if you took that idea and say put it into a modern non-magic setting, I might bite.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 28, 2020, 10:45:52 AM
Quote from: tenbones;1146782
But that's not why it exists.

The creator did it to virtue signal. It's *dumb*.

But if you took that idea and say put it into a modern non-magic setting, I might bite.

I mean, put it in a superhero setting and it's pretty standard, a paraplegic inventor makes a super chair with all kinds of gadgets and gizmos.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: ThatChrisGuy on August 28, 2020, 10:59:12 AM
The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.  A crippled Necromancer on a skeleton-palanquin, an eastern scholar on a flying carpet, etc.  There are ways to use the concept that aren't pandering or just plain dumb.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RandyB on August 28, 2020, 11:07:40 AM
Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1146786
The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.  A crippled Necromancer on a skeleton-palanquin, an eastern scholar on a flying carpet, etc.  There are ways to use the concept that aren't pandering or just plain dumb.

Pandering is the point, intention, and goal. Along with "license to cancel" anyone who is insufficiently enthusiastic about joining in the pandering.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Franky on August 28, 2020, 11:24:21 PM
Quote from: kythri;1145671
Learn a bit about "the one who made it" - "the one who made it" isn't in a wheelchair.  The one who made it is self-diagnosed with such a mild form of Ehlers-Danlos - so mild that it doesn't impact her life in any way, other than giving her the abilithy to virtue signal by appropriating disability, and using it to get sham jobs like "disability consultant" and "sensitivity reader - she's the "disabled" version of Rachel Dolezal.

A wheelchair user did not create this, you twat.  But the creator has no problem attacking wheelchair users who have dared to criticized this nonsense, as "ableist", which goes even further to show you what kind of a trash person they are.


Quote from: kythri;1146238
Twitter feed (twitter.com/mustangsart), Instagram (instagram.com/mustangsart) and other social media.  I gathered this information from going back and reading her posts before this all blew up.  She claims to have hEDS (hypermobile Ehler-Danlos Syndrome), and early posts discussion her "diagnosis" are clearly self-diagnosis, inasmuch as all of the complaints about her providers refusing to diagnose her to her satisfaction, and fishing for a provider who will diagnose her as she desires.  Her Instagram contains numerous pictures of her actively engaged in bipedal locomotion with groups of her friends to dispel any potential claims of her being in a wheelchair.

Ah, so the one who made it is a Munchie.  FYI, Munchie (and sometimes Spoonie)is the term for illness fakers and malingerers. It's from Munchhausens by Internet, since they use the internet, Instagram for example, to solicit asspats from sympathizers for being such brave chronic illness warriors.  There are several sub-reddits, or were, about them.  They usually claim E-D, but also other hard to diagnose conditions like POTS, Chiari, "Chronic Lyme" and so forth.   They are drawn to all the shiny "toys" -- medical equipment -- the chronically ill have, like wheelchairs, but also feeding tubes, ports etc.  They are usually female, in their 20's to start with, and started their Munching careers after they realized that they would just be ordinary as an adult, and not super special.  Most would probably be diagnosed with some sort of Cluster B personality disorder.  

The mini is very low on detail.  It's the sort of thing one would produce when one is first learning how to do digital sculpting and use 3d rendering software.  As someone who has been around minis for a loooong time, I am not impressed. Even the crudest late '80s GW minis had more going on for them than this.

Personally, I'm holding out for an infinifat mini on a Scootypuff.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 29, 2020, 08:34:29 AM
I don't want the minis, but I'm tempted to get some empty/broken wheelchairs as scatter terrain.  :D
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 29, 2020, 06:30:59 PM
Well I have to say, this whole threat got me chuckling. Seriously, people are legitimately upset over a magic wheelchair in D&D? 2020 really has people going BAT-shit crazy (excuse the pun, coming from me) over the most stupidest shit.

If someone came to my table with the concept of a wheel-chair bound character, and say that character is an Artificer well I could totally see that. Even something like a pistol-wielding Fighter (Renegade archetype for 5E) or a Pathfinder Gunslinger, I could see that too. Does it hurt my verisimilitude? Haha, no because I accept the concept that there's magical fucking dragons, powerful undead necromancers, and beings that can literally be summoned from actual Hell. And I'm supposed to have my panties in a bunch because someone wants wheels can calls themselves Iron-Sides? Please...
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 29, 2020, 08:01:44 PM
Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1146786
The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.


Agreed. It's tragic. Let's take your Necromancer Palaquin idea. In pre-SJW years, we could discuss the positives and negatives of this concept, how it would offer advantages and disadvantages in different circumstances, all without any concern for anyone's feelings or how our discussion must meet the criteria of the politically correct watchKarens.
 

Quote from: Franky;1146858
They are drawn to all the shiny "toys" -- medical equipment -- the chronically ill have, like wheelchairs, but also feeding tubes, ports etc.  They are usually female, in their 20's to start with, and started their Munching careers after they realized that they would just be ordinary as an adult, and not super special.


My brother requires "shiny toys" to survive. If I ever explained these "Munchies" to my mother, I think she'd make the news in 72 hours and at her trial, my mom's defense would be "But your honor, they SAID they wanted to be disabled! I only gave them what they always wanted."  

Quote from: Franky;1146858
Most would probably be diagnosed with some sort of Cluster B personality disorder.  


From Wikipedia...
Cluster B personality disorders are a categorization of personality disorders as defined in the DSM-IV and DSM-5.[1] These disorders are characterized by dramatic, overly emotional or unpredictable thinking or behavior and interactions with others. They include antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder.[2] The British National Health Service has described those with this disorder as someone who, "struggles to relate to others. As a result, they show patterns of behaviour most would regard as dramatic, erratic and threatening or disturbing."[3]

AKA...at least 50% of Twitter.

Thank you Franky...for further deepening my belief the internet is the damnation of humanity.


Quote from: Franky;1146858
Personally, I'm holding out for an infinifat mini on a Scootypuff.


I googled "infinifat" and I'll be sending you my therapy bill.


