TheRPGSite

Apparently the fantasy wheelchair canard is making the rounds again. Got brought up in this video by a guy I like that doesn't talk about TTRPGs that much, The Dragons Treasure - Let's Talk About Fantasy Wheelchairs. This One is Personal. (https://youtu.be/1OZRSZq0RSs)

He pretty much hits all the basics, but there's hardly anything new to say on the topic. He's got a good personal story though. Definitely demonstrates, to me at least, that those whining about dungeons not being ADA compliant don't care about disabled people as anything other than tokens.

As for me, I think the whole conversation is pointless, cause the people arguing for the fantasy wheelchair garbage don't actually care about fantasy wheelchairs or anything else about TTRPGs in the first place. They just want control over the hobby and those playing, and are just trying to find ways of coercing people to bend the knee to them. It's good to point out that their arguments are bad, but it matters more to point out that their arguments aren't about what they say they're about.

I have played with people on wheelchairs.

That player never, ever played a character that couldn't walk. Not once.

I understand its not really a sample size, but I've seen the same with other similar cases. People that are fat never play an obese character. People that are shy want to play an outgoing silver tongue type. People that are meek and short want to play a big and strong warrior.

And again, none of those experiences are an accurate sample size. But, on my personal experience, people that have a limitation never play a character with said limitation. That is, the only players that I've seen wanting to play, say, a blind character are not blind themselves.

These people who can only think in terms of handicapped people=wheelchair are cancers on our society.  They lack imagination and creative insight.

Quote from: Cipher on March 19, 2024, 02:30:26 PM
I have played with people on wheelchairs.

That player never, ever played a character that couldn't walk. Not once.

I understand its not really a sample size, but I've seen the same with other similar cases. People that are fat never play an obese character. People that are shy want to play an outgoing silver tongue type. People that are meek and short want to play a big and strong warrior.

And again, none of those experiences are an accurate sample size. But, on my personal experience, people that have a limitation never play a character with said limitation. That is, the only players that I've seen wanting to play, say, a blind character are not blind themselves.

I can certainly imagine that. That's the kind of thing that proves to me that hte people complaining about all this don't actually care about disabled people.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 19, 2024, 03:27:43 PM
I can certainly imagine that. That's the kind of thing that proves to me that hte people complaining about all this don't actually care about disabled people.

They care about using people as props, that's about it.

Stupidity at its worse.  None of the dungeons I have ever run are wheelchair accessible and I am sure most are not. 

I will not allow that stupidity (Wheelchair characters) in games I run.  Period.

Quote from: Brad on March 19, 2024, 03:35:14 PM

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 19, 2024, 03:27:43 PM
I can certainly imagine that. That's the kind of thing that proves to me that hte people complaining about all this don't actually care about disabled people.

They care about using people as props, that's about it.

Yep it's weaponized compassion.

I've played with disabled players and I've had disabled characters (fighter was steamrolled by an Ent like monster in a system that has nasty crit tables and lost use of his legs). In each case we gamed like normal adults who know the difference between fiction and reality, no virtues were signaled, and we somehow managed to avoid becoming fascists.

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 19, 2024, 04:21:04 PM
In each case we gamed like normal adults who know the difference between fiction and reality, no virtues were signaled, and we somehow managed to avoid becoming fascists.

Inconceivable

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 19, 2024, 04:21:04 PM
I've played with disabled players and I've had disabled characters (fighter was steamrolled by an Ent like monster in a system that has nasty crit tables and lost use of his legs). In each case we gamed like normal adults who know the difference between fiction and reality, no virtues were signaled, and we somehow managed to avoid becoming fascists.

I'm not clear what constitutes fascism in this context. Like you, rystrami, I've had disabled players and disabled characters. Having played a lot of GURPS and HERO System, it's been not uncommon for there to be disabilities in my games - usually minor. I had a wheelchair-using character in a superhero game who could overcome that with his superpowers, but never had any wheelchair users in medieval fantasy.

I think it should be up to the personal choice of the group. I don't think wheelchair-using characters should be forced into anyone's game -- but conversely, if a group wants to have a game with a wheelchair-using character, that's their choice.

I'm sorry to hear about the broken arm and subsequent health issues that the video creator (The Dragon's Treasure) talked about, and he's welcome to game however he wants -- but he doesn't get to dictate to anyone else how they play their games. If some group has fun with a wheelchair-using character, that's their choice - and his being offended doesn't mean he can tell them how to play.

Quote from: Cipher on March 19, 2024, 02:30:26 PM
I have played with people on wheelchairs.

That player never, ever played a character that couldn't walk. Not once.

I understand its not really a sample size, but I've seen the same with other similar cases. People that are fat never play an obese character. People that are shy want to play an outgoing silver tongue type. People that are meek and short want to play a big and strong warrior.

I've seen it go either way, partly based on personality and partly based on what the game supports. I've seen a fair number of nerdy, weak players who want to play a nerdy, weak wizard rather than a beefy fighter. I think there being an supported option for a powerful nerdy, weak wizard is appealing to those players. If the game has no magic or equivalent, the players won't choose such a character.

Similarly, I've often seen shy players who want to play more the strong, silent actiony types rather than a bard or similar.

That said, I've also seen it go the other way and had weak players who wanted to play beefy fighters and similar.

Don't worry folks, the white saviors of the coast will remove regenerate from the game &/or state it specifically can't make the blind see, fix dumbness, muteness and especially wheelchair bound pcs.  Wish as well won't work on that.  If you get reincarnated you are still deaf, dumb, blind, crippled whatever.

The whole concept in a game with magical healing and wish is pointless.  Its for pointless virtue signaling, to complain and to get a deal to write a module and get some residuals.  I've been done with white saviors of the coast for a while now, so no skin of my teeth.  I'm waiting for WotC to fire another 20% of its staff and I'm doing dark rituals at the druid circle wishing for WotC's demise.

My god the cost of a magical artifact for a flying chair would be astronomical compared to a simple heal or regenerate spell.  A lot of us like to run a fantasy world that makes sense but this makes no sense.

This insanity cropped back up on Twitter a few days ago and the stupidity never got less. What is the point of having magical healing spells in 1E Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (for example) if they're incapable of correcting disability? Way too many morons, who don't know the rules, think it requires the spell Regenerate to heal a PC whose had their back broken, when all it does is either reattach or regrow a severed limb. If you're in a wheelchair cause you got your legs lopped off, okay. But otherwise, every single damn condition can be cured by either a 1st lvl Paladin/5th lvl Cleric/3rd lvl Druid (Cure Disease), 1st lvl Paladin/1st lvl Cleric/2nd lvl Druid (Lay on Hands/Cure Light Wounds), 3rd lvl Druid/5th lvl Cleric (Cure Disease) 3rd lvl Druid/7th lvl Cleric (Neutralize Poison), 5th lvl Cleric/6th lvl Druid/5th lvl Mage/8th lvl Illusionist (Dispel Magic), or a 5th lvl Cleric/7th lvl Mage (Remove Curse). 

Quote from: GhostNinja on March 19, 2024, 03:55:44 PM
Stupidity at its worse.  None of the dungeons I have ever run are wheelchair accessible and I am sure most are not. 

Most dungeons aren't Adventurer accessible. That's kinda the point.

QuoteI will not allow that stupidity (Wheelchair characters) in games I run.  Period.

Characters in wheelchairs. I can kinda sorta understand.

(https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/thumb/8/89/WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg/200px-WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg)

But considering the culture war and wokie ideolgy driving the current push for "differently abled" characters, I'd probably just say "Fuck off" as well. At least I'd consider it a red flag that the player has a disruptive agenda inserted into their role playing.

Quote from: jhkim on March 19, 2024, 04:57:24 PM
I think it should be up to the personal choice of the group. I don't think wheelchair-using characters should be forced into anyone's game -- but conversely, if a group wants to have a game with a wheelchair-using character, that's their choice.

I'm sorry to hear about the broken arm and subsequent health issues that the video creator (The Dragon's Treasure) talked about, and he's welcome to game however he wants -- but he doesn't get to dictate to anyone else how they play their games. If some group has fun with a wheelchair-using character, that's their choice - and his being offended doesn't mean he can tell them how to play.

What the Teaman is arguing against is exactly that people are demanding that people include things in their games. He's fed up with people that are making such demands, and with those that, in his opinion, spinelessly accommodate them to keep the peace.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 19, 2024, 05:54:00 PM
This insanity cropped back up on Twitter a few days ago and the stupidity never got less. What is the point of having magical healing spells in 1E Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (for example) if they're incapable of correcting disability? Way too many morons, who don't know the rules, think it requires the spell Regenerate to heal a PC whose had their back broken, when all it does is either reattach or regrow a severed limb. If you're in a wheelchair cause you got your legs lopped off, okay. But otherwise, every single damn condition can be cured by either a 1st lvl Paladin/5th lvl Cleric/3rd lvl Druid (Cure Disease), 1st lvl Paladin/1st lvl Cleric/2nd lvl Druid (Lay on Hands/Cure Light Wounds), 3rd lvl Druid/5th lvl Cleric (Cure Disease) 3rd lvl Druid/7th lvl Cleric (Neutralize Poison), 5th lvl Cleric/6th lvl Druid/5th lvl Mage/8th lvl Illusionist (Dispel Magic), or a 5th lvl Cleric/7th lvl Mage (Remove Curse).

(https://i.imgur.com/M8J5zCf.gif)

Besides, dungeons are generally filled with things that are EVIL. >:(

Why in the fuck would someone whose EVIL, design a dungeon with wheelchair access?  ::)

Unless they trapped the access ramps with pits filled with acid or spikes, then that's some pretty EVIL shit!  :o

Quote from: blackstone on March 19, 2024, 07:03:45 PM
Besides, dungeons are generally filled with things that are EVIL. >:(

Why in the fuck would someone whose EVIL, design a dungeon with wheelchair access?  ::)

Unless they trapped the access ramps with pits filled with acid or spikes, then that's some pretty EVIL shit!  :o

When this nonsense all started, I had a mental image of a goblin tipping over an adventurer in a wheelchair and laughing at him.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 07:31:40 PM
When this nonsense all started, I had a mental image of a goblin tipping over an adventurer in a wheelchair and laughing at him.

That image is right and correct.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 19, 2024, 05:54:00 PM
This insanity cropped back up on Twitter a few days ago and the stupidity never got less. What is the point of having magical healing spells in 1E Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (for example) if they're incapable of correcting disability? Way too many morons, who don't know the rules, think it requires the spell Regenerate to heal a PC whose had their back broken, when all it does is either reattach or regrow a severed limb. If you're in a wheelchair cause you got your legs lopped off, okay. But otherwise, every single damn condition can be cured by either a 1st lvl Paladin/5th lvl Cleric/3rd lvl Druid (Cure Disease), 1st lvl Paladin/1st lvl Cleric/2nd lvl Druid (Lay on Hands/Cure Light Wounds), 3rd lvl Druid/5th lvl Cleric (Cure Disease) 3rd lvl Druid/7th lvl Cleric (Neutralize Poison), 5th lvl Cleric/6th lvl Druid/5th lvl Mage/8th lvl Illusionist (Dispel Magic), or a 5th lvl Cleric/7th lvl Mage (Remove Curse).

In AD&D1E, there are specific other spells like "Cure Blindness" (to cure blindness) and "Restoration" (to cure level drain) to cure specific conditions. Are you saying that those spells are useless or redundant?

To the specific question of a severed spinal cord -- it seems to me an open DM's call whether it's equivalent to a severed limb (requiring _Regenerate_), an infectious disease (requiring _Cure Disease_) or simply a wound (requiring _Cure Light Wounds_ or just rest to heal). If an NPC got his spinal cord severed, I think it would be reasonable to say it's equivalent to a severed limb, since it isn't something that can grow back naturally.

In 1E, Cure Disease explicitly says that it only cures most diseases. It's not clear that it could, say, cure cancer or a genetic disease like Down's Syndrome.

Greetings!

I love having ctippled, diseased, and insane characters in the game. In Thandor, the unwashed masses that sweat and cry, and wallow in the filthy city streets, covered in shit, and living in cesspools, are everywhere. Insane Asylums are full of poor, diseased, oppressed people that are routinely plundered and abused in horrific ways, constantly. Being experimented on, being bred, and used by the depraved and greedy elites. I have Leper Colonies where diseased, crippled scum gibber and wallow together in endless misery and hopelessness. This is also where many crippled people stuck in wheelchairs end up, in one of these environments. usually, on the roadside, holding a bucket and begging passing citizens for alms. I keep it harsh, brutal, and real. The world doesn't give a fuck about pathetic, hopeless crippled people.

Of course, families that are wealthier and better off, well, they of course are compassionate, and provide crippled relatives stuck in wheelchairs with a fairly comfortable and normal life. So, yes, for a few, there is some hope of having a relatively pleasant and normal life.

That doesn't mean they are Navy Seals or Marines, or Knights crawling through dungeons. Get real. Any Player insisting on that I would fucking laugh at ruthlessly. Then, probably kick them promptly from the table. *Laughing*

Be harsh, and ruthless with these morons. Don't give them an inch. NO. The answer is NO, and get the fuck out, pussy. ;D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Love wheelchairs? Hate wheelchairs? It's all fiction anyway. Get over it.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM

Characters in wheelchairs. I can kinda sorta understand.

(https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/thumb/8/89/WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg/200px-WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg)

But considering the culture war and wokie ideolgy driving the current push for "differently abled" characters, I'd probably just say "Fuck off" as well. At least I'd consider it a red flag that the player has a disruptive agenda inserted into their role playing.

Its a lack of imagination or thought. Its just fake diversity for fake diversity's sake.

Rare you ever see characters with a disability shown to actually be a disability. Extreme Ghostbusters had Garrett who was also wheelchair bound and
occasionally got knocked out of it and had to either crawl to it and get back in or fight from the ground. And there were places he just could not get to. Still my go-to for doing a handicapped adventurer right.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/ghostbusters/images/9/9d/RadioactiveHazardSuitEGB22.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200109045401 (https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/ghostbusters/images/9/9d/RadioactiveHazardSuitEGB22.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200109045401)

I just want to play the modules:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJEEGmja4AAJgmc?format=jpg&name=medium)

Quote from: Cipher on March 19, 2024, 02:30:26 PM
I have played with people on wheelchairs.