Quote from: Batman;1146922
Well I have to say, this whole threat got me chuckling. Seriously, people are legitimately upset over a magic wheelchair in D&D?


I haven't analyzed all the posts, but I haven't seen anyone upset over the "magic wheelchair" as a concept.

The problem isn't the magic wheelchair. It's the claim that disabled PCs have to be accommodated and not penalized in any meaningful manner. For me, the demand for "disability as cosmetic issue" is particularly galling because it reeks of virtue signalling.

360 mobility is key to dodging and defense. There is no way I am equal at dodging and parrying from a seated position as I am from a standing position with the option to move in any direction at will. The idea that a wheelchair, blindness, deafness, etc MUST NOT have penalties (because of fee-fees) is idiotic, and the demand that any PC beginning with these disabilities must be instantly equipped with disability-negating magic (instead of ACTUAL HEALING) screams of a sexual fetish.


Quote from: Batman;1146922
And I'm supposed to have my panties in a bunch because someone wants wheels can calls themselves Iron-Sides? Please...


Considering the nipples on the Batsuit and the tight armor-spandex around the ass, we pretty much assume "panties in a bunch" is your namesake's default condition.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 29, 2020, 10:44:43 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927
Agreed. It's tragic. Let's take your Necromancer Palaquin idea. In pre-SJW years, we could discuss the positives and negatives of this concept, how it would offer advantages and disadvantages in different circumstances, all without any concern for anyone's feelings or how our discussion must meet the criteria of the politically correct watchKarens.
 



My brother requires "shiny toys" to survive. If I ever explained these "Munchies" to my mother, I think she'd make the news in 72 hours and at her trial, my mom's defense would be "But your honor, they SAID they wanted to be disabled! I only gave them what they always wanted."  



From Wikipedia...
Cluster B personality disorders are a categorization of personality disorders as defined in the DSM-IV and DSM-5.[1] These disorders are characterized by dramatic, overly emotional or unpredictable thinking or behavior and interactions with others. They include antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, histrionic personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder.[2] The British National Health Service has described those with this disorder as someone who, "struggles to relate to others. As a result, they show patterns of behaviour most would regard as dramatic, erratic and threatening or disturbing."[3]

AKA...at least 50% of Twitter.

Thank you Franky...for further deepening my belief the internet is the damnation of humanity.




I googled "infinifat" and I'll be sending you my therapy bill.




I haven't analyzed all the posts, but I haven't seen anyone upset over the "magic wheelchair" as a concept.

The problem isn't the magic wheelchair. It's the claim that disabled PCs have to be accommodated and not penalized in any meaningful manner. For me, the demand for "disability as cosmetic issue" is particularly galling because it reeks of virtue signalling.

360 mobility is key to dodging and defense. There is no way I am equal at dodging and parrying from a seated position as I am from a standing position with the option to move in any direction at will. The idea that a wheelchair, blindness, deafness, etc MUST NOT have penalties (because of fee-fees) is idiotic, and the demand that any PC beginning with these disabilities must be instantly equipped with disability-negating magic (instead of ACTUAL HEALING) screams of a sexual fetish.




Considering the nipples on the Batsuit and the tight armor-spandex around the ass, we pretty much assume "panties in a bunch" is your namesake's default condition.

Greetings!

Exactly, my friend! If any character in my campaign wants to begin the game being severely disabled, they are going to suffer. Even a somewhat lesser disability like missing one arm, one ear, or one eye is going to have significant penalties. No balancing, no special goodies provided to them to compensate--NO. They get to suffer.

Such characters get to suffer and endure, and learn of the glories of humility, and come face to face with just how limited they are.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Pat on August 29, 2020, 10:51:33 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927
360 mobility is key to dodging and defense. There is no way I am equal at dodging and parrying from a seated position as I am from a standing position with the option to move in any direction at will.

What are you talking about? There's even wheelchair parkour!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 30, 2020, 01:03:15 AM
LOL Pat!

That was a darkly humorous video showing how the world isn't wheelchair accessible. Kudos for them calling it "wheelchair parkour." And yes, it proves the point harshly about how wheelchairs don't make the slightest possible sense in a pre-modern setting, nor in any natural environ.

Here's a wheelchair bound athlete. He races and shows how to handle stairs. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH82l-OEXcg) Look at the strength required and the sound made. He's got a mighty attitude, but unless he has open flat terrain to race forward on quickly, he's got no
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: SHARK on August 30, 2020, 01:44:31 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146944
LOL Pat!

That was a darkly humorous video showing how the world isn't wheelchair accessible. Kudos for them calling it "wheelchair parkour." And yes, it proves the point harshly about how wheelchairs don't make the slightest possible sense in a pre-modern setting, nor in any natural environ.

Here's a wheelchair bound athlete. He races and shows how to handle stairs. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH82l-OEXcg) Look at the strength required and the sound made. He's got a mighty attitude, but unless he has open flat terrain to race forward on quickly, he's got no

Greetings!

Right! But some handicapped guy in a wheelchair is going to survive and be a badass in an adventuring team exploring some monster-filled dungeon!

It's some woke snowflake fetishizing of handicapped people. That's what it all is down deep. It's pathetic.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 30, 2020, 02:28:30 AM
Quote from: Batman;1146922
Well I have to say, this whole threat got me chuckling. Seriously, people are legitimately upset over a magic wheelchair in D&D?

Its not the wheelchair that is the problem really.

Its how its executed, and who is doing it, and why.

I think making it a mary-sue magic wheelchair just kinda added salt to the wound.

And as said. Take note that several of us have suggested better ways to pull it off and why the concept can work. I've got a whole thread on the subject and various insights from the handicapped side of the fence and why we find stuff like this annoying. Especially when invariably its followed by someone proclaiming for us that anything else like you know, an actual cure, is BAD!

And for me this is iteration 3 of this nonesense. And the worst so far.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: HappyDaze on August 30, 2020, 02:33:03 AM
I'm honestly surprised that this topic is getting as much attention as it has. I figured that the most likely response would have been to just ignore it and just deal with it if the unlikely event of someone bringing this up at a table really happens. Instead, it seems that a lot of people got triggered by a magic wheelchair and have to REEEE about it.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 30, 2020, 02:56:10 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146949
I'm honestly surprised that this topic is getting as much attention as it has. I figured that the most likely response would have been to just ignore it and just deal with it if the unlikely event of someone bringing this up at a table really happens. Instead, it seems that a lot of people got triggered by a magic wheelchair and have to REEEE about it.

Its the inevitible pushback as people get ever more tired of this and other "diversity" grifting at the expense of real people.

As noted elsewhere. There wouldnt be any pushback if any of this was done right and honestly.

And its infesting board games too. Over on BGG a designer doing a time travel historical game was told he could not have Washington in the game as thats racist as Washington kept slaves. Then someone on the fora told him to hire a "sensitivity consultant".
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 30, 2020, 05:39:45 AM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927
I haven't analyzed all the posts, but I haven't seen anyone upset over the "magic wheelchair" as a concept.

The problem isn't the magic wheelchair. It's the claim that disabled PCs have to be accommodated and not penalized in any meaningful manner. For me, the demand for "disability as cosmetic issue" is particularly galling because it reeks of virtue signalling.

Who's claiming that disabled PCs HAVE to be accommodated to? Like, where was that ever written by anyone at WotC that people must be allowed to play these crippled PCs and that you have to have all these widgets that let them shine? Every DMG I've own (four editions worth) all say you can run the game how you, the DM, like and to tailor the game how you see fit. Use or don't use a powered Wheelchair. Also, because something it made to cater to a group of people that isn't majority doesn't = virtue signalling. Honestly, this claim has been overused so much that it pretty much equates to "get off my lawn." Honestly, no one cares.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927
360 mobility is key to dodging and defense. There is no way I am equal at dodging and parrying from a seated position as I am from a standing position with the option to move in any direction at will. The idea that a wheelchair, blindness, deafness, etc MUST NOT have penalties (because of fee-fees) is idiotic, and the demand that any PC beginning with these disabilities must be instantly equipped with disability-negating magic (instead of ACTUAL HEALING) screams of a sexual fetish.

Again, no one's begging to have all of these disability-negating effects. Hell I remember waay back when people wanted to do the whole "blind-monk" warrior thing and instead of sight it was blind-sense out so many feet, like some Dare-Devil wanna be. That doesn't mean they have some odd sexual fetish (a really odd and....quite disturbing way of thinking to boot) just because  they want to explore a different aspect of role-playing. Do I think this wheel-chair is a bit much, sure absolutely. But that's a mechanical issue, not a concept issue IMO.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927
Considering the nipples on the Batsuit and the tight armor-spandex around the ass, we pretty much assume "panties in a bunch" is your namesake's default condition.
Whoa whoa - hold on now, it's a poly-carbonate / leather mesh that fits nicely and never "bunches", unless it's a thing Selina and I are trying.

We won't discuss Joel Schumacher though......
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 30, 2020, 06:02:10 AM
Quote from: Omega;1146947
Its not the wheelchair that is the problem really.

Its how its executed, and who is doing it, and why.

You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that I really give a rats-ass who or why they're doing it. I simply don't. It's a small thing on the internet among thousands of related stuff on the internet. Use it. Don't. It really doesn't matter. What I found funny is just how much people really do care about something that A) will most likely NEVER affect their game and B) wouldn't probably allow anyways should it attempt to be brought in.

Quote from: Omega;1146947
I think making it a mary-sue magic wheelchair just kinda added salt to the wound.

Oh, that changes everything! I mean, we can't have mary-sues in D&D! That's preposterous!!

Quote from: Omega;1146947
And as said. Take note that several of us have suggested better ways to pull it off and why the concept can work. I've got a whole thread on the subject and various insights from the handicapped side of the fence and why we find stuff like this annoying. Especially when invariably its followed by someone proclaiming for us that anything else like you know, an actual cure, is BAD!

And for me this is iteration 3 of this nonesense. And the worst so far.

I don't think the person who made it, regardless of their own handicaps nor not, did it so that every disabled person out there would be forced or feel bad for not using it. They're just one person, just like other people who are disabled are their own person. No one's trying to be "Speaker" for an entire group of people, that's my take. And yea, it can work a lot of different ways, that's kinda the point and beauty of this game. The thread you made works great! Yay!! The original powered wheelchair might work great for others..yay!! Use what you like, or don't. No WotC Gestapo is rolling into your house to verify the correct ratio of diversity, lol.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Blankman on August 30, 2020, 08:34:10 AM
Quote from: SHARK;1146936
Greetings!

Exactly, my friend! If any character in my campaign wants to begin the game being severely disabled, they are going to suffer. Even a somewhat lesser disability like missing one arm, one ear, or one eye is going to have significant penalties. No balancing, no special goodies provided to them to compensate--NO. They get to suffer.

Such characters get to suffer and endure, and learn of the glories of humility, and come face to face with just how limited they are.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK


What's a special goody and what do you mean by provided? If a PC gets his hand cut off and then in the next adventure they finds the Hand of Vecna, will you say "oh no, you can't use that, that would balance out your missing hand!"? What if the PCs already have a flying carpet, and then someone makes a new character (maybe their previous one died) and gets the idea to make a paraplegic wizard who travels about on the carpet, would you then demand the carpet get deleted in order to not counterbalance the PCs paraplegia?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: VisionStorm on August 30, 2020, 05:37:53 PM
Quote from: Batman;1146962
You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that I really give a rats-ass who or why they're doing it. I simply don't.


You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that your willfully uniformed opinion is important here to anyone. If you can't be bothered to read what the people you're criticizing are actually talking about then what worth is your moronic babbling to anyone? You're not arguing against what people are actually saying. You're just venting at us like we're your therapists and your imaginary ravings are supposed to matter to us?

Go take your meds, Batboy. :p
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 30, 2020, 06:30:58 PM
Quote from: Batman;1146962
I don't think the person who made it, regardless of their own handicaps nor not, did it so that every disabled person out there would be forced or feel bad for not using it. They're just one person, just like other people who are disabled are their own person. No one's trying to be "Speaker" for an entire group of people, that's my take.