That player never, ever played a character that couldn't walk. Not once.

I understand its not really a sample size, but I've seen the same with other similar cases. People that are fat never play an obese character. People that are shy want to play an outgoing silver tongue type. People that are meek and short want to play a big and strong warrior.

And again, none of those experiences are an accurate sample size. But, on my personal experience, people that have a limitation never play a character with said limitation. That is, the only players that I've seen wanting to play, say, a blind character are not blind themselves.

I have seen a tall, obese player jump at the chance to play an ogre in WFRP and another obese player that played a Hutt in Star Wars. Again, small sample size, but it does happen.

Summing up every forum thread reply ever:

"Well, when you consider that the average height of women in the US is 5'4", it does make sense that..."

"Aktually, my sister is 5'8", and she says..."
"I'm 5'10 woman, and for me..."
"My 5' mom could easily..."

The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

Quote from: Jaeger on March 19, 2024, 10:12:58 PM
I just want to play the modules:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GJEEGmja4AAJgmc?format=jpg&name=medium)

Greetings!

*LAUGHING*!!! Awesome visual, Jaeger!

I roared in laughter at that, and lit up a good cigar in joy. So fucking funny, my friend!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 20, 2024, 02:29:49 AM
The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

That isn't what they want. They don't want something that makes sense, they're demanding "representation" which means modern style wheelchairs and ADA compliant dungeons.

Quote from: blackstone on March 19, 2024, 07:03:45 PM
Besides, dungeons are generally filled with things that are EVIL. >:(

Why in the fuck would someone whose EVIL, design a dungeon with wheelchair access?  ::)

Unless they trapped the access ramps with pits filled with acid or spikes, then that's some pretty EVIL shit!  :o

My 5E group actually ran through that moronic adventure created for a 'wheelchair accessible dungeon' (Candlekeep Mysteries, IIRC) and it was just as retarded as you would imagine. One of our players, a woke twat who played the exact same grumpy/bitchy character every single time, was friends on Twitter with the writer. The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales on March 19, 2024, 09:32:48 PM
Love wheelchairs? Hate wheelchairs? It's all fiction anyway. Get over it.

Actually, it's a GAME, and it makes no sense for some of those GAMES. Wheelchair-bound fucking mastermind telepath? Yep. Wheelchair-bound Conan-esque warrior? Dumb as royal fuck. Hell, wheelchair-bound super wizard where regenerative magic exists is even dumber as fuck for obvious reasons.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM

Quote from: blackstone on March 19, 2024, 07:03:45 PM
Besides, dungeons are generally filled with things that are EVIL. >:(

Why in the fuck would someone whose EVIL, design a dungeon with wheelchair access?  ::)

Unless they trapped the access ramps with pits filled with acid or spikes, then that's some pretty EVIL shit!  :o

My 5E group actually ran through that moronic adventure created for a 'wheelchair accessible dungeon' (Candlekeep Mysteries, IIRC) and it was just as retarded as you would imagine. One of our players, a woke twat who played the exact same grumpy/bitchy character every single time, was friends on Twitter with the writer. The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

Her disability is she's a cunt.  For your online group, go to Fantasy Grounds, it's filled to the brim with wall to wall normies.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM
Most dungeons aren't Adventurer accessible. That's kinda the point.

Very true

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM
Characters in wheelchairs. I can kinda sorta understand.

(https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/thumb/8/89/WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg/200px-WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg)

But considering the culture war and wokie ideolgy driving the current push for "differently abled" characters, I'd probably just say "Fuck off" as well. At least I'd consider it a red flag that the player has a disruptive agenda inserted into their role playing.

Yeo that would is my feeling as well.  I would wonder why a player would think making a disabled character would want to do so, and why would someone who is disabled want to play a disabled person in a game.  Games are meant to be escapism and being someone you could never be.

Quote from: GhostNinja on March 20, 2024, 10:07:15 AM
Yeo that would is my feeling as well.  I would wonder why a player would think making a disabled character would want to do so, and why would someone who is disabled want to play a disabled person in a game.  Games are meant to be escapism and being someone you could never be.

It's called purposefully being a dick. Inject asinine stuff into a situation, then cry foul whenever people call you out on the stupidity. We used to just call these morons drama queens and assholes; now excluding them is "gatekeeping" and we need to ensure their "triggers" are respected. When your entire life revolves around being a victim, escapism is impossible to grasp.

Quote from: GhostNinja on March 20, 2024, 10:07:15 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM
Most dungeons aren't Adventurer accessible. That's kinda the point.

Very true

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM
Characters in wheelchairs. I can kinda sorta understand.

(https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/thumb/8/89/WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg/200px-WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg)

But considering the culture war and wokie ideolgy driving the current push for "differently abled" characters, I'd probably just say "Fuck off" as well. At least I'd consider it a red flag that the player has a disruptive agenda inserted into their role playing.

Yeo that would is my feeling as well.  I would wonder why a player would think making a disabled character would want to do so, and why would someone who is disabled want to play a disabled person in a game.  Games are meant to be escapism and being someone you could never be.

...and that right there in bold is the problem. These asshats think they're playing themselves in an FRPG. This is incorrect for the most part. Unless the DM says "OK, you'll be playing as yourselves in this setting.", you are playing as someone else. So these woke jackasses take FRPGs as playing themselves in the setting.

You know who does that? narcissists...and certain shitty actors.

A trivia note on this point: Wheelchair-bound characters in AD&D go back at least to 1986, in I10 Ravenloft II: The House on Gryphon Hill. Lord Byron Weathermay is a retired adventurer "confined to a wheelchair, the result of an accident hunting boar years ago." He still hunts from a special saddle, and can fight, but can't walk and "while he is confined to his wheelchair he suffers a penalty of 2 vs. his AC."

Of course, I10 has a tone that's more Hammer Horror/Dark Shadows than traditional D&D, and the only cleric in Mordentshire is only 6th level.

Quote from: Brad on March 20, 2024, 10:18:06 AM
It's called purposefully being a dick. Inject asinine stuff into a situation, then cry foul whenever people call you out on the stupidity. We used to just call these morons drama queens and assholes; now excluding them is "gatekeeping" and we need to ensure their "triggers" are respected. When your entire life revolves around being a victim, escapism is impossible to grasp.

Yep.  Call me a gatekeeper all you want, asshats like this will never be welcome in my games.  I have no problem keeping my games full and if one person drops or gets kicked, they are replaced in 24 hours or less.

Of course as I get further away from official D&D, the less I have to deal with this crap.

Quote from: blackstone on March 20, 2024, 10:23:50 AM
...and that right there in bold is the problem. These asshats think they're playing themselves in an FRPG. This is incorrect for the most part. Unless the DM says "OK, you'll be playing as yourselves in this setting.", you are playing as someone else. So these woke jackasses take FRPGs as playing themselves in the setting.

You know who does that? narcissists...and certain shitty actors.

You are right.  They would probably be happier playing some storygame and not an actual role playing game because that's not what they are doing.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 20, 2024, 11:13:15 AMOf course, I10 has a tone that's more Hammer Horror/Dark Shadows than traditional D&D, and the only cleric in Mordentshire is only 6th level.

Which shows you the people writing weren't paying attention to the rules whatsoever. That Cleric would be able to heal any such injury. Hell, Donavich in Barovia, who is only a 2nd Lvl Cleric, would have been able to heal that.

My dungeons with the vending machines should have some wheel chairs at the door for accessibility purposes, and a ramp with a pit trap on the way in.  The way to survive is taking the stairs.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 01:07:36 PM

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 20, 2024, 11:13:15 AMOf course, I10 has a tone that's more Hammer Horror/Dark Shadows than traditional D&D, and the only cleric in Mordentshire is only 6th level.

Which shows you the people writing weren't paying attention to the rules whatsoever. That Cleric would be able to heal any such injury. Hell, Donavich in Barovia, who is only a 2nd Lvl Cleric, would have been able to heal that.

  Let's be honest--D&D has never been good with specific injuries and their healing. You could make an argument that a 1st-level cleric could heal an injury that leaves someone paralyzed, or that it would take a 14th-level cleric (regenerate), and multiple points inbetween.

Castle Mangle-Mutilateus is home to the eccentric Marquis de Trapeze. The Marquis is a retired acrobat who, years ago, earned his landed title by saving the king from a would-be fatal fall. The Marquis is now a recluse who hates everyone. He spends his time creating elaborate traps and capturing fiendish monsters for the castle. The 54-room compound is designed to cripple, but not kill, nosey adventurers. By the time the party confronts the Marquis, they will be lucky if they can still walk or even move their shattered limbs. In the final secret treasure room, the party will find a collection of assistive devices, such as wheelchairs, as well as a long ramp leading to the safety of a nearby forest.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 20, 2024, 02:35:18 PMYou could make an argument that a 1st-level cleric could heal an injury that leaves someone paralyzed, or that it would take a 14th-level cleric (regenerate), and multiple points inbetween.

The only way to make that argument is if the DM is intentionally being an asshole and intentionally misconstruing the spells. Regenerate is for missing limbs, like if you got hit with a Sword of Sharpness or what have you. Every other form of paralyzation is covered by a host of spells WELL before needing to use a 7th level Cleric spell (let alone something like Illusionist's Alter Reality or Mage's Limited Wish or Wish). Shit, you could do it with a Polymorph Other spell if you had to do so. Otherwise, how do you explain spells like Raise Dead existing at only 5th lvl casting (requiring a 9th lvl Cleric)? They can bring your ass back from the great beyond, but fuck no, they can't heal your paralysis?

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 20, 2024, 04:54:37 PM
Castle Mangle-Mutilateus is home to the eccentric Marquis de Trapeze. The Marquis is a retired acrobat who, years ago, earned his landed title by saving the king from a would-be fatal fall. The Marquis is now a recluse who hates everyone. He spends his time creating elaborate traps and capturing fiendish monsters for the castle. The 54-room compound is designed to cripple, but not kill, nosey adventurers. By the time the party confronts the Marquis, they will be lucky if they can still walk or even move their shattered limbs. In the final secret treasure room, the party will find a collection of assistive devices, such as wheelchairs, as well as a long ramp leading to the safety of a nearby forest.

Pretty sure this is one of those Grimtooth's Traps things. I mean, you can justify ANYTHING if you have a good reason. The wheelchair crap in D&D per WotC and other fucking morons has zero justification other than pandering.

Rolemaster has had crippled player characters and spells to heal specific injuries pretty much forever.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 20, 2024, 09:50:57 AM
Her disability is she's a cunt.

BTW they're now a trans man.

...

Because of course they are.

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 20, 2024, 02:29:49 AM
The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

That isnt the problem.

Its how the woke push it to the point they are trolling handicapped people.

Quote from: Brad on March 20, 2024, 06:49:48 PM
Pretty sure this is one of those Grimtooth's Traps things. I mean, you can justify ANYTHING if you have a good reason. The wheelchair crap in D&D per WotC and other fucking morons has zero justification other than pandering.

It is not even pandering at this point. Its devolved into trolling for a few extra clicks and outrage marketing by pissing off handicapped people.

Quote from: Omega on March 21, 2024, 12:56:43 AM

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 20, 2024, 02:29:49 AM
The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

That isnt the problem.

Its how the woke push it to the point they are trolling handicapped people.

I wasn't aware that actual handicapped people were also ticked off by this. The Woke can never be Woke enough to satisfy all their little diverse micro-communities they pander to.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 21, 2024, 12:17:39 AM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 20, 2024, 09:50:57 AM
Her disability is she's a cunt.

BTW they're now a trans man.
...
Because of course they are.

Source? We're talking about Jennifer Kretchmer, right? I don't see anything to suggest that she identifies as a man. She lists "she/they" as pronouns in her profile.

https://linktr.ee/dreamwisp

I've read her adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries, "The Canopic Being". The weird thing to me over the controversy is that it clearly isn't wheelchair accessible. The entrance to the dungeon is down a ladder. Inside the tomb, there are ramps - but that's just like there are ramps in the real-world Egyptian tombs that it's based on. There's no hints of wheelchairs or anything else in the adventure. I liked the mystery side of the adventure, but I'm not sure of the combat balance.

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 21, 2024, 01:51:50 AM

Quote from: Omega on March 21, 2024, 12:56:43 AM

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 20, 2024, 02:29:49 AM
The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

That isnt the problem.

Its how the woke push it to the point they are trolling handicapped people.

I wasn't aware that actual handicapped people were also ticked off by this. The Woke can never be Woke enough to satisfy all their little diverse micro-communities they pander to.

Greetings!

Yeah, it was an epic shitstorm when the fucking Liberal Woketards started pushing and promoting homosexuality, trans BS, anal sex, cock-sucking, to children in grade school, and in Deerborn Michigan, the huge MUSLIM population there went berserk. Instantly, the Democratic Party became shit, and Woke policies came under blistering attack.

Muslims--young men, young women, often encouraged by their mothers standing nearby--overtook an entire school district hall, chanting and screaming. The Muslims took to the podiums and told the school teachers and administrators exactly what was acceptable, and what was not.

The Woke media's head exploded. ;D

It is sad that handicapped gamers do not have the numbers or ferocity to resist the Woke Marxists like the Muslims have done.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 02:24:32 AM

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 21, 2024, 12:17:39 AM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on March 20, 2024, 09:50:57 AM
Her disability is she's a cunt.

BTW they're now a trans man.
...
Because of course they are.

Source? We're talking about Jennifer Kretchmer, right? I don't see anything to suggest that she identifies as a man. She lists "she/they" as pronouns in her profile.

https://linktr.ee/dreamwisp

I've read her adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries, "The Canopic Being". The weird thing to me over the controversy is that it clearly isn't wheelchair accessible. The entrance to the dungeon is down a ladder. Inside the tomb, there are ramps - but that's just like there are ramps in the real-world Egyptian tombs that it's based on. There's no hints of wheelchairs or anything else in the adventure. I liked the mystery side of the adventure, but I'm not sure of the combat balance.

Greetings!

Jhkim, why do you always backpeddle and dance about this? Did you not read the article produced by WOTC--I forgot the name of it, but WOTC did it--where they talked about the importance of including combat wheelchairs. Come on, man. I didn't make this up, and neither did Pundit. Other people--members here, as well, talked about Wheelchair accessible dungeons and combat wheelchairs. OTHER PEOPLE, Jhkim. Clownfish, I think, and others too, like LEGION OF MYTH.

None of them made this BS up, Jhkim.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

For me, the oddest argument in all of this is that the combat wheelchairs would be relevant because there would be people who would not want to be cured even if there was magical available to cure them easily.  Their rationale for this usually amounts to vague gassing on identity and calling people ableist.  I don't believe this for a single fucking second.  Even if they could walk again or regain their eyesight by having someone wave a holy symbol at them and chant for a few seconds, they would choose to remain as they are?  Bullshit.  No one believes that.

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 21, 2024, 01:51:50 AMThe Woke can never be Woke enough to satisfy all their little diverse micro-communities they pander to.

That's not a bug, its a feature. And it always has been and always will be with those types.

My issue is not the player wanting to use the wheelchair. It's more that they want all the positives and advantages without none of the negatives or disadvantages.


If any DMs implements the second then your ( insert word)ist or gatekeeping them from the hobby.

By all means take a wheelchair your getting the base model. None of that 5 gp BS from Paizo that allows one to suffer no negatives. Don't expect them enemies not to target the characters nor demand the players lug one up the stairs. Or expect any and all surfaces to code.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 21, 2024, 03:06:18 AM
For me, the oddest argument in all of this is that the combat wheelchairs would be relevant because there would be people who would not want to be cured even if there was magical available to cure them easily.  Their rationale for this usually amounts to vague gassing on identity and calling people ableist.  I don't believe this for a single fucking second.  Even if they could walk again or regain their eyesight by having someone wave a holy symbol at them and chant for a few seconds, they would choose to remain as they are?  Bullshit.  No one believes that.

Spent on summary imo

As someone who wears glasses being told I would not want to be cured is incredibly insulting. Tell me you suffer no disability without telling me because ifor every one or two paralyzed or blind characters who would refuse to be cured. The rest would be.

Quote from: SHARK on March 21, 2024, 02:32:27 AM

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 02:24:32 AM
Source? We're talking about Jennifer Kretchmer, right? I don't see anything to suggest that she identifies as a man. She lists "she/they" as pronouns in her profile.

https://linktr.ee/dreamwisp

I've read her adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries, "The Canopic Being". The weird thing to me over the controversy is that it clearly isn't wheelchair accessible. The entrance to the dungeon is down a ladder. Inside the tomb, there are ramps - but that's just like there are ramps in the real-world Egyptian tombs that it's based on. There's no hints of wheelchairs or anything else in the adventure. I liked the mystery side of the adventure, but I'm not sure of the combat balance.

Jhkim, why do you always backpeddle and dance about this? Did you not read the article produced by WOTC--I forgot the name of it, but WOTC did it--where they talked about the importance of including combat wheelchairs. Come on, man. I didn't make this up, and neither did Pundit. Other people--members here, as well, talked about Wheelchair accessible dungeons and combat wheelchairs. OTHER PEOPLE, Jhkim.

I'm not the one who is fucking backpedaling. I remember very specifically from three years ago when this topic came up. Here was the claim:

Quote from: RPGPundit on September 03, 2021, 04:35:00 PM

Quote from: jhkim on September 03, 2021, 10:47:20 AM
If Thompson got her original combat wheelchair added to official D&D, then yes, I would be wrong. Can you give a link or reference that the original combat wheelchair was added to official D&D?

The wheelchair is in Candlekeep, and EVERY dungeon for official D&D from Candlekeep onwards has been wheelchair-accessible. Also, every D&D product from candlekeep onward has featured the wheelchair in art.

Source: https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/the-chronic-fatigue-barbarian-is-a-real-not-parody-new-dd-subclass/msg1186109/#msg1186109

This was false. There were no wheelchairs of any kind in Candlekeep Mysteries, and the dungeons were not wheelchair-accessible -- not even "The Canopic Being".

I have never claimed that no one in the world has ever talked about combat wheelchairs. I agree that Sara Thompson posted her homebrew rules for the combat wheelchair, and it was reported on in Polygon. And there have been a handful of D&D characters in wheelchairs - like Lord Byron Weathermay back in 1986 as Armchair Gamer noted.

But some of the claims made have been flatly false. After checking on the claims about Candlekeep Mysteries, I am wary about what is being said, and I'd like to see sources for what people are saying.

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 02:24:32 AM
We're talking about Jennifer Kretchmer, right?

No.

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 01:11:00 PM
I agree that Sara Thompson posted her homebrew rules for the combat wheelchair,

I think you mean Mark Thompson.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 21, 2024, 05:23:32 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 02:24:32 AM
We're talking about Jennifer Kretchmer, right?

No.

OK, I think you mixed up the references here. In post #27, Insane Nerd Ramblings talked about the author of the Candlekeep Mysteries scenario -- which is Jennifer Kretchmer. Here's the post:

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
My 5E group actually ran through that moronic adventure created for a 'wheelchair accessible dungeon' (Candlekeep Mysteries, IIRC) and it was just as retarded as you would imagine. One of our players, a woke twat who played the exact same grumpy/bitchy character every single time, was friends on Twitter with the writer. The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

In reply #47, you replied to this saying that the author was a trans man. But you were talking about a different person than the post you replied to.

Kretchmer is the designer of the scenario "The Canopic Being" in Candlekeep Mysteries, published by WotC. There are no wheelchairs in the scenario. The dungeon does have ramps like real-life Egyptian tombs do, and was evidently inspired by the author's wheelchair use, but as published it is entered via a ladder so it isn't wheelchair accessible.

Thompson is the designer of the self-published homebrew "Combat Wheelchair". As far as I can tell, Thompson has never written for WotC.

Honestly, I think the argument that people that are disabled such that they require a wheelchair would be easily healed is a weak one. Primarily because it assumes that we're talking about a relatively high magic setting, to be fair most of this discourse is centered around 5e which is basically a superhero setting, but leaves out cases where the setting will be much lower magic. If you'rre speaking of a lower magic setting, such as those found in Conan etc, then the "3rd level cleric spell performed in a curch at cost" argument loses its power completely.

Rather, I prefer the argument is that dungeoneering and other forms of adventuring require a certain level of skills to be attempted, and being wheelchair bound is going to either greatly hamper or even preclude much of that, and handwaving those challenges such people would face does nothing but tokenize them. Requiring a wheelchair is a disability, and to demand the whole world to bend over backwards to accomodate it is an absolute disservice.

This will vary game by game too, a Call of Cthulhu game taking place entirely within Miskatonic University is going to be much more accesible to a wheelchair bound character than an expedition Beyond the Mountiains of Madness. Players should create characters suitable to the game they're playing, and demanding that a gamemaster change the game to suit your particular character idea is unacceptable.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 21, 2024, 06:08:43 PMHonestly, I think the argument that people that are disabled such that they require a wheelchair would be easily healed is a weak one. Primarily because it assumes that we're talking about a relatively high magic setting, to be fair most of this discourse is centered around 5e which is basically a superhero setting, but leaves out cases where the setting will be much lower magic. If you'rre speaking of a lower magic setting, such as those found in Conan etc, then the "3rd level cleric spell performed in a curch at cost" argument loses its power completely.

We have been talking about Dungeons & Dragons and don't fucking pretend we haven't. So take your Goalpost Move and Motte & Bailey and cram it.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 21, 2024, 06:20:30 PM
We have been talking about Dungeons & Dragons and don't fucking pretend we haven't. So take your Goalpost Move and Motte & Bailey and cram it.

Like I said, the discourse is centered around 5e, and the power level of the setting means that that argument has power. I never made that argument because I don't care about 5e. I made a stronger argument, which applies not only in the 5e case, but to other settings as well. I'm not moving goal posts, and I'm not disagreeing with you. Calm down.

In a world with animated suits of armor, wheel chairs seem suboptimal to me.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 21, 2024, 06:32:34 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 21, 2024, 06:20:30 PM
We have been talking about Dungeons & Dragons and don't fucking pretend we haven't. So take your Goalpost Move and Motte & Bailey and cram it.

Like I said, the discourse is centered around 5e, and the power level of the setting means that that argument has power. I never made that argument because I don't care about 5e. I made a stronger argument, which applies not only in the 5e case, but to other settings as well. I'm not moving goal posts, and I'm not disagreeing with you. Calm down.

Greetings!

Yes, Zenoguy3, you are right. In the last thread we had here about the wheelchair BS, I made precisely the same argument. Magic makes the wheelchair argument stupid as fuck. EVEN MORE SO, just common sense physics and reality makes the wheelchair argument stupid and laughably pathetic. Adventurers doing Special Operations like missions absolutely precludes crippled morons in wheelchairs. Climbing ropes, sliding through tunnel drops, swimming across a river, going up and down stairs--climbing a simple tree--and much more that are the routine norm for adventurers--are simply beyond wheelchair morons. No magic required.

Adventuring is for strong, active, healthy, mobile people. Not crippled morons in wheelchairs.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Omega on March 19, 2024, 10:12:39 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 19, 2024, 06:46:58 PM

Characters in wheelchairs. I can kinda sorta understand.

(https://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/images2/thumb/8/89/WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg/200px-WarDinobots_Chip_warning_Autobots.jpg)

But considering the culture war and wokie ideolgy driving the current push for "differently abled" characters, I'd probably just say "Fuck off" as well. At least I'd consider it a red flag that the player has a disruptive agenda inserted into their role playing.

Its a lack of imagination or thought. Its just fake diversity for fake diversity's sake.

Rare you ever see characters with a disability shown to actually be a disability. Extreme Ghostbusters had Garrett who was also wheelchair bound and
occasionally got knocked out of it and had to either crawl to it and get back in or fight from the ground. And there were places he just could not get to. Still my go-to for doing a handicapped adventurer right.

https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/ghostbusters/images/9/9d/RadioactiveHazardSuitEGB22.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200109045401 (https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/ghostbusters/images/9/9d/RadioactiveHazardSuitEGB22.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20200109045401)

I always saw Chip Chase not as forced diversity (because that wasn't such a big thing in the 80s outside of Affirmative Action), but someone who was limited physically, so he developed his mind to the point that he was a super-computer whiz.  Maybe his character was even Stephen Hawking-inspired.

I did have this one player in a GURPS campaign.  He took his Strength and Health down to sevem and learned levitation to the point where he could maintain it indefinantly so the party dragged him around on a string like a balloon.  He's the guy that got up to the hijinks where he and his familiar shape shifted into elephants to power a bug proofing spell on a swamp based settlement because a guy with a seven health does not want to get exposed to malaria.

Quote from: David Johansen on March 21, 2024, 10:14:08 PMHe's the guy that got up to the hijinks where he and his familiar shape shifted into elephants to power a bug proofing spell on a swamp based settlement because a guy with a seven health does not want to get exposed to malaria.

I bet he's never forgotten that game.

Quote from: David Johansen on March 21, 2024, 10:14:08 PM
I did have this one player in a GURPS campaign.  He took his Strength and Health down to sevem and learned levitation to the point where he could maintain it indefinantly so the party dragged him around on a string like a balloon.  He's the guy that got up to the hijinks where he and his familiar shape shifted into elephants to power a bug proofing spell on a swamp based settlement because a guy with a seven health does not want to get exposed to malaria.

That sounds awesome.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 21, 2024, 03:06:18 AM
For me, the oddest argument in all of this is that the combat wheelchairs would be relevant because there would be people who would not want to be cured even if there was magical available to cure them easily.  Their rationale for this usually amounts to vague gassing on identity and calling people ableist.  I don't believe this for a single fucking second.  Even if they could walk again or regain their eyesight by having someone wave a holy symbol at them and chant for a few seconds, they would choose to remain as they are?  Bullshit.  No one believes that.

You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 05:39:17 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
My 5E group actually ran through that moronic adventure created for a 'wheelchair accessible dungeon' (Candlekeep Mysteries, IIRC) and it was just as retarded as you would imagine. One of our players, a woke twat who played the exact same grumpy/bitchy character every single time, was friends on Twitter with the writer. The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

In reply #47, you replied to this saying that the author was a trans man. But you were talking about a different person than the post you replied to.

Kretchmer is the designer of the scenario "The Canopic Being" in Candlekeep Mysteries, published by WotC. There are no wheelchairs in the scenario. The dungeon does have ramps like real-life Egyptian tombs do, and was evidently inspired by the author's wheelchair use, but as published it is entered via a ladder so it isn't wheelchair accessible.

Thompson is the designer of the self-published homebrew "Combat Wheelchair". As far as I can tell, Thompson has never written for WotC.

Oh.

Well in that case give it time.

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

It's partly because their shared language is fundamental in keeping their community together. And while other disabled folks share common experience, they don't necessarily share a common language.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 22, 2024, 04:15:43 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2024, 05:39:17 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 20, 2024, 04:37:12 AM
My 5E group actually ran through that moronic adventure created for a 'wheelchair accessible dungeon' (Candlekeep Mysteries, IIRC) and it was just as retarded as you would imagine. One of our players, a woke twat who played the exact same grumpy/bitchy character every single time, was friends on Twitter with the writer. The writer, btw, was not wheelchair bound and her 'disability' was self-diagnosed.

In reply #47, you replied to this saying that the author was a trans man. But you were talking about a different person than the post you replied to.

Kretchmer is the designer of the scenario "The Canopic Being" in Candlekeep Mysteries, published by WotC. There are no wheelchairs in the scenario. The dungeon does have ramps like real-life Egyptian tombs do, and was evidently inspired by the author's wheelchair use, but as published it is entered via a ladder so it isn't wheelchair accessible.

Thompson is the designer of the self-published homebrew "Combat Wheelchair". As far as I can tell, Thompson has never written for WotC.

Oh.

Well in that case give it time.

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

It's partly because their shared language is fundamental in keeping their community together. And while other disabled folks share common experience, they don't necessarily share a common language.

That's an interesting insight I hadn't considered. (I had heard , no pun intended, about the deaf activists who oppose being "cured")

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 22, 2024, 04:59:00 PM

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 22, 2024, 04:15:43 PM

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

It's partly because their shared language is fundamental in keeping their community together. And while other disabled folks share common experience, they don't necessarily share a common language.