Given that she's attacked folks who are legitimate wheelchair users, accusing them of being "ableist" for criticizing her shitty ideas, I'm going to go ahead and say you're off base on this one.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 30, 2020, 07:19:33 PM
Quote from: VisionStorm;1146982
You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that your willfully uniformed opinion is important here to anyone. If you can't be bothered to read what the people you're criticizing are actually talking about then what worth is your moronic babbling to anyone?

In the 22/23 pages of this thread, it's mostly people going back and forth complaining about how someone made a homebrewed thing that represents the possibility of having a wheelchair bound character and still, somehow, be applicable to dangerous life of adventuring. Not that the concept is bad -per se- but because the creator (who's name I forget) is bad because she's championing a cause she doesn't apparently belong to (I didn't bother to verify her actual disabilities - fictional or real and one wasn't provided here) and then she apparently called people bad for either not liking her idea or because it's some white-knighting or other some such dog-whistle word. This lends itself, to me in my uninformed opinion, that people are mad because they feel this is another SJW push at that terrible word representation! or *gasp* diversity and it's particularly damning since the greater disabled community of D&D players don't agree with the concept of Powered Wheelchairs (though, I'm guessing the poll is still out on that or have they surveyed all of them?).  

To sum up: Person made a thing about a small group of people, and because they're possibly NOT of that that same group AND argued against those who were opposed to the idea the thing and that person are bad, and bad for the gaming population and genre as a whole. Did I get that right?  


Quote from: VisionStorm;1146982
You're not arguing against what people are actually saying.
Funny, I didn't really thing I was "arguing" with anything, more of a generalized observation which cause a brief sense of humor for me. I stated that I was a bit amazed (and perplexed) as to why people were so mad about something that would never grace their gaming table. Even with the usual SJW-hate and vitriol that one grows accustomed to seeing here, it really only made me laugh a bit more. Still, a portion still seem to be very upset by the notion that a thing is made for _insert wrong reason_ (citation?) and carry on for 23 pages about it.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1146982
You're just venting at us like we're your therapists and your imaginary ravings are supposed to matter to us?

Go take your meds, Batboy. :p

I didn't feel it came off as a "vent", but you really can't show emotion via simple text.

And I have taken them, thank you for your concern. :)

Edit: forgot to note that I understand this is just a continuation of frustration towards the direction this particular game is taking in regards to the push for inclusiveness, much like we saw with the changing of Orcs and Dark Elves and the game ovary remova/l change to how ability scores are set.

Still, even with those changes becoming actual things in WotC products, I'm still not sure why people are upset? I consider myself a pretty left-progressive person but I have no intention of changing the way in which these races are reacted to in my games.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 30, 2020, 07:20:46 PM
Quote from: kythri;1146992
Given that she's attacked folks who are legitimate wheelchair users, accusing them of being "ableist" for criticizing her shitty ideas, I'm going to go ahead and say you're off base on this one.


Is there a source for this?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on August 31, 2020, 12:26:16 AM
Quote from: Batman;1146996
Still, even with those changes becoming actual things in WotC products, I'm still not sure why people are upset? I consider myself a pretty left-progressive person but I have no intention of changing the way in which these races are reacted to in my games.

Here's why people are upset.

WotC is the 500 lb gorilla of the RPG industry. As they "normalize" more and more of the left-progressive freakshow into the hobby, it becomes the de facto baseline of the hobby that other publishers will adhere to, and will shape the expectations of players.

This is already playing out on Boardgame Geek as has been pointed out repeatedly, as they are the 500 lb gorilla of the boardgame hobby. Game designers are AFRAID to upset the BGG mob in fear of losing their livelihood.

WotC, like all coastal elites, believe SJWs are not just the way, truth and the light, but also make up the majority of the fanbase - especially because the WotC scum live on Twatter where the SJWs scream the loudest, thus make up the entirety of their world.

Leftists have openly preached "never let a crisis go to waste", and in 2020 we're seeing that played out across our lives on many battlefronts, and unfortunately, our hobby is one of those. So last month it was "Orcs are Blacks Peoples!" and this month is "Wheelchair Accessible Dungeons!", and of course, any dissent is met with the usual screeching on Twatter.

Thus, it's approaching the "one thin wafer" moment.  

Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on August 31, 2020, 05:51:19 AM
Quote from: HappyDaze;1146949
I'm honestly surprised that this topic is getting as much attention as it has. I figured that the most likely response would have been to just ignore it and just deal with it if the unlikely event of someone bringing this up at a table really happens. Instead, it seems that a lot of people got triggered by a magic wheelchair and have to REEEE about it.


No because it is more Neo-Marxist bullshit that's why no go burn something down.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on August 31, 2020, 05:53:49 AM
Quote from: Batman;1146962
You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that I really give a rats-ass who or why they're doing it..

Then why you spending so time on it and the fact that you are shows that you are lying and are just part of them problem.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: kythri on August 31, 2020, 10:04:11 AM
Quote from: Batman;1146997
Is there a source for this?

The "creator's" Twatter feed:  twitter.com/mustangsart
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2020, 10:11:12 AM
Quote from: Batman;1146962
You're possibly under the incorrect assumption that I really give a rats-ass who or why they're doing it. I simply don't. It's a small thing on the internet among thousands of related stuff on the internet. Use it. Don't. It really doesn't matter. What I found funny is just how much people really do care about something that A) will most likely NEVER affect their game and B) wouldn't probably allow anyways should it attempt to be brought in.


Ive heard this argument before. And every time in the end, one way or another it has ended up affecting the games or entertainment of others. And in this iteration of this stupid its exponentially more likely to be parroted by other companies as apparently just about every fucking company is falling over themselves to get on the woke wagon and virtue signal big or small.

No woke gestapo is in our houses coming for our games... yet.