That's an interesting insight I hadn't considered. (I had heard , no pun intended, about the deaf activists who oppose being "cured")

This was dramatized in "Children of a Lesser God" (1986) - so it's been around for a while as an issue, though I don't know how real the portrayal is. (The book is supposedly based on a true story, but I don't know the real life basis.) A particular controversial issue is deaf parents who want their children to be deaf so that they can talk to their kids natively, rather than having their children learn to speak from strangers.

Quote from: jhkim on March 22, 2024, 07:06:14 PM
This was dramatized in "Children of a Lesser God" (1986) - so it's been around for a while as an issue, though I don't know how real the portrayal is. (The book is supposedly based on a true story, but I don't know the real life basis.) A particular controversial issue is deaf parents who want their children to be deaf so that they can talk to their kids natively, rather than having their children learn to speak from strangers.

Almost every person on Earth can hear, and speaks with their mouth. Parents that want to hold their children back by giving them hurdles to success in life are assholes. Worse, some of that community act like the Amish, not wanting them to join the English.

For every one person out of 10 who wants to remain with their disability (even that number is probably too high imo). The rest of us like me want to be cured.

If benevolent aliens landed and agree to cure blindness, deafness etc. the ones that want to keep their disability would trampled and crushed under the mob rushing to be cured. Most who want to keep it are satisfied with what they have though don't speak for all of us. Or worse White Knighters who have none and speak for people like me.

The whole premise boggles my mind for a fantasy adventure.  I have seen disabilities in other games being desired, but those were all superhero games where compensating powers existed at the start and might even be a back story/motivation for the PC.

How does a peasant even acquire a magic device like that?  None of the other starting characters get free magic items.  Are equipment saves still a thing in 5e?
   

Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 21, 2024, 08:58:19 PM
I always saw Chip Chase not as forced diversity (because that wasn't such a big thing in the 80s outside of Affirmative Action), but someone who was limited physically, so he developed his mind to the point that he was a super-computer whiz.  Maybe his character was even Stephen Hawking-inspired.

I just watched that episode the other day with my kids, actually. 80s cartoons ALWAYS had some kid in a wheelchair with glasses who was some sort of super nerd, usually worked with computers. There was no "forced diversity," it was just shorthand for "hyper-capable teenager who is an inexplicable expert." It's like Daredevil being fucking blind yet one of the most skilled HtH combatants in the Marvel universe...he's blind so he HAS TO BE better at something he probably should suck at.

Also, if Chip was somehow transported to the D&D world and became a magic-user, he'd just get some levitation spell or a magic carpet to fly around on. He's not a fucking dunce so wouldn't have a ludicrously retarded "combat wheelchair".

Quote from: Brad on March 23, 2024, 11:26:46 AM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 21, 2024, 08:58:19 PM
I always saw Chip Chase not as forced diversity (because that wasn't such a big thing in the 80s outside of Affirmative Action), but someone who was limited physically, so he developed his mind to the point that he was a super-computer whiz.  Maybe his character was even Stephen Hawking-inspired.

I just watched that episode the other day with my kids, actually. 80s cartoons ALWAYS had some kid in a wheelchair with glasses who was some sort of super nerd, usually worked with computers. There was no "forced diversity," it was just shorthand for "hyper-capable teenager who is an inexplicable expert." It's like Daredevil being fucking blind yet one of the most skilled HtH combatants in the Marvel universe...he's blind so he HAS TO BE better at something he probably should suck at.

Also, if Chip was somehow transported to the D&D world and became a magic-user, he'd just get some levitation spell or a magic carpet to fly around on. He's not a fucking dunce so wouldn't have a ludicrously retarded "combat wheelchair".

I thought that the Autobots should have made Chip some kind of mecha-suit he could drive around in. Too bad he dissappeared after season 2...

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 23, 2024, 01:54:32 PM

Quote from: Brad on March 23, 2024, 11:26:46 AM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 21, 2024, 08:58:19 PM
I always saw Chip Chase not as forced diversity (because that wasn't such a big thing in the 80s outside of Affirmative Action), but someone who was limited physically, so he developed his mind to the point that he was a super-computer whiz.  Maybe his character was even Stephen Hawking-inspired.

I just watched that episode the other day with my kids, actually. 80s cartoons ALWAYS had some kid in a wheelchair with glasses who was some sort of super nerd, usually worked with computers. There was no "forced diversity," it was just shorthand for "hyper-capable teenager who is an inexplicable expert." It's like Daredevil being fucking blind yet one of the most skilled HtH combatants in the Marvel universe...he's blind so he HAS TO BE better at something he probably should suck at.

Also, if Chip was somehow transported to the D&D world and became a magic-user, he'd just get some levitation spell or a magic carpet to fly around on. He's not a fucking dunce so wouldn't have a ludicrously retarded "combat wheelchair".

I thought that the Autobots should have made Chip some kind of mecha-suit he could drive around in. Too bad he dissappeared after season 2...

If they didn't send Chip one of these by 2005 then they're dicks.

(https://justkillingti.me/wp-content/2017/06/spike-and-bumblebee-transformers-the-movie.jpg)

Quote from: Brad on March 23, 2024, 11:26:46 AM

Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 21, 2024, 08:58:19 PM
I always saw Chip Chase not as forced diversity (because that wasn't such a big thing in the 80s outside of Affirmative Action), but someone who was limited physically, so he developed his mind to the point that he was a super-computer whiz.  Maybe his character was even Stephen Hawking-inspired.

I just watched that episode the other day with my kids, actually. 80s cartoons ALWAYS had some kid in a wheelchair with glasses who was some sort of super nerd, usually worked with computers. There was no "forced diversity," it was just shorthand for "hyper-capable teenager who is an inexplicable expert."

Chip first appears in "Roll For It" (s01e05), but you'll get to see mrore f him, as he appears again in several episodes in season 1 ,and a few s2 eps.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 23, 2024, 01:59:35 PM

I thought that the Autobots should have made Chip some kind of mecha-suit he could drive around in. Too bad he dissappeared after season 2...

If they didn't send Chip one of these by 2005 then they're dicks.

(https://justkillingti.me/wp-content/2017/06/spike-and-bumblebee-transformers-the-movie.jpg)
[/quote]

Chip probably invented the exo-suit that Spike and Daniel use in the Movie (and some s3 episodes, like "Dark Awakening")

Quote from: Brad on March 23, 2024, 11:26:46 AM80s cartoons ALWAYS had some kid in a wheelchair with glasses who was some sort of super nerd, usually worked with computers.

Eh, just to quibble a moment, but not anime that was imported: Starblazers, Voltron, Thundersub and Robotech come to mind. About the only characters that were disabled in those were missing an eye and had some sort of prosthetic, or in the case of someone like Dusty Ayres who had half his body replaced by full cybernetic prosthesis.

I'm not saying there weren't characters that ended up in wheelchairs (or whatever was analogous to them), but they were almost always old people.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on March 23, 2024, 02:03:51 PMChip first appears in "Roll For It"

(https://64.media.tumblr.com/74738b378eaa2db33dfa602d7f9c031c/tumblr_mu1uvn9H7Q1r5gvg1o1_400.gif)

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 22, 2024, 04:15:43 PM
It's partly because their shared language is fundamental in keeping their community together. And while other disabled folks share common experience, they don't necessarily share a common language.

Quote from: jhkim on March 22, 2024, 07:06:14 PM
This was dramatized in "Children of a Lesser God" (1986) - so it's been around for a while as an issue, though I don't know how real the portrayal is. (The book is supposedly based on a true story, but I don't know the real life basis.) A particular controversial issue is deaf parents who want their children to be deaf so that they can talk to their kids natively, rather than having their children learn to speak from strangers.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 22, 2024, 08:20:06 PM
Almost every person on Earth can hear, and speaks with their mouth. Parents that want to hold their children back by giving them hurdles to success in life are assholes. Worse, some of that community act like the Amish, not wanting them to join the English.

Don't understand the attitude. Even if it is a tiny minority; they are acting like it is and either / or choice.

There's an old saying for this kind of behavior: Cutting off your nose to spite your face.

FWIW: The implant is a technical solution; not an actual "cure".

If I had a deaf kid, I would absolutely teach him (And my wife and I) how to sign as soon as possible! That way if something happens to the tech, he can still communicate.

I'd want my deaf kid to have ALL the options to live a better life. I wouldn't limit him to just one of two...


Getting people to "accept" the combat wheelchair in D&D is done for the same reasons a minority of deaf people reject the implants:

The "You must accept that I am 100% fine no matter how unrealistic it is" humiliation ritual.

No. You're not fine. You're fucking deaf. It's a life changing disability.


And no, your PC with his combat wheelchair is not fine either, he literally cannot walk.

He's a retarded idiot, and his fellow PC's are deranged psychopaths' for taking him straight to his death.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 21, 2024, 11:12:56 PM

Quote from: David Johansen on March 21, 2024, 10:14:08 PM
I did have this one player in a GURPS campaign.  He took his Strength and Health down to sevem and learned levitation to the point where he could maintain it indefinantly so the party dragged him around on a string like a balloon.  He's the guy that got up to the hijinks where he and his familiar shape shifted into elephants to power a bug proofing spell on a swamp based settlement because a guy with a seven health does not want to get exposed to malaria.

That sounds awesome.

GURPS is the game where the guy in the wheel chair is the one to be afraid of.  What did he do with those points?

Still, it wouldn't work in fourth edition because fatigue (used to cast spells) is based on Health instead of Strength now.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 21, 2024, 10:35:17 PM

Quote from: David Johansen on March 21, 2024, 10:14:08 PMHe's the guy that got up to the hijinks where he and his familiar shape shifted into elephants to power a bug proofing spell on a swamp based settlement because a guy with a seven health does not want to get exposed to malaria.

I bet he's never forgotten that game.

I know I haven't.  Still, he was one of those players.  In Spacemaster he played an Oort, a race of supergenius Cousin It's about the size of a halfling.  So he built a carapace armour hamster ball and put a track through the bulkheads of his ship.

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 21, 2024, 01:51:50 AM

Quote from: Omega on March 21, 2024, 12:56:43 AM

Quote from: Thor's Nads on March 20, 2024, 02:29:49 AM
The dumbest "controversy" yet. If people want to have magic wheelchairs in their game let them. So what?

That isnt the problem.

Its how the woke push it to the point they are trolling handicapped people.

I wasn't aware that actual handicapped people were also ticked off by this. The Woke can never be Woke enough to satisfy all their little diverse micro-communities they pander to.

Enough are pissed off. Though the woke try to turn more and more to their hateful little screeds and then you get publishers backing them and it never ends.

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

I just don't believe them.  It's easy to virtue signal or use this as an excuse for their own bad behavior.  It's easy to talk about not wanting a cure when you have a kind of hearing loss that can't be reversed anyway.  I don't believe for a second that they would actually turn down a cure if one were available.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 21, 2024, 03:06:18 AM
For me, the oddest argument in all of this is that the combat wheelchairs would be relevant because there would be people who would not want to be cured even if there was magical available to cure them easily.  Their rationale for this usually amounts to vague gassing on identity and calling people ableist.  I don't believe this for a single fucking second.  Even if they could walk again or regain their eyesight by having someone wave a holy symbol at them and chant for a few seconds, they would choose to remain as they are?  Bullshit.  No one believes that.

Yep. The woke need handicapped people to feed off of and so they try to infect us with this brainwashing that we dont need a cure.

Other problem is unfortunately any of us that were born handicapped have a tendency to not see a need for a cure because we are adapted to our various problems. But I can tell you some of us would flat out KILL for a cure.

And in a fantasy setting where death is around every corner, if you can afford getting fixed up you'd be insane not to. But getting the appropriate cure could be more costly than commoners and at least low level adventurers can get ahold of and still afford gear. YMMV but accessibility of funds could be a problem for a few. But I think it would alsi prevent someone adventuring without alot of support.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 21, 2024, 06:08:43 PM
Honestly, I think the argument that people that are disabled such that they require a wheelchair would be easily healed is a weak one.

This is my argument to. Not everyone can even afford the steep prices listed in AD&D or 5e. Though I am guessing its been retconned in 5e that priests now heal for free... because of course!

But starter adventurers are not going to have the cash for both possibly. Choose one. Then start accumulating funds all over again. And anyone who cant walk is a severe problem in a dungeon delve or even cross country.

A flying carpet or the rideable variant of Tensers Floating Disc makes 1000% more sense than an idiotic wheelchair that is more a liability than a boon..

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 24, 2024, 01:01:35 AM

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

I just don't believe them.  It's easy to virtue signal or use this as an excuse for their own bad behavior.  It's easy to talk about not wanting a cure when you have a kind of hearing loss that can't be reversed anyway.  I don't believe for a second that they would actually turn down a cure if one were available.

I'd lay good odds they are people like me who were born deaf and have never known any difference. Its way too easy to get into this mindset that just because you are used to not having this thing everyone else has, that having your lack of hearing "taken away" is wrong.

And I'd lay good odds some have been brainwashed by the moral outrage brigade. Because of course. They will just be outraged for us if we refuse to be.

Quote from: yosemitemike on March 24, 2024, 01:01:35 AM

Quote from: Shalashashka on March 22, 2024, 11:25:23 AM
You'd think that, but there is a sizable chunk of the deaf community (I hate using the word community but it is what it is) that don't want deafness cured. They actively fight against any advances in curing their condition and ostracize and bully those deaf people who get hearing implants.

I just don't believe them.  It's easy to virtue signal or use this as an excuse for their own bad behavior.  It's easy to talk about not wanting a cure when you have a kind of hearing loss that can't be reversed anyway.  I don't believe for a second that they would actually turn down a cure if one were available.

I'm with omega on this one. I'd wager that most of those against curing deafness are those that have always been deaf, and have internalized it as a part of their identity to point they would reject a cure if offered. I can sympathize, honestly.

I'm sure it's a ton of hard work, taking almost a lifetime getting to the point you can make it without the secondary way humans interact with the whole world, and the primary one we use to interact with each other, and then to be offered a cure would make all that effort what? Wasted? It's a difficult position, even if the answer seems obvious from an outside perspective. It's hard to see from here what they'd be seeing as what they're giving up.

That applies way less to the children though. People advocating against the curing of deafness in children is a lot darker. Kids haven't spent a lifetime building those skills or that identity because they haven't spent a lifetime doing anything yet. So for someone to decide they should have to is a lot less understandable to me.

Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2024, 01:17:25 AMThis is my argument to. Not everyone can even afford the steep prices listed in AD&D

Lets be honest: the economics of AD&D were terrible. They in no way represented what we see. Heck, even the poorest villagers in Hommlet usually had dozens of Silver Pieces and Copper Pieces squirreled away. Many who were more afluent had hundreds (if not several thousands) worth of gold pieces. There is a clear disconnect between what the economy should look like and what it ended up being because Gygax thought a 'boomtown economy' made sense, forgetting that the kinds of hoards you see in D&D/AD&D should really have been the exception instead of the rule. And instead of building in credible money sinks (or simply fixing the economy) the absurd Experience Training Cost system was implemented that the vast majority of people hated, never used and simply house ruled out of the game.

I would find it weird that a Cleric of Pelor, for example, should be charging such an exorbitant fee for healing the sick. Sure, he may not give away such a blessing for free, but charging so much that all but the richest of peasants (on paper, not in practice) could afford it if they (or their loved ones) were maimed seems odd. Add into the mix a group of heavily armed 'vagabond mercenaries' (ie - murderhobos) and the likelihood of such cut-throat dealings may end with the Cleric seeing his entire convent sacked and himself put to the sword.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 24, 2024, 09:37:56 AMAdd into the mix a group of heavily armed 'vagabond mercenaries' (ie - murderhobos) and the likelihood of such cut-throat dealings may end with the Cleric seeing his entire convent sacked and himself put to the sword.

Vikings looting and burning English monasteries is one thing, they didn't believe in the Christian god. But you'd have to be some kind of fuckwit to sack and destroy the temple of a god that demonstrably exists.*

* Doing it in the service of a rival god that is shielding you is obviously different.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 24, 2024, 10:43:26 AMVikings looting and burning English monasteries is one thing, they didn't believe in the Christian god. But you'd have to be some kind of fuckwit to sack and destroy the temple of a god that demonstrably exists.*

* Doing it in the service of a rival god that is shielding you is obviously different.

Well, I would point out the price listed in the DMG is basically for 'non-believers' or those who aren't 'regular attendees'. Again, when dealing with a heavily armed band of potential sociopaths...I'm not sure that its a good idea to fleece them as heavily as Gygax implies.....

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 24, 2024, 10:48:49 AMWell, I would point out the price listed in the DMG is basically for 'non-believers' or those who aren't 'regular attendees'.

But they're not really un-believers, they just either back a different team, or don't want to get involved with all that nonsense.

If Evangelical Christians started performing miracles I'd either join a less pushy branch of Christianity, or just pay up for demonstrable effects (like visiting a Doctor.)

(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/446/054/e36.jpg)

Quote from: Aglondir on March 24, 2024, 09:17:20 PM
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/446/054/e36.jpg)

...

At the height of our gonzo period, we had demonically posessed cars (Christine meets D&D) Elfquest elves flying X-Wings, and Marvel Supervillians running around Greyhawk (And the Forgotten Realms and Krynn)

We knew no limit...

Quote from: Jaeger on March 23, 2024, 03:47:20 PM
Getting people to "accept" the combat wheelchair in D&D is done for the same reasons a minority of deaf people reject the implants:

The "You must accept that I am 100% fine no matter how unrealistic it is" humiliation ritual.

No. You're not fine. You're fucking deaf. It's a life changing disability.

This is equating fantasy gaming with real-life behavior, like people complaining about evil acts done in game mean a player is really evil.

Someone can enjoy playing a kick-ass blind character in a fantasy game without that saying anything about their beliefs about blind people in real life. The same goes for deafness, chronic fatigue, or any other disability - including being in a wheelchair. I've only had one wheelchair-using character in my games - which was in a modern superpowers game - but I've had lots of characters with other disabilities in many genres - most commonly using GURPS or HERO System, but in other games as well.

If a handicapped person is offended over a character in one of my games, then they're welcome to tell me what they're feeling and why, but I'm not going to change my gaming simply because they're offended.

Quote from: Jaeger on March 23, 2024, 03:47:20 PM
And no, your PC with his combat wheelchair is not fine either, he literally cannot walk.

He's a retarded idiot, and his fellow PC's are deranged psychopaths' for taking him straight to his death.

David Johansen's example of the levitating mage pulled on a string was also effectively handicapped, but it sounds like he was a fun and effective character. I think wheelchair-using characters work fine in Fantasy HERO, for example. I think they could work fine in any other system as well, with some degree of house rules and rulings.

So characters can work in terms of game balance and playability, but it's an open question about whether and how such a character would fit in the context of the campaign and the world. For example, I wouldn't have a wheelchair in my current campaign setting -- the main culture doesn't even use wheels for transportation.

Quote from: Aglondir on March 24, 2024, 09:17:20 PM
(https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/446/054/e36.jpg)

Haha wtf

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 24, 2024, 12:45:24 PMIf Evangelical Christians started performing miracles I'd either join a less pushy branch of Christianity, or just pay up for demonstrable effects (like visiting a Doctor.)

It does go into other areas that are ignored by the 'Combat Wheelchair' asshats. It assumes no Clerics of ANY good-aligned gods go out and perform miracles to heal the crippled. No good works to feed the poor. They all just sit in their gold-and-gem, encrusted and beautifully painted cathedrals and let the rest of society live in squalor.

When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

Two white chicks (one in wheelchair), their pet black guy (possibly gay, definitely neutered - see comicbooks for the trope), and the white guy isn't human.

Bravo.


Wheels can't even be a computer tech that was allowed to be a resource drain because of superior intelligence (it's total war for survival, they'd go full Spartan,) has to be out in the field, yass Queen.

Imagine the pick-up truck scene from T-1, but there's a wheelchair ramp, and the Terminators wait patiently for her to be loaded.

Quote from: Omega on March 24, 2024, 01:29:50 AM
I'd lay good odds they are people like me who were born deaf and have never known any difference. Its way too easy to get into this mindset that just because you are used to not having this thing everyone else has, that having your lack of hearing "taken away" is wrong.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 24, 2024, 03:42:44 AM
I'm with omega on this one. I'd wager that most of those against curing deafness are those that have always been deaf, and have internalized it as a part of their identity to point they would reject a cure if offered. I can sympathize, honestly.

I'm sure it's a ton of hard work, taking almost a lifetime getting to the point you can make it without the secondary way humans interact with the whole world, and the primary one we use to interact with each other, and then to be offered a cure would make all that effort what? Wasted? It's a difficult position, even if the answer seems obvious from an outside perspective. It's hard to see from here what they'd be seeing as what they're giving up.

That applies way less to the children though. People advocating against the curing of deafness in children is a lot darker. Kids haven't spent a lifetime building those skills or that identity because they haven't spent a lifetime doing anything yet. So for someone to decide they should have to is a lot less understandable to me.

Excellent points.

This all makes far more sense when you consider the sunk costs of survival and ignorance of what's missing. Reminds me of how normie parents treated their mutant children for being 'additionally abled' in #XMen.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 25, 2024, 01:23:03 PM

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

Two white chicks (one in wheelchair), their pet black guy (possibly gay, definitely neutered - see comicbooks for the trope), and the white guy isn't human.

Bravo.


Wheels can't even be a computer tech that was allowed to be a resource drain because of superior intelligence (it's total war for survival, they'd go full Spartan,) has to be out in the field, yass Queen.

Imagine the pick-up truck scene from T-1, but there's a wheelchair ramp, and the Terminators wait patiently for her to be loaded.

(https://i.imgur.com/NyeVjKK.jpg)

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

My character doesn't need to be able to outrun a T-800.  He just needs to be able to outrun the chick in the wheelchair.

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

Why did they make a campfire out of a Terminator skull?
How did they make a campfire out of a Terminator skull?  ???

Quote from: jhkim on March 25, 2024, 01:33:46 AM

This is equating fantasy gaming with real-life behavior, like people complaining about evil acts done in game mean a player is really evil.

Someone can enjoy playing a kick-ass blind character in a fantasy game without that saying anything about their beliefs about blind people in real life. ...

So characters can work in terms of game balance and playability, but it's an open question about whether and how such a character would fit in the context of the campaign and the world. ...

LOLZ.

Your moral equivocations aren't fooling anyone.

The people pushing the "Combat Wheelchair" on the hobby? Their only goal is to get people to bend the knee.

And everyone here knows it.

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

In principal, the Terminator universe is one of the few science-fantasy settings where I think a wheelchair-bound character might make a degree of sense. At least the wheelchair has actually been invented in that setting, and while I doubt the human resistance has the means to build one, I could buy them salvaging an old one. The war with the Machines would doubtless leave a lot of people maimed or otherwise without the use of one or more limbs, and it's plausible to me that enough medical knowledge has survived that you could be maimed in battle and still survive. I've only seen the first two Terminator movies, but based on those, John Conner doesn't strike me as the kind of man who leaves his wounded veterans to die.

Where it gets silly is if they want to claim that character is going on commando raids. But if they were a gunsmith or something, and stayed in the resistance hideout conntributing in some logistical manner, that seems reasonable to me. I don't know enough about the Terminator franchise to know if they could have built her robot legs or somethings, but the impression I get is no.

Mind you, I don't think any of this went through the mind of the illustrator. I fully believe the motivation there was pure virtue signalling and nothing else. Just saying that on paper it's less outrageous than it might seem.

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 25, 2024, 07:25:31 PM

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

In principal, the Terminator universe is one of the few science-fantasy settings where I think a wheelchair-bound character might make a degree of sense. At least the wheelchair has actually been invented in that setting, and while I doubt the human resistance has the means to build one, I could buy them salvaging an old one. The war with the Machines would doubtless leave a lot of people maimed or otherwise without the use of one or more limbs, and it's plausible to me that enough medical knowledge has survived that you could be maimed in battle and still survive. I've only seen the first two Terminator movies, but based on those, John Conner doesn't strike me as the kind of man who leaves his wounded veterans to die.

Where it gets silly is if they want to claim that character is going on commando raids. But if they were a gunsmith or something, and stayed in the resistance hideout conntributing in some logistical manner, that seems reasonable to me. I don't know enough about the Terminator franchise to know if they could have built her robot legs or somethings, but the impression I get is no.

Mind you, I don't think any of this went through the mind of the illustrator. I fully believe the motivation there was pure virtue signalling and nothing else. Just saying that on paper it's less outrageous than it might seem.

Exactly. Wheelchairs were invented circa 1650. I don't think its a huge stretch to have them in a medieval fantasy setting. The problem is not the prosthetics, its the "combat" wheelchair.

I am 100% fine with wheelchairs existing. The thing is, and we all laughed this dead horse into the ground, but there's a reason why that one guard used to be an adventurer but then he got an arrow to the knee and he is not an adventurer anymore.

If your character cannot use his or her legs, for whatever reason, then through magic or other means, he or she should be able to move in a way that is equivalent or better than having legs. Someone said something like having an animal carry you or using a clockwork set of spiderlegs chair or something like that.

Those would be fine. But a wheelchair, even in our modern world, has a lot of limitations. Never mind a hostile environment that is not design to accommodate for a wheelchair and that potentially has hazards and/or monsters out to kill you.

In the same vein, as you said, having people in the Terminator setting maimed and end up in wheelchairs wouldn't be out of place at all. Having said character out with the raid fire team is an issue, since they are expecting to be engaged by the enemy while scrounging for resources or worse, they are actively striking at the enemy in some guerrilla style mission.

A wheelchair bound person is not suited for any of those scenarios and it will be a huge liability for him or herself and for the rest of the squad.

If it wasn't about trying to make people comply, we wouldn't even be talking about this manufactroversy.  People would just do it in their games and that would be that.  The entire public debate only arose because a few people were trying to use shaming and ostracization tactics to browbeat other people into embracing this or at least saying they do.  If not for the attempts to browbeat people into compliance, we wouldn't even be talking about this. 

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 25, 2024, 07:25:31 PM
In principal, the Terminator universe is one of the few science-fantasy settings where I think a wheelchair-bound character might make a degree of sense. At least the wheelchair has actually been invented in that setting, and while I doubt the human resistance has the means to build one, I could buy them salvaging an old one.

Was my thought too. Its a setting where people are going to get maimed and theres little to zero tech to make more advanced cures. So good ol wheelchair.

As for fantasy ones. Wheelchairs go back a fair span of time. They just were alot different way back and if recall right were more dependent on someone to push it as they were not yet so easy to self actuate?

As for the artist. Likely just put it in for woke points, or outrage marketing.

In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available. Even if the affliction is curse related, a Remove Curse spell would do the trick.

The ONLY exception to this would be a VERY special and exceptional case in which the wheelchair bound PC is specifically on a journey to cure him of the affliction. Something that is tied into the overall story of the campaign.

But that's just my two coppers.

Quote from: blackstone on March 26, 2024, 09:39:32 AM
In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available. Even if the affliction is curse related, a Remove Curse spell would do the trick.

The ONLY exception to this would be a VERY special and exceptional case in which the wheelchair bound PC is specifically on a journey to cure him of the affliction. Something that is tied into the overall story of the campaign.

But that's just my two coppers.

I would argue your exception would not even apply. It would be cheaper and more dignified to travel via sedan with bearers. If a sedan is above your station, then just a couple of bearers with a hammock or seat between them. Probably much cheaper than a wheelchair and better movement over rough ground.

People forget that machines of convenience were rare until very recently. Human labor used to be much cheaper and more practical.

Quote from: blackstone on March 26, 2024, 09:39:32 AM
In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available.

I disagree, "fantasy" is not interchangeable with "high magic". The Hyborian Age
is a fantasy setting, but I don't think there's a ton of clerics running around curing people. (Although there would probably not be an abundance of wheelchair bound people there for completely different reasons)

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 11:04:09 AM
I would argue your exception would not even apply. It would be cheaper and more dignified to travel via sedan with bearers. If a sedan is above your station, then just a couple of bearers with a hammock or seat between them. Probably much cheaper than a wheelchair and better movement over rough ground.