But we are allready seeing them start to strongarm and "police" conventions. And that was going on as of the last few years also gradually increasingly. If it werent for the lockdowns and practically end of conventions for now, we'd likely had by now more threads here on cons that have been either infiltrated or completely co-opted.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on August 31, 2020, 10:42:02 AM
Quote from: Omega;1147073
No woke gestapo is in our houses coming for our games... yet.

Its a trolls truism. A kinda pointless true statement used to cover up the actual practice. When the woke gestapos goal is to ultimately shape the entire landscape into one they find preferable with no space for dissenters saying "Well they haven't smashed down your door" is a worthless intelectual excercise.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: VisionStorm on August 31, 2020, 11:23:26 AM
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1147080
Its a trolls truism. A kinda pointless true statement used to cover up the actual practice. When the woke gestapos goal is to ultimately shape the entire landscape into one they find preferable with no space for dissenters saying "Well they haven't smashed down your door" is a worthless intelectual excercise.


It's basically a type of straw man. No one's actually arguing that they're literally going to come to your house to confiscate your books or fine you for playing the game "wrong". So of course they have to argue against that, cuz this isn't about having a reasonable discussion, but about putting down the people who have the audacity to complain and dismissing them by making them look like morons. Since they can't do that by arguing against actual points they have to invent ridiculous straw points to attack them furiously instead.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: GameDaddy on August 31, 2020, 12:17:04 PM
Of the people in Wheelchairs who have played in my D&D or Traveller games, and there have been a few, absolutely none of them wanted to play a character in a Wheelchair. They opted of course to play Heroes, and Wizards, and Fighters and Rogues, without any disabilities, instead whenever possible, just like the rest of the player, they wanted to play healthy and strong larger than life heroes.


Also WOTC is not original in this. GURPS has had disadvantages since the 80's, and you could play a guy in a wheelchair, (Professor Charles Francis Xavier, for a guy in one of my X-Men games), which would give you more points for other skills or advantages.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on August 31, 2020, 12:23:17 PM
Quote from: GameDaddy;1147085
Of the people in Wheelchairs who have played in my D&D or Traveller games, and there have been a few, absolutely none of them wanted to play a character in a Wheelchair. They opted of course to play Heroes, and Wizards, and Fighters and Rogues, without any disabilities, instead whenever possible, just like the rest of the player, they wanted to play healthy and strong larger than life heroes.


Also WOTC is not original in this. GURPS has had disadvantages since the 80's, and you could play a guy in a wheelchair, (Professor Charles Francis Xavier, for a guy in one of my X-Men games), which would give you more points for other skills or advantages.

...and it -works- in GURPS and similar point-based games; in that you are agreeing to play a character weaker in some aspects, to be stronger in others, while the wheelchair as written is all advantage, no downside.  Even if you are ok with this in theory, it either becomes purely  cosmetic (crippled in name only) or an unfair advantage.

Here's a question, if my so stunning, so brave team member dies to dragon breath due to a tragic inability to quickly move to the sides, and the chair itself survives, can my slightly overweight mage retrieve the gems to make a flight belt?  I want to go full Harkkonen.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2020, 01:30:35 PM
Quote from: Batman;1146996
In the 22/23 pages of this thread, it's mostly people going back and forth complaining about how someone made a homebrewed thing that represents the possibility of having a wheelchair bound character and still, somehow, be applicable to dangerous life of adventuring. Not that the concept is bad -per se- but because the creator (who's name I forget) is bad because she's championing a cause she doesn't apparently belong to (I didn't bother to verify her actual disabilities - fictional or real and one wasn't provided here) and then she apparently called people bad for either not liking her idea or because it's some white-knighting or other some such dog-whistle word. This lends itself, to me in my uninformed opinion, that people are mad because they feel this is another SJW push at that terrible word representation! or *gasp* diversity and it's particularly damning since the greater disabled community of D&D players don't agree with the concept of Powered Wheelchairs (though, I'm guessing the poll is still out on that or have they surveyed all of them?).


Um... why are you putting my name on someone elses comments?

As for the wheelchair. The spark of all this was the illustration. Which in no way suggests the thing is magical in any way. It looks fairly mundane and a bit more modern than I remember some older wheelchairs looking. Presented as it was, it was pretty out of place and more than a little impractical for an adventurer. Which makes me wonder if this flying self righting can be quick-fixed wheelchair features was added in after the fact or not? I assume not and were features from the start? Is the conveyance described and the one in the illustration even the same?

The description sounds alot like what I described here and elsewhere for designing an artficer Steel Defender as a conveyance. Just with wheels instead of legs.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: WillInNewHaven on August 31, 2020, 01:30:37 PM
Quote from: GameDaddy;1147085
Of the people in Wheelchairs who have played in my D&D or Traveller games, and there have been a few, absolutely none of them wanted to play a character in a Wheelchair. They opted of course to play Heroes, and Wizards, and Fighters and Rogues, without any disabilities, instead whenever possible, just like the rest of the player, they wanted to play healthy and strong larger than life heroes.


Also WOTC is not original in this. GURPS has had disadvantages since the 80's, and you could play a guy in a wheelchair, (Professor Charles Francis Xavier, for a guy in one of my X-Men games), which would give you more points for other skills or advantages.

I've had two trans players in my games. They both wanted to play, and played, born women. I've had several gay women and gay men in my campaign. One of the gay women occasionally liked to play a slutty straight woman "because I used to be one." The rest of the gay players varied their characters. The Black players in my campaigns never asked about race. The ethnic groups you could play did not equate to races. No one seemed to want "representation."
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on August 31, 2020, 01:40:55 PM
Quote from: GameDaddy;1147085
Of the people in Wheelchairs who have played in my D&D or Traveller games, and there have been a few, absolutely none of them wanted to play a character in a Wheelchair. They opted of course to play Heroes, and Wizards, and Fighters and Rogues, without any disabilities, instead whenever possible, just like the rest of the player, they wanted to play healthy and strong larger than life heroes.

Also WOTC is not original in this. GURPS has had disadvantages since the 80's, and you could play a guy in a wheelchair, (Professor Charles Francis Xavier, for a guy in one of my X-Men games), which would give you more points for other skills or advantages.