People forget that machines of convenience were rare until very recently. Human labor used to be much cheaper and more practical.

I misread that as being about the 2021 BMW 5 Series 530i with option heated seating again. Topkek.

In all though, I can't really disagree. Being carried would definitely be more practical over any terrain other than a well kept (and dry) road. Not sure about the costs, just because prices on things in fantasy setting are wildly divergent.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 26, 2024, 11:43:11 AM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 11:04:09 AM
I would argue your exception would not even apply. It would be cheaper and more dignified to travel via sedan with bearers. If a sedan is above your station, then just a couple of bearers with a hammock or seat between them. Probably much cheaper than a wheelchair and better movement over rough ground.

People forget that machines of convenience were rare until very recently. Human labor used to be much cheaper and more practical.

I misread that as being about the 2021 BMW 5 Series 530i with option heated seating again. Topkek.

In all though, I can't really disagree. Being carried would definitely be more practical over any terrain other than a well kept (and dry) road. Not sure about the costs, just because prices on things in fantasy setting are wildly divergent.

Cost aside, if a bearer quits or dies you can just hire any sturdy village lad to replace him. It would be much more difficult to find a blacksmith or carpenter with the specialized knowledge to fix a wheelchair.

Also, even if you had good roads, they would be cobble and you'd shake apart your chair and possibly cripple yourself further. Bad roads would have mud and ruts, which would be wagon sized not wheelchair sized. It would be a nightmare. 

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 12:34:55 PM
Also, even if you had good roads, they would be cobble and you'd shake apart your chair and possibly cripple yourself further. Bad roads would have mud and ruts, which would be wagon sized not wheelchair sized. It would be a nightmare.

yea, wheelchairs are basically only practical in the same places as skateboards.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 26, 2024, 12:44:51 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 12:34:55 PM
Also, even if you had good roads, they would be cobble and you'd shake apart your chair and possibly cripple yourself further. Bad roads would have mud and ruts, which would be wagon sized not wheelchair sized. It would be a nightmare.

yea, wheelchairs are basically only practical in the same places as skateboards.

I'd agree that realistically, in semi-medieval times, getting around would be more by being carried or pushed. However, it still makes sense for a character like Lord Weathermay (from Ravenloft II) to have a wheelchair, though, even if he is often carried or pushed. It gives him a place to sit rather than being dumped prone on the ground, and if well-crafted, it doesn't add much to his weight.

In the bigger picture, though, the argument that any handicapped adventurer would be a liability is completely wrong in my experience.

Quote from: Cipher on March 25, 2024, 07:34:03 PM
In the same vein, as you said, having people in the Terminator setting maimed and end up in wheelchairs wouldn't be out of place at all. Having said character out with the raid fire team is an issue, since they are expecting to be engaged by the enemy while scrounging for resources or worse, they are actively striking at the enemy in some guerrilla style mission.

A wheelchair bound person is not suited for any of those scenarios and it will be a huge liability for him or herself and for the rest of the squad.

If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help. David Johansen gave an example of the GURPS mage who was towed on a string. I've seen many weakling PCs, who would be a liability were it not for their magic. But if their magic (or other talents) are important enough, then the rest of the party will want them along - even if they have to be carried or minded. In real-world history, military teams would carry along a 300-pound cannon with them through very difficult terrain because of the importance of it.

A handicapped hero is more often a trope of superhero comics than fantasy fiction, but the same logic applies to both. Superheroes constantly are involved in dangerous action and need to move across difficult terrain -- but they'll still often want Professor X around since his abilities are so useful. The Transformers brought wheelchair-bound Chip along, and he was critical in attaching his control device to one of the Decepticons in the fight over antimatter Energon cubes. In a Terminator game, if the team only has one genius hacker who can do vital work for the mission, then they'll bring the hacker even if it means carrying them up stairs.

I've found that games are often more interesting if PCs have weaknesses, and they need to help each other regularly.

For me I have no problem if people include wheel chair stuff or things related to disabilities. It is when it is mandatory in some way that it is a problem. But there are definitely lots of movies and books that I draw inspiration from in my campaigns that get into this stuff. The key though is there shouldn't just be one way to do it. I do a lot of wuxia so I will use that as an example. Some campaigns might be like The Four for example, where a character being paralyzed is overcome with a wheel chair or even mechanical legs. Or maybe it's handled like the One Armed Swordsman where the character needs to adapt to over come the challenge of what has happened. The Crippled Avengers is another example that leaps to mind in that same vein (except both the villain and all the heroes are disabled in various ways). But then there are things like Heaven Sword Dragon Sabre where a person is so debilitated they can't do martial arts at all. I think all these kinds of examples address different aspects of the realities of what a disability can mean. And again where I think we run into problems is more when its like "You have to do it this one way" (and it is doubly a problem when it stifles creativity and people trying to explore something in an RPG context).

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
In the bigger picture, though, the argument that any handicapped adventurer would be a liability is completely wrong in my experience.

Holy red herring Batman, look, a vaguely related but ultimately irrelevant argument!

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help.

'Sometimes need help' is a woman or child getting tired and needing a hand over a wall. Trying to cross a rubble-strewn hellscape crawling with killer robots, with wheelchair gal, is stupid to the point of destroying verisimilitude.

Watch the T1 flashback, where able bodied people are killed after being visible for a second.

One idea I have for a character (NPC or PC) is a man so strong he crippled himself to actually have a fair fight. Could only work in a fantastical world.

Quote from: MeganovaStella on March 26, 2024, 06:18:02 PMOne idea I have for a character (NPC or PC) is a man so strong he crippled himself to actually have a fair fight.

Man, the Mohammad Ali lore is wild.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 06:01:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help.

'Sometimes need help' is a woman or child getting tired and needing a hand over a wall. Trying to cross a rubble-strewn hellscape crawling with killer robots, with wheelchair gal, is stupid to the point of destroying verisimilitude.

Watch the T1 flashback, where able bodied people are killed after being visible for a second.

The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 07:39:14 PM

The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

What the literal fuck is this take...holy shit

i'd be happier if they just give him terminator legs from the waist or knee down instead.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help. David Johansen gave an example of the GURPS mage who was towed on a string. I've seen many weakling PCs, who would be a liability were it not for their magic. But if their magic (or other talents) are important enough, then the rest of the party will want them along - even if they have to be carried or minded. In real-world history, military teams would carry along a 300-pound cannon with them through very difficult terrain because of the importance of it.

Every occupation has a certain basic requirements where if you don't fill them, then no matter what your other merits are, you can't do that job. A fantasy adventurer needs to be able to run, climb, swim, sneak, fight and probably ride a horse. They don't need to be the best at any of those things, but if they can't do them at all, they're not qualified to be an adventurer. If they can't do those things physically, they need to be able to reliably produce an equivalent result magically.

You might say "Wait a minute! Lots of D&D characters can't do all those things". Yeah, I think it stretches plausibility that anyone would take a 1st level wizard with 6 strength, 3 HP, no armor and one spell per day with them into a dungeon. The chances are just too high of him either forcing the expedition to stall because he can't traverse the dungeon, or getting his companions killed trying to defend him. The only reason that happens is game convention.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 07:39:14 PM
The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

I would agree with you that that is one of the themes of Terminator, but I don't think they would take the wheelchair-bound person to raid the machine base. That's too likely to cause the mission to fail. They'd either aim to clear out the base and then bring the wheelchair user in, or capture the terminator and bring it back to the person that could hack it. Arguably, if you only had one person who could reprogram the terminator, you wouldn't bring them on the assault no matter what their condition is. They're too important to risk.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 07:39:14 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 06:01:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help.

'Sometimes need help' is a woman or child getting tired and needing a hand over a wall. Trying to cross a rubble-strewn hellscape crawling with killer robots, with wheelchair gal, is stupid to the point of destroying verisimilitude.

Watch the T1 flashback, where able bodied people are killed after being visible for a second.

The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

You're a shining example of someone being highly intelligent, and extremely educated, then letting ideology turn your brain to shit.

The absolute nonsensical BS you'll twist your mind into knots excusing is truly a sight to behold.

This is the only Fantasy Wheelchair I want to see in a game I run.

(https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/20/590x/secondary/Vikings-1246112.jpg)

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 26, 2024, 08:18:47 PMI would agree with you that that is one of the themes of Terminator, but I don't think they would take the wheelchair-bound person to raid the machine base. That's too likely to cause the mission to fail. They'd either aim to clear out the base and then bring the wheelchair user in, or capture the terminator and bring it back to the person that could hack it. Arguably, if you only had one person who could reprogram the terminator, you wouldn't bring them on the assault no matter what their condition is. They're too important to risk.

They could have had her strapped to the back of that reprogrammed T-800. It's strong enough to easily carry her and still keep up with the team, but that would treat her being crippled as, well, some kind of disability! Also there's a fetish for wheelchairs doing the rounds of prog game designers.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 09:36:31 PMYou're a shining example of someone being highly intelligent, and extremely educated, then letting ideology turn your brain to shit.

The absolute nonsensical BS you'll twist your mind into knots excusing is truly a sight to behold.

We really do need a Like button....

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 26, 2024, 08:18:47 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help. David Johansen gave an example of the GURPS mage who was towed on a string. I've seen many weakling PCs, who would be a liability were it not for their magic. But if their magic (or other talents) are important enough, then the rest of the party will want them along - even if they have to be carried or minded. In real-world history, military teams would carry along a 300-pound cannon with them through very difficult terrain because of the importance of it.

Every occupation has a certain basic requirements where if you don't fill them, then no matter what your other merits are, you can't do that job. A fantasy adventurer needs to be able to run, climb, swim, sneak, fight and probably ride a horse. They don't need to be the best at any of those things, but if they can't do them at all, they're not qualified to be an adventurer. If they can't do those things physically, they need to be able to reliably produce an equivalent result magically.

You might say "Wait a minute! Lots of D&D characters can't do all those things". Yeah, I think it stretches plausibility that anyone would take a 1st level wizard with 6 strength, 3 HP, no armor and one spell per day with them into a dungeon. The chances are just too high of him either forcing the expedition to stall because he can't traverse the dungeon, or getting his companions killed trying to defend him. The only reason that happens is game convention.

Even if you think that a 1st level wizard is too unplausibly weak for other 1st level characters, and thus AD&D as written doesn't work -- that's a matter of game balance. There is a level of magical power at which you'd think it *is* plausible that the party would take them. If, say, they had 5th level wizard casting then would that balance their weakness? I would think that to be overpowered, if anything.

I don't put much stock in game balance - at best, it's an art rather than a science. But in general, weaknesses are compensated for by strengths. In 3rd edition, they balanced races with "effective character level" (ECL). For example, if a starting 1st level party had the option to bring along a 12th level wizard who used a wheelchair, then the wheelchair-using character would overshadow everyone else. Even though they can't walk, they can summon monsters to carry them or similar. Regardless of how one assesses the wheelchair, that degree of magical power more than compensates.

---

It's the same game balance logic as when I had a wheelchair-using character in my superpowers game. The superpowered PCs still had to do things like move, sneak, and so forth -- but they could and did use their abilities to compensate.

Saying "all adventurers must be able to do XYZ" sounds like 4E D&D style balance - where all characters do the same things, just by different methods. And if one likes 4E, then that's fine. But it is also possible and playable to have characters that are more differentiated.

Like, your comment about riding reminded me of an old 1E Rolemaster character who was too big to ride a horse. He also was an avowed pacifist, masochistic, and simple-minded. So he was quite limited. But he was also insanely tough and was a powerful sympathetic healer who could take on the wounds of others, and was if anything a dominant character for the group.

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 09:36:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 07:39:14 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 06:01:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help.

'Sometimes need help' is a woman or child getting tired and needing a hand over a wall. Trying to cross a rubble-strewn hellscape crawling with killer robots, with wheelchair gal, is stupid to the point of destroying verisimilitude.

Watch the T1 flashback, where able bodied people are killed after being visible for a second.

The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

You're a shining example of someone being highly intelligent, and extremely educated, then letting ideology turn your brain to shit.

The absolute nonsensical BS you'll twist your mind into knots excusing is truly a sight to behold.

Since we don't have an upvote button...
(http://i.imgur.com/gkfvtLl.gif) (https://imgur.com/gkfvtLl)

To simplify the game balance point:

• If a wheelchair-bound character is created the same way as any other, and then apply realistic effects of being paraplegic - then yeah, that character will be a liability compared to the others.
• If being wheelchair-bound is balanced by other advantages (as is normal in game balance), then whether the character is a liability, balanced, or overpowered depends on what the compensating advantages given are.

It's the same principle as any other weakness in a game.

Just watched Dune Part 2 yesterday and I kept thinking about this topic when watching the Baron floating around with his assistive devices.  Now THAT is a type of disabled future-wheelchair character that I'd be fine with playing!   And, of course, we get to see what his life is like without it at one point.

Quote from: jhkim on March 27, 2024, 01:09:31 PM
It's the same game balance logic as when I had a wheelchair-using character in my superpowers game. The superpowered PCs still had to do things like move, sneak, and so forth -- but they could and did use their abilities to compensate.

That's exactly what I meant when I said  "If they can't do those things physically, they need to be able to reliably produce an equivalent result magically." It's not about an abstracted power level, it's about whether or not you can deal with situations which will reliably turn up in the adventure. How big of a fireball you can shoot doesn't really matter if you can't get down the stairs into the dungeon, or run away from the inevitable monster which is too powerful, or survive a goblin throwing a rock at you.

Quote from: jhkim on March 27, 2024, 01:09:31 PM
Saying "all adventurers must be able to do XYZ" sounds like 4E D&D style balance - where all characters do the same things, just by different methods. And if one likes 4E, then that's fine. But it is also possible and playable to have characters that are more differentiated.

I don't put much stock in game balance - at best, it's an art rather than a science. But in general, weaknesses are compensated for by strengths. In 3rd edition, they balanced races with "effective character level" (ECL). For example, if a starting 1st level party had the option to bring along a 12th level wizard who used a wheelchair, then the wheelchair-using character would overshadow everyone else. Even though they can't walk, they can summon monsters to carry them or similar. Regardless of how one assesses the wheelchair, that degree of magical power more than compensates.

I understand why someone would read things that way, but it's genuinely not about balance to me. It's about verisimilitude. I'm apparently alone in this, but I don't buy that a person who can't withstand physical hardship or defend themselves would succeed long-term as a career adventurer. It's not often an issue in D&D because of a bunch of meta reasons which are external to the fictional world of the game: everything from the way turn-based combat works, to dungeon design, the experience system and which factors are and are not simulated in the rules. That's what I mean by "game convention". Mostly I can let willing suspension of disbelief fill in the gaps, but it does bother me a bit that most fantasy RPGs reward specialization over generalism, just because I personally find playing generalists more fun.

"Game balance" is a bit of an old-school gaming bogeyman. Every edition of D&D since at least AD&D1e has had substantial thought put into game balance, and frankly so has every RPG I've ever read. Success rates vary, but the effort is obvious in the text. People complain about newer editions of D&D focusing on class roles, but that's how the game has always been. Fighters excel in combat, Thieves excel at dungeon exploration. Wizards get utility abilities and act as artillery. Etc. Etc. All that changed is that the roles went from macro to micro. Instead of some classes having "be good at fighting" as their role, they moved towards every class having a designated combat role. That attitude has never been as well realized in other aspects of the game, such as exploration and socializing, but they've clearly tried. That isn't at all what I was arguing for (though again I see why it might read that way), but it's not the worst idea. I just think "every character is good at some things and bad at others" vs. "every character can do everything equally well" is a false dichotomy. I'd prefer a game where every character has a base competence in the mandatory major activities of the game (unless they choose to handicap themselves at character creation), but has one or two things they excel at.

Quote from: jhkim on March 27, 2024, 01:43:45 PM
To simplify the game balance point:

• If a wheelchair-bound character is created the same way as any other, and then apply realistic effects of being paraplegic - then yeah, that character will be a liability compared to the others.
• If being wheelchair-bound is balanced by other advantages (as is normal in game balance), then whether the character is a liability, balanced, or overpowered depends on what the compensating advantages given are.

It's the same principle as any other weakness in a game.

GM: "So in this campaign you will all be playing Mer-People, fighting the cruel ruler of Atlantis to free your people."

jhkim: "I'm taking air-breather as a disadvantage."

GM: "It's...set under the ocean."

jhkim: "It's a disadvantage from the rulebook. All things work in all situations, as long as the points balance out. I may breathe air, but I have some very nice skills to help the party."

GM: "OK, so the adventure starts, jkhim's character instantly drowns. Do you give it a decent burial, or use it to distract the King's guardian sharks?"

jhkim: "AHA! Told you I was useful to bring along" (Smug grin of victory)

Quote from: jhkim on March 27, 2024, 01:43:45 PM
To simplify the game balance point:

• If a wheelchair-bound character is created the same way as any other, and then apply realistic effects of being paraplegic - then yeah, that character will be a liability compared to the others.
• If being wheelchair-bound is balanced by other advantages (as is normal in game balance), then whether the character is a liability, balanced, or overpowered depends on what the compensating advantages given are.

It's the same principle as any other weakness in a game.

This simplifies to:

• Equality (aka equal opportunity)
• Equity (aka equal outcome)

And that probably explains why so many here, me included, don't like the second one in gaming. IRL lots of people demand equal outcomes, which in many cases is fine with me. Everyone should be able to function in society and if that means wheelchair ramps and handicapped parking, that's great. 

But in a game designed to simulate certain activities, the second one breaks verisimilitude and comes across as pandering. Proponents of equity refuse to engage with the game as it is. Perhaps they are incapable of engaging with a fictional world on its own terms. We see this all the time with a certain segment of (apparent) gamers. They demand IRL representation in a fictional world, which IMO is a failure to understand and appreciate the game.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 07:39:14 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on March 26, 2024, 06:01:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM
If a character has enough compensating power and skills, then they are still an asset to the group and will be taken along even if they sometimes need help.

'Sometimes need help' is a woman or child getting tired and needing a hand over a wall. Trying to cross a rubble-strewn hellscape crawling with killer robots, with wheelchair gal, is stupid to the point of destroying verisimilitude.

Watch the T1 flashback, where able bodied people are killed after being visible for a second.

The whole point of the Terminator movies was having unlikely heroes rather than the standard action heroes. T1 had a seasoned commando as a plot device, but the real protagonist was an unassuming waitress who is the one that wins in the end. T2 the protagonist was a ten-year-old kid. A wheelchair-using character is spot-on with the theme.

If, say, the wheelchair-using character were the only one with the skill to reprogram terminator robots, then I'm pretty sure the others would go through fire to make sure to get them into the right place to do it.

You are exactly the sort of asshole that would die trying to push a wheelchair through rubble. You are spouting the same intersectional rhetoric as the woke morons at  Nightfall games. Have you watched the movies or any of the other media ?  Have you seen the way the survivors live?  Or maybe you think that somewhere in the cramped shelters there is wheelchair access funded by grants from Skynet.

(https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/fantasy-wheelchairs-are-a-controvesy-again-video-discussion/?action=dlattach;attach=3817;image)

Greetings!

Superheroes in comic books? Movies?

Fuck that BS.

For my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

To be a member of the adventuring team, it is simple, but demanding.

You need to be able to fucking run. For miles.
You need to be able to march for many miles, loaded down with a field pack and full gear.
You need to be able to climb up a rope.
You need to rappel down a ripe from a considerable height.
You need to run and jump off a high point, landing in deep water, fully dressed in clothes. From which you need to tread water and swim effectively.
You need to be able to stay awake and alert for two or three days straight, with no sleep, and no food. Only water.
You need to perform basic wrestling, boxing, and hand-to-hand combat drills against an opponent.
You need to demonstrate basic proficiency in several standard weapons.

Pacifists, the fat, the weak, the crippled, the slow, the stupid--and especially morons trapped in fucking wheelchairs--can stay the fuck home.

All the coddling and crying for including all of the weak, pathetic members of society in a super-dangerous, highly demanding job of what professional Adventurers do is just mind-bogglingly stupid. Get real.

That's the bottom line. This is also why all this pussy juice nonsense is pushed by Woke morons. Because they do not live in reality, and cannot comprehend even a fantasy game that embraces strong elements of reality. Their expectations are fucking laughably absurd--which is why normal gamers reject this stupid nonsense.

All you veterans out there know what I'm talking about. Just going for a quick run overland, through even modest countryside--is fucking impossible for crippled people in a fucking wheelchair. That's ABOVE GROUND. That's not running up and down fucking mountains. That sure as fuck isn't crawling through subterranean tunnels and caves. Over and over and over again, Geesus. Crippled people cannot even hardly dress themselves without help. Cripples in wheelchairs are absolutely a liability to the team. Even trying to bring someone like that out into the field is a recipe for swift and fatal FAILURE.

Ask yourself, what is the whole point of (A) Having a demanding, dangerous mission to accomplish--but somehow, not wanting the toughest and most capable people you can get? Why the fuck would you want to bring someone that is obviously handicapped, crippled, and otherwise simply incapable of keeping up with the real demands in the field?

Someone even suggesting such crippled, helpless members for a team setting out on dangerous field missions, I would think must be fucking insane.

That is a very good way to absolutely fail the mission, and get everyone else killed in the process. All for nothing, because some jello-filled moron thought it was kind, and fair, and goody goody, and "inclusive" to bring some crippled fuck in a wheelchair.

Mind boggling. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PM
Greetings!

Superheroes in comic books? Movies?

Fuck that BS.

For my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

To be a member of the adventuring team, it is simple, but demanding.

You need to be able to fucking run. For miles.
You need to be able to march for many miles, loaded down with a field pack and full gear.
You need to be able to climb up a rope.
You need to rappel down a ripe from a considerable height.
You need to run and jump off a high point, landing in deep water, fully dressed in clothes. From which you need to tread water and swim effectively.
You need to be able to stay awake and alert for two or three days straight, with no sleep, and no food. Only water.
You need to perform basic wrestling, boxing, and hand-to-hand combat drills against an opponent.
You need to demonstrate basic proficiency in several standard weapons.

Pacifists, the fat, the weak, the crippled, the slow, the stupid--and especially morons trapped in fucking wheelchairs--can stay the fuck home.

You literally just described every kickass 80's street-super-hero.

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PMFor my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

Ain't no one in any pseudo-medieval world gonna let their crippled relative, who is confined to a wheelchair, go adventuring. Even if they were the most gifted Wizard pupil around, the harsh reality of life would smack them in the face long before they went into their first ruin. And, as I said, it presumes that not a single Cleric does anything for charity. That their friendly Druid neighbor doesn't take pity on them and see to it their life is not confined to some wheelchair.

Quote from: tenbones on March 27, 2024, 05:52:04 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PM
Greetings!

Superheroes in comic books? Movies?

Fuck that BS.

For my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

To be a member of the adventuring team, it is simple, but demanding.

You need to be able to fucking run. For miles.
You need to be able to march for many miles, loaded down with a field pack and full gear.
You need to be able to climb up a rope.
You need to rappel down a ripe from a considerable height.
You need to run and jump off a high point, landing in deep water, fully dressed in clothes. From which you need to tread water and swim effectively.
You need to be able to stay awake and alert for two or three days straight, with no sleep, and no food. Only water.
You need to perform basic wrestling, boxing, and hand-to-hand combat drills against an opponent.
You need to demonstrate basic proficiency in several standard weapons.

Pacifists, the fat, the weak, the crippled, the slow, the stupid--and especially morons trapped in fucking wheelchairs--can stay the fuck home.

You literally just described every kickass 80's street-super-hero.

Greetings!

*Laughing* Yeah, my friend, I imagine so. I don't play superhero games though. ;D

I do know what Marine Infantry squads do. I'm also familiar with other branches of troops, and the normal, routine achievements and standards they must embrace at all times--with no exceptions. In a similar manner, the medieval-inspired Adventuring party is routinely involved with a similar lifestyle, schedule, and activities, aimed at accomplishing the mission.

Whether the scenario is a modern combat zone, or a medieval-inspired combat zone, crippled, weak characters in wheelchairs have no place being in such an environment. Similarly, the old, very young, the fat, the weak, or the stupid.

Such crippled, fucked up or otherwise disadvantaged characters all suffer from the same harsh buffet table--

They are a liability to the group, they inhibit the mission from being successful; and they are a drain in energy, effort and resources from the rest of the team unnecessarily. All of these weak, sub-standard characters and their misfit problems can easily be avoided altogether by the hard-charging Adventuring party that wants to succeed, and survive--

Only bring new members into the team that can keep up and maintain the standards of the team.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 27, 2024, 06:59:26 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PMFor my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

Ain't no one in any pseudo-medieval world gonna let their crippled relative, who is confined to a wheelchair, go adventuring. Even if they were the most gifted Wizard pupil around, the harsh reality of life would smack them in the face long before they went into their first ruin. And, as I said, it presumes that not a single Cleric does anything for charity. That their friendly Druid neighbor doesn't take pity on them and see to it their life is not confined to some wheelchair.

Greetings!

Yep, my friend! The whole argument is arguing from a position of absolute absurdity. Morons push for this kind of BS. Imagine what anyone rational in the game-world itself would likely think about such morons. They would laugh at them ruthlessly, out-of-hand. These pathetic, weak, helpless types of characters make zero sense in the harsh, real world environment--and they don't somehow make more sense in a harsh, brutal world that also has vampires, bands of savage orcs, and dragons running about seeking to slaughter everything that comes across their path.

The promotion of this nonsense is for the most part promoted by woke, jello-filled morons that are absolutely delusional.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: blackstone on March 26, 2024, 09:39:32 AM
In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available. Even if the affliction is curse related, a Remove Curse spell would do the trick.

The ONLY exception to this would be a VERY special and exceptional case in which the wheelchair bound PC is specifically on a journey to cure him of the affliction. Something that is tied into the overall story of the campaign.

But that's just my two coppers.

Artifact or other remove curse resistant curses is one that could do it.
Or a setting where clerics are few and far between, or too expensive.
Or in a campaign where the PC is actially questing for something better. Replacement legs, a better conveyance, or funds for that advanced cure or super curse removal.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 26, 2024, 11:37:07 AM

Quote from: blackstone on March 26, 2024, 09:39:32 AM
In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available.

I disagree, "fantasy" is not interchangeable with "high magic". The Hyborian Age
is a fantasy setting, but I don't think there's a ton of clerics running around curing people. (Although there would probably not be an abundance of wheelchair bound people there for completely different reasons)

AD&D Conan did not have clerics at all. If you lost the use of your legs you had to resort to other means of getting around.

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 26, 2024, 12:44:51 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 12:34:55 PM
Also, even if you had good roads, they would be cobble and you'd shake apart your chair and possibly cripple yourself further. Bad roads would have mud and ruts, which would be wagon sized not wheelchair sized. It would be a nightmare.

yea, wheelchairs are basically only practical in the same places as skateboards.

I'd agree that realistically, in semi-medieval times, getting around would be more by being carried or pushed. However, it still makes sense for a character like Lord Weathermay (from Ravenloft II) to have a wheelchair, though, even if he is often carried or pushed. It gives him a place to sit rather than being dumped prone on the ground, and if well-crafted, it doesn't add much to his weight.

Dirt roads, when not muddy would actually be easier to traverse. Problem is they will not go where you always need to and eventually you have to go offroad.

My great grandparents place was up in the mountains and it was dirt roads all the way once outside the nearest town. That was hell getting to one time we went up during the rain and we got stuck at least once.

Weather is going to be a major hassle. Snow in particular.

Quote from: Omega on March 27, 2024, 09:18:36 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 26, 2024, 03:57:37 PM

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 26, 2024, 12:44:51 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 12:34:55 PM
Also, even if you had good roads, they would be cobble and you'd shake apart your chair and possibly cripple yourself further. Bad roads would have mud and ruts, which would be wagon sized not wheelchair sized. It would be a nightmare.

yea, wheelchairs are basically only practical in the same places as skateboards.

I'd agree that realistically, in semi-medieval times, getting around would be more by being carried or pushed. However, it still makes sense for a character like Lord Weathermay (from Ravenloft II) to have a wheelchair, though, even if he is often carried or pushed. It gives him a place to sit rather than being dumped prone on the ground, and if well-crafted, it doesn't add much to his weight.