1: I've worked with a broader spectrum then than you and seen all manner of approaches from playing normal person, to playing themselves pretty much. Everyone has their takes on approaching this. Saying no handicapped person would ever want to play a handicapped character is pretty off base from experience. And on top of that these rules arent there for only the handicapped to use. Its also for normal people to try playing with such disadvantages. Weve gone over reasons before.

2: We've also gone over that as well. This isnt new. That is not the issue at hand. Its the execution and reason behind it. Not the inclusion itself overall. Its akin to the gay gnome kings in Essentials. Just less meaningless. Maybe.  :rolleyes:
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 31, 2020, 04:25:39 PM
Quote from: Gagarth;1147047
Then why you spending so time on it and the fact that you are shows that you are lying and are just part of them problem.


So, does this mean we can't be Facebook friends?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 31, 2020, 04:28:36 PM
Quote from: Omega;1147092
Um... why are you putting my name on someone elses comments?

Apologies, I fixed that.

Quote from: Omega;1147092
As for the wheelchair. The spark of all this was the illustration. Which in no way suggests the thing is magical in any way. It looks fairly mundane and a bit more modern than I remember some older wheelchairs looking. Presented as it was, it was pretty out of place and more than a little impractical for an adventurer. Which makes me wonder if this flying self righting can be quick-fixed wheelchair features was added in after the fact or not? I assume not and were features from the start? Is the conveyance described and the one in the illustration even the same?

The description sounds alot like what I described here and elsewhere for designing an artficer Steel Defender as a conveyance. Just with wheels instead of legs.

Initially I saw a miniature with a skeletal guy in a wheelchair, which made me curious as to what it was in the D&D context, and went down that rabbit hole. And yea, the illustration of what was presented definitely seemed out of place for something that could be geared for adventuring. Like you, I could easily see something like this for an Artificer, which I thought would've been pretty cool.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 31, 2020, 04:46:02 PM
Quote from: Spinachcat;1147027
Here's why people are upset.

WotC is the 500 lb gorilla of the RPG industry. As they "normalize" more and more of the left-progressive freakshow into the hobby, it becomes the de facto baseline of the hobby that other publishers will adhere to, and will shape the expectations of players.

This is already playing out on Boardgame Geek as has been pointed out repeatedly, as they are the 500 lb gorilla of the boardgame hobby. Game designers are AFRAID to upset the BGG mob in fear of losing their livelihood.


So isn't this where the beauty of Capitalism comes into play? That if there's a big enough market and like-minded consumers, it doesn't matter because in the end money will be the biggest deciding factor in what goes forward? IF the so-called "Left-Progressive Freakshow" is enjoying a lot of limelight and there's significant unrest/backlash towards these ideals, wouldn't it make sense to hit them in their wallet? Basically if there's a sizable market for content outside the mob mentality, they shouldn't be fearful because it'll be bought anyways.  

Quote from: Spinachcat;1147027
WotC, like all coastal elites, believe SJWs are not just the way, truth and the light, but also make up the majority of the fanbase - especially because the WotC scum live on Twatter where the SJWs scream the loudest, thus make up the entirety of their world.


So essentially they have a bigger consumer base and their marketing team caters to them fairly well.  

Quote from: Spinachcat;1147027
Leftists have openly preached "never let a crisis go to waste", and in 2020 we're seeing that played out across our lives on many battlefronts, and unfortunately, our hobby is one of those. So last month it was "Orcs are Blacks Peoples!" and this month is "Wheelchair Accessible Dungeons!", and of course, any dissent is met with the usual screeching on Twatter.

Thus, it's approaching the "one thin wafer" moment.  


And what, exactly, is going to explode? I think this whole thing equates to a small sub-set of people in an already small niche market being upset because the content created is moving far away from the ideals, values, and likes of said small sub-set of people. I say this is "small" because - from your description above - they don't have the marketable size to combat the business model that's currently going on. Both Paizo and WotC have done a LOT in the last decade to put in elements that would be deemed "left-leaning" like gay NPCs in their adventures (I think Paizo did this a few years ago) or trans characters in video games (Beemdog did this with their Baldur's Gate game), and of course WotC recent changes too.

If there's going to be an explosion from people who don't want this content, then it'd better be pretty damn big or otherwise, resign to fade away into obscurity.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on August 31, 2020, 04:52:33 PM
Quote from: Omega;1147073
Ive heard this argument before. And every time in the end, one way or another it has ended up affecting the games or entertainment of others. And in this iteration of this stupid its exponentially more likely to be parroted by other companies as apparently just about every fucking company is falling over themselves to get on the woke wagon and virtue signal big or small.

No woke gestapo is in our houses coming for our games... yet.


Better to realize the direction the game is heading in now and get out while you can, because I don't see their trends and left-progression changing in the slightest and - like you said - it pushes other companies to do like-minded things as well. I'd say the way to combat it is to come up with a similar platform, catering to the needs of those who are upset, and see where it gets you.

Quote from: Omega;1147073
But we are all ready seeing them start to strongarm and "police" conventions. And that was going on as of the last few years also gradually increasingly. If it werent for the lockdowns and practically end of conventions for now, we'd likely had by now more threads here on cons that have been either infiltrated or completely co-opted.


I don't go to conventions, but what policing are you talking about? Like, people aren't allowed to go and promote games that don't fall under left-think ideology?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: jhkim on September 01, 2020, 04:07:40 AM
The thing that stands out to me about the discussion is differing reactions. Some posters are like "Disabled PCs work fine in other cases, but the combat wheelchair write-up is dumb" - while other posters like SHARK are like "Disabled PCs should *suffer* and suck". I think the split over this shows that there is an actual issue here about how people play games, not just political posturing.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1147085
GURPS has had disadvantages since the 80's, and you could play a guy in a wheelchair, (Professor Charles Francis Xavier, for a guy in one of my X-Men games), which would give you more points for other skills or advantages.
Quote from: LiferGamer;1147086
...and it -works- in GURPS and similar point-based games; in that you are agreeing to play a character weaker in some aspects, to be stronger in others, while the wheelchair as written is all advantage, no downside.  Even if you are ok with this in theory, it either becomes purely  cosmetic (crippled in name only) or an unfair advantage.

Yeah, a lot of posters have cited different disabled characters in their games - which worked fine in practice. Also, I don't see a problem with characters like Daredevil or M.A.N.T.I.S. who are only cosmetically disabled -- or Elric for an example from fantasy. I've had characters like that in HERO and GURPS, and I have had no problems. They typically don't take the full disadvantage value, or alternately, they spend on compensation equal to what they get.

To my mind, the dumb part that stands out to me about the combat wheelchair is how it can fly, but only over stairs. If I wanted to have a wheelchair, I'd probably have it as an animate object like a living statue or living armor -- a parallel for it would be the "Steel Defender" companion for the Artificer class. So it can flex and move to some degree on its own, which could allow dodging and limited climbing, and there is precedent for how it can heal.


Quote from: SHARK;1146936
If any character in my campaign wants to begin the game being severely disabled, they are going to suffer. Even a somewhat lesser disability like missing one arm, one ear, or one eye is going to have significant penalties. No balancing, no special goodies provided to them to compensate--NO. They get to suffer.

Such characters get to suffer and endure, and learn of the glories of humility, and come face to face with just how limited they are.

How does balancing work in your games for cases *other* than disabled characters? If a player wanted a character from a disadvantaged background - like being an orphan or an escaped slave, would you give them a bunch of penalties and make them suffer to represent the reality of how life is difficult?
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: trechriron on September 01, 2020, 04:18:12 AM
After 24 pages we had to have learned something important about one another.  Can I get the TL:DR summary of what we learned. I'm interested in your summary take.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on September 01, 2020, 04:36:33 AM
Quote from: Batman;1147109
I don't go to conventions, but what policing are you talking about? Like, people aren't allowed to go and promote games that don't fall under left-think ideology?


Some conventions have posted games forbidden to be played because of the author's wrongthink, and apparently its a growing trend thanks to SJW garbage. We had a thread about it last year where we were suggesting more games for their lists because they are total douche canoes.


Quote from: trechriron;1147133
Can I get the TL:DR summary of what we learned. I'm interested in your summary take.


If we snap a BLM supporter's spine, they will thank us for making them extra special and that much closer to winning the Oppression Olympics.

Also, apparently the "Munchies" - freaks who get off making believe they're disabled - are now yet another glorious addition to the D&D "community" thanks to social media.

And Shark thinks wheelchair adventuring makes total sense and should be added to every fantasy campaign!
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 01, 2020, 05:12:49 AM
Quote from: Batman;1147109
I don't go to conventions, but what policing are you talking about? Like, people aren't allowed to go and promote games that don't fall under left-think ideology?


Its been popping up sporatically up till lockdowns pretty much put the kibosh on cons for now.

We've had cons removing events because either someone woke complained, or they got woke and nixed whatever was deemed "problematic". We've had cons flat out state certain things were now verboten. And in the early stages of this cult we saw things like seminars at cons and more. Then theres been several attempts to strongarm and in at least two cases, blackmail cons into bending knee.

Back in the 90s iteration of this I had the misfortune of being at ground zero of one of these hate groups attacks on a con that literally ended with us being policed at the con and security guards watching us in the RPG rooms. ARMED security guards. A year later they took over the con completely and booted anyone "offensive". And a year later the con was DOA.

Still my go-to example of just how bad this can get. And afterwards this group of course escalated to acts of violence and their version of cancel culture.

This is in part why I have zero tolerance for SJW cults and very little patience for anyone trying to say that it cant get "that" bad. Or that this isnt really a problem.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 01, 2020, 05:14:48 AM
Quote from: trechriron;1147133
After 24 pages we had to have learned something important about one another.  Can I get the TL:DR summary of what we learned. I'm interested in your summary take.

Beats me! Maybe that as usual YMMV but some seem to think that everyone should only play THE ONE TRUE WAY. ad nausium.
Title: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Gagarth on September 01, 2020, 06:15:55 AM
Quote from: Batman;1147105
So, does this mean we can't be Facebook friends?


More lies, fuck off, you are a Twatter denizen when you are not out burning buildings and "peacefully"  throwing  professional grade fireworks at cops.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Spinachcat on September 02, 2020, 12:45:35 AM
More lies, fuck off, you are a Twatter denizen when you are not out burning buildings and "peacefully"  throwing  professional grade fireworks at cops.
Dude, uncool...unless you got proof.

Batman says he's a left-progressive, but even I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not a domestic terrorist...unless you have proof otherwise.

I've had a few quiet conversations recently with "left-progressives" who didn't sign up for what's going down and as they say, it's been raining red pills. And based on Batman's posting history, I'm doubly willing to cut him some slack.

Also, has there been a more Alt-Right superhero in DC than the Dark Knight???
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on September 02, 2020, 04:24:19 AM
Quote from: Batman;1147105
So, does this mean we can't be Facebook friends?

More lies, fuck off, you are a Twatter denizen when you are not out burning buildings and "peacefully"  throwing  professional grade fireworks at cops.


Where's the lie though? I really don't go on Twitter, I find the platform annoying to navigate and ignore it almost completely. I also don't live anywhere near there's significant civil unrest. As for stances, I think it comes down to who's making the depiction and it varies a lot from an almost alt-right (vigilantism and pummeling of the desperate) to a position to antifa (conflict with law enforcement and established order). It's like trying to pin down my Alignment in D&D, it's difficult.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Batman on September 02, 2020, 04:31:16 AM
More lies, fuck off, you are a Twatter denizen when you are not out burning buildings and "peacefully"  throwing  professional grade fireworks at cops.
Dude, uncool...unless you got proof.

Batman says he's a left-progressive, but even I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he's not a domestic terrorist...unless you have proof otherwise.

I've had a few quiet conversations recently with "left-progressives" who didn't sign up for what's going down and as they say, it's been raining red pills. And based on Batman's posting history, I'm doubly willing to cut him some slack.


I'm certainly not about throwing fireworks at police, I'm also not cool with shooting people in the face and body with rubber bullets either. I don't think there's currently a good solution to whats happening right now, but that's not exactly what this thread is about.


Also, has there been a more Alt-Right superhero in DC than the Dark Knight???


Lex Luthor

[/quote]
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: WillInNewHaven on September 06, 2020, 10:50:04 AM
My biggest objection to the combat wheelchair, at least to its being common in a fantasy setting, is that mages or clerics could fix the problem, so you won't need them.

The major response seems to treat being broken as an identity, like race, and demand representation.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 06, 2020, 06:51:55 PM
Depends on the setting and what the PCs have access to. In say O and BX D&D regenerative spells do not exist. In AD&D and 2e there are spells. But they are higher level often and thus may not be easily had due to rarity of casters, or cost of having it cast being to high for the characters current funds. It is a similar problem as with Raise Dead. How common is it or not? The harder a cure is to get the more likely a workaround like a wheelchair or prosthetic will be sought.

I'd expect the common folk would be resorting to non-magical solutions quite a bit due to sheer cost alone.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: WillInNewHaven on September 06, 2020, 10:11:19 PM
I was thinking that the wheelchair would have to be really expensive also. If not, then I can see it.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 06, 2020, 10:48:31 PM
Wheelchairs in some form go back quite a ways. They didnt hit their more recognizable form till much later though. Mostly just need someone willing to craft it. Not much different from a dog or pony cart probably. A cart or wagon maker might be the person to go to. Like alot of this stuff you'd need to hunt down someone to make it. They probably arent mass produced. But there might be craftsmen known for making good ones or the only ones.

They sure wont ever be combat viable or even wilderness viable without alot of effort. And even then that viability will be really limited without magic.
This is probably why the one in the article that sparked off these discussions is so mary-sued. It has to be to make the concept not fall totally apart as it would if the wheelchair werent tricked out to the gills.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 06, 2020, 10:58:18 PM
I was thinking that the wheelchair would have to be really expensive also. If not, then I can see it.
A quick check from a catalogue from the 1920s. A sulky for a dog or goat cost around 5$ (5$ more for the harness and tack for the animal)
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: WillInNewHaven on September 07, 2020, 11:52:43 AM
Will this "sulky for a dog or goat" do well cross-country or in combat? If someone wanted to play a handicapped character or a character was injured in a way to handicap them, I would certainly allow such a thing but they would still be badly handicapped.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: Omega on September 07, 2020, 03:09:31 PM
Will this "sulky for a dog or goat" do well cross-country or in combat? If someone wanted to play a handicapped character or a character was injured in a way to handicap them, I would certainly allow such a thing but they would still be badly handicapped.
Thats what meant above when said that even with alot of effort its not really viable without magic. That sort of conveyance just wont work. Same as you cant take certain animals into a dungeon due simply to space limits anywhere corridors get too restricted for passage by a large beast. Or the simple fact that traps will be a serious problem.
The cart sort of conveyance though will allow traversing the less bothersome wilderness where a wheelchair is going to be a severe hassle for the user.

And was mostly in that post giving an example of how relatively cheap something like that could be.

Logistics can and will make certain things either not viable or flat out impossible without some workaround for the workaround as it were.
If the user themselves is a wizard or such then it makes alot more sense as they can probably prep some solution spells as contingencies.

Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on September 10, 2020, 07:30:16 PM
Quote from: RPGPundit;1145878
Do you have links/data to back this up?

Twitter feed (twitter.com/mustangsart), Instagram (instagram.com/mustangsart) and other social media.  I gathered this information from going back and reading her posts before this all blew up.  She claims to have hEDS (hypermobile Ehler-Danlos Syndrome), and early posts discussion her "diagnosis" are clearly self-diagnosis, inasmuch as all of the complaints about her providers refusing to diagnose her to her satisfaction, and fishing for a provider who will diagnose her as she desires.  Her Instagram contains numerous pictures of her actively engaged in bipedal locomotion with groups of her friends to dispel any potential claims of her being in a wheelchair.




Well, that's... my goodness.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on September 10, 2020, 07:35:07 PM
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?
By Leona maple sensitivity reader, queer South Asian woman, and, an intersectional feminist!

"Do you truly want your game to have racism/ableism/-ism in it? While it%u2019s not strictly necessary, I have absolutely been approached by people working on their home games to make sure they%u2019re not contributing to harmful tropes while they play. No project is too small or too big for a sensitivity reader."

https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do (https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do)


They work in exactly the same way that Soviet Political Commissars worked.

Or how Mafia Protection Money works.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: LiferGamer on September 11, 2020, 11:59:57 AM
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?
By Leona maple sensitivity reader, queer South Asian woman, and, an intersectional feminist!

"Do you truly want your game to have racism/ableism/-ism in it? While it%u2019s not strictly necessary, I have absolutely been approached by people working on their home games to make sure they%u2019re not contributing to harmful tropes while they play. No project is too small or too big for a sensitivity reader."

https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do (https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do)


They work in exactly the same way that Soviet Political Commissars worked.

Or how Mafia Protection Money works.


At least when you pay protection money, they don't hang around and crow about it.
Title: Re: +1 Combat Wheelchair of "Representation"
Post by: RPGPundit on September 16, 2020, 01:20:38 AM
What Does a TTRPG Sensitivity Reader Do?
By Leona maple sensitivity reader, queer South Asian woman, and, an intersectional feminist!

"Do you truly want your game to have racism/ableism/-ism in it? While it%u2019s not strictly necessary, I have absolutely been approached by people working on their home games to make sure they%u2019re not contributing to harmful tropes while they play. No project is too small or too big for a sensitivity reader."

https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do (https://blog.roll20.net/post/627556922437042176/what-does-a-ttrpg-sensitivity-reader-do)


They work in exactly the same way that Soviet Political Commissars worked.

Or how Mafia Protection Money works.


At least when you pay protection money, they don't hang around and crow about it.



Touche!