Dirt roads, when not muddy would actually be easier to traverse. Problem is they will not go where you always need to and eventually you have to go offroad.

My great grandparents place was up in the mountains and it was dirt roads all the way once outside the nearest town. That was hell getting to one time we went up during the rain and we got stuck at least once.

Weather is going to be a major hassle. Snow in particular.

Ruts. Ancient and medieval roads had deep ruts. Dirt roads, stone roads, dry or wet. We don't get the same thing today except sometimes on unmaintained backcountry roads. The ruts were carved over years by thousands of carts. Speaking of carts...a donkey cart would be infinitely more practical than a wheelchair.

Quote from: Gagarth on March 25, 2024, 01:18:17 PM
When the HKs and T-800s turn up who is staying behind to help him/her/xe/zi  with his/her/xem/zim wheelchair.
(https://d1vzi28wh99zvq.cloudfront.net/images/3600/461379.jpg)

Being in a wheelchair, taking care of such survivors, and lacking alternatives, is not an unlikely scenario in a post-apocalyptic war against machines. And as long as it's treated as a liability and not some superpower it shouldn't be antithetical to verisimilitude. But at this point simply seeing a wheelchair is apparently just as triggering for yall as those hypothetical 'dogwhistles' the wokies keep complaining about.

This ideological bullshit is so tedious.

Constant gaslighting makes reactionaries of people who wish to end such practice. I also see trannies lurking in every slob who wants to play an anime girl. You have chosen to die by stay-puft marshmellow man and i feel fine.

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 26, 2024, 11:04:09 AM

Quote from: blackstone on March 26, 2024, 09:39:32 AM
In a fantasy setting, a wheelchair bound PC would be an anomaly because of the various type of magical healing that is available. Even if the affliction is curse related, a Remove Curse spell would do the trick.

The ONLY exception to this would be a VERY special and exceptional case in which the wheelchair bound PC is specifically on a journey to cure him of the affliction. Something that is tied into the overall story of the campaign.

But that's just my two coppers.

I would argue your exception would not even apply. It would be cheaper and more dignified to travel via sedan with bearers. If a sedan is above your station, then just a couple of bearers with a hammock or seat between them. Probably much cheaper than a wheelchair and better movement over rough ground.

People forget that machines of convenience were rare until very recently. Human labor used to be much cheaper and more practical.

Sure. Fine. be it a wheelchair or bearers, We're splitting hairs here. The point I raise still is valid.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 27, 2024, 11:21:49 PM
But at this point simply seeing a wheelchair is apparently just as triggering for yall as those hypothetical 'dogwhistles' the wokies keep complaining about.

This ideological bullshit is so tedious.

Yes, pointing out how fucking stupid this crap is certainly is "triggering". Got it.

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 08:38:12 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 27, 2024, 06:59:26 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PMFor my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

Ain't no one in any pseudo-medieval world gonna let their crippled relative, who is confined to a wheelchair, go adventuring. Even if they were the most gifted Wizard pupil around, the harsh reality of life would smack them in the face long before they went into their first ruin. And, as I said, it presumes that not a single Cleric does anything for charity. That their friendly Druid neighbor doesn't take pity on them and see to it their life is not confined to some wheelchair.

Greetings!

Yep, my friend! The whole argument is arguing from a position of absolute absurdity. Morons push for this kind of BS. Imagine what anyone rational in the game-world itself would likely think about such morons. They would laugh at them ruthlessly, out-of-hand. These pathetic, weak, helpless types of characters make zero sense in the harsh, real world environment--and they don't somehow make more sense in a harsh, brutal world that also has vampires, bands of savage orcs, and dragons running about seeking to slaughter everything that comes across their path.

The promotion of this nonsense is for the most part promoted by woke, jello-filled morons that are absolutely delusional.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

In Hackmaster 4th Ed, you has quirks and flaws (both mental and physical) for your PC by either cherry pick or roll (3 max by cherry pick). The more quirks and flaws you have, the more building points you get to purchase talents and skills at character creation.

BUT there is a threshold. A saturation point if you will, where the character would be considered unplayable. Through a sheer number of unlucky rolls, your character could become unplayable.  You could end up with a character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional).

My point? Sure you can have a game where PC do have quirks and flaws. HM 4E pulls this off. A PC who is a chronic liar, has unusual body odor, and in near-sighted is not exactly unplayable for example. As a DM, I would on occasion use these quirks and flaws against the PC. Honestly, that's part of my job.

But the guy who is character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional)?

No, he's unplayable. Period.

There comes a point where the shit piles up so much, you just have to say to yourself "there is no fucking way this character is playable."

The problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I don't care how fucking intelligent Steven Hawking was but he isn't climbing a fucking tree.

Intelligent? Yes. Genius? For sure. Run a 500m dash? Fuck NO!

Which is why...

(http://i.imgur.com/NyeVjKK.jpg) (https://imgur.com/NyeVjKK)

In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AMThe problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 28, 2024, 05:05:41 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AMThe problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.

Greetings!

Exactly, my friend! Which begs the question, in my mind, "Why even have the stupid "disability"--which is not a disability--in the first place? Why not dispense with the fucking rainbow sprinkles and the fucking candycane in your mouth, and play a normal character to begin with? ;D

That is how you know really that none of this BS is based on reality. It is all Woke BS, and a mechanism for infiltration, subversion, and control. That is really what is at the core of all of this, as well as a slice of narcissism pie for sobbing crybabies to always be able to shriek, "LOOK AT ME! I'M AWESOME AND SPECIAL!" You know?

This BS is so frustrating.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: rytrasmi on March 27, 2024, 09:56:12 PM
Ruts. Ancient and medieval roads had deep ruts. Dirt roads, stone roads, dry or wet. We don't get the same thing today except sometimes on unmaintained backcountry roads. The ruts were carved over years by thousands of carts. Speaking of carts...a donkey cart would be infinitely more practical than a wheelchair.

Depends on the traffic. And you can putter between ruts if they are wagon sized. But we lived around alot of Amish and their dirt roads did not have ruts. Or at least ones worth noting. Its been a few decades now. Not sure why. But if they can pull it off...

Rain is still going the be the more pressing problem. And you still have the off-road problem.

You know what occurred to me that could work?

A halfling or gnome ranger or artificer in a dog cart or similar. I have an old catalogue from 1930 and theres a section on them for dogs, goats even to pull children around. Still got that off-road problem. But maybe something like a magical sled? Of course the woke cant ever think of more than a fantasy indestructo flying wheelchair.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 27, 2024, 11:21:49 PM
Being in a wheelchair, taking care of such survivors, and lacking alternatives, is not an unlikely scenario in a post-apocalyptic war against machines. And as long as it's treated as a liability and not some superpower it shouldn't be antithetical to verisimilitude. But at this point simply seeing a wheelchair is apparently just as triggering for yall as those hypothetical 'dogwhistles' the wokies keep complaining about.

This ideological bullshit is so tedious.

Its not so much the wheelchair - as the thought, or lack thereof, behind it. Anymore its more likely these insertions are not in good faith. That is the problem.

I have no idea if its viable or not in a post apoc setting. But circumstance is going to FORCE the handicapped to get out there and fight.

I think the same off-road/rubble problems are going to be a problem though. And anything with stairs. We come back to the need for a PC to act as handler for these problems. Which fits these settings too. And as said before. Can even fit a fantasy one. Work together or die alone.

Quote from: Slipshot762 on March 28, 2024, 04:58:13 PM
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

In D&D the person would be prone and all the penalties that grants and no way to un-prone yourself without righting the chair and pulling yourself back in it. This actually happens in some of the Ghostbuster Extreme episodes where the wheelchair bound character gets knocked out of his chair. He either has to right it and get back in, or fight from the ground.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan on March 27, 2024, 11:21:49 PM
But at this point simply seeing a wheelchair is apparently just as triggering for yall as those hypothetical 'dogwhistles' the wokies keep complaining about.

I think you might have something there.
If one pops up in a game, I'm going to play that X-card.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 28, 2024, 05:05:41 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AMThe problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.

Theres also a fantisization of being handicapped. As if it is no hindrance at all. Movies, cartoons.

Or they think they will automatically get some compensation sense from it that will lessen it. Guess what. You aint! I've talked with alot of handicapped folk about this and way more than half ended up with no other sense enhanced.

I feel this comes from the overall push to gloss over the negatives of being handicapped. Which leaves some people unprepared for the harsh realities.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 28, 2024, 05:05:41 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AMThe problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I would argue they simply don't want the actual flaws. They want the appearance of being disabled without actually having to play a disabled PC. Its virtue signaling retardation taken to its logical extreme. The stupid fucker that came up with the 'combat wheelchair' made sure that any such PC confined to one was better and more capable than a standard PC.

Sometimes that is probably it.  I think some of it is the same old stupid trick that's been around since the game first existed:  Try to push the GM's buttons to make them dance to your tune.  Some people just really get off on wrecking the experience for everyone else, to the point they aren't having fun if they can't push in that way. 

I decided a long time ago that I wasn't having any of that in any game I ran. Woke BS is yet another case.  It is a particularly annoying case in some ways, but the more subtle, non-political versions are just as damaging to a group in the long run.

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 08:38:12 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 27, 2024, 06:59:26 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PMFor my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

Ain't no one in any pseudo-medieval world gonna let their crippled relative, who is confined to a wheelchair, go adventuring. Even if they were the most gifted Wizard pupil around, the harsh reality of life would smack them in the face long before they went into their first ruin. And, as I said, it presumes that not a single Cleric does anything for charity. That their friendly Druid neighbor doesn't take pity on them and see to it their life is not confined to some wheelchair.

Greetings!

Yep, my friend! The whole argument is arguing from a position of absolute absurdity. Morons push for this kind of BS. Imagine what anyone rational in the game-world itself would likely think about such morons. They would laugh at them ruthlessly, out-of-hand. These pathetic, weak, helpless types of characters make zero sense in the harsh, real world environment--and they don't somehow make more sense in a harsh, brutal world that also has vampires, bands of savage orcs, and dragons running about seeking to slaughter everything that comes across their path.

The promotion of this nonsense is for the most part promoted by woke, jello-filled morons that are absolutely delusional.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

In Hackmaster 4th Ed, you has quirks and flaws (both mental and physical) for your PC by either cherry pick or roll (3 max by cherry pick). The more quirks and flaws you have, the more building points you get to purchase talents and skills at character creation.

BUT there is a threshold. A saturation point if you will, where the character would be considered unplayable. Through a sheer number of unlucky rolls, your character could become unplayable.  You could end up with a character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional).

My point? Sure you can have a game where PC do have quirks and flaws. HM 4E pulls this off. A PC who is a chronic liar, has unusual body odor, and in near-sighted is not exactly unplayable for example. As a DM, I would on occasion use these quirks and flaws against the PC. Honestly, that's part of my job.

But the guy who is character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional)?

No, he's unplayable. Period.

There comes a point where the shit piles up so much, you just have to say to yourself "there is no fucking way this character is playable."

The problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I don't care how fucking intelligent Steven Hawking was but he isn't climbing a fucking tree.

Intelligent? Yes. Genius? For sure. Run a 500m dash? Fuck NO!

Which is why...

(http://i.imgur.com/NyeVjKK.jpg) (https://imgur.com/NyeVjKK)

Greetings!

Absolutely, my friend! Hackmaster was absolute *genius* too! Definitely a system that makes Woke people REEE and cry!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Slipshot762 on March 28, 2024, 04:58:13 PM
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

That's getting into what the D&D attributes actually represent, which is a whole other can of worms. I see no reason why a wheelchair-bound character could not be an expert marksman, at least with a crossbow or firearm. But I'm also not giving them a dodge bonus to AC. Where that gets complicated is that the Dex bonus to AC theoretically incorporates both parrying and dodging. While being in a wheelchair would badly hinder your ability to fence, it doesn't make parrying impossible, so maybe limit on the max AC bonus they can get from Dexterity would be in order. I'd penalize the shit out of their reflexes-based saving throws, too.

If the wheelchair got suddenly vaporized they would be prone, and that would do whatever it otherwise does in the game rules.

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 28, 2024, 09:39:14 PM

Quote from: Slipshot762 on March 28, 2024, 04:58:13 PM
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

That's getting into what the D&D attributes actually represent, which is a whole other can of worms. I see no reason why a wheelchair-bound character could not be an expert marksman, at least with a crossbow or firearm. But I'm also not giving them a dodge bonus to AC. Where that gets complicated is that the Dex bonus to AC theoretically incorporates both parrying and dodging. While being in a wheelchair would badly hinder your ability to fence, it doesn't make parrying impossible, so maybe limit on the max AC bonus they can get from Dexterity would be in order. I'd penalize the shit out of their reflexes-based saving throws, too.

If the wheelchair got suddenly vaporized they would be prone, and that would do whatever it otherwise does in the game rules.

Agreed.  You can have an 18 in dex and be completely helpless in combat with a horrible AC because your (lack of) mobility overrides the general rule of dex and AC just like being restrained.  The dex still has full effect both regardless of whether you're in a wheelchair for appropriate ranged attacks as well as other potentially picking locks or crafting intricate items.

Quote from: SHARK on March 28, 2024, 09:27:41 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 28, 2024, 10:09:10 AM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 08:38:12 PM

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on March 27, 2024, 06:59:26 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 27, 2024, 05:21:06 PMFor my medieval-based D&D games, I prefer to be inspired by harsh, brutal reality.

Ain't no one in any pseudo-medieval world gonna let their crippled relative, who is confined to a wheelchair, go adventuring. Even if they were the most gifted Wizard pupil around, the harsh reality of life would smack them in the face long before they went into their first ruin. And, as I said, it presumes that not a single Cleric does anything for charity. That their friendly Druid neighbor doesn't take pity on them and see to it their life is not confined to some wheelchair.

Greetings!

Yep, my friend! The whole argument is arguing from a position of absolute absurdity. Morons push for this kind of BS. Imagine what anyone rational in the game-world itself would likely think about such morons. They would laugh at them ruthlessly, out-of-hand. These pathetic, weak, helpless types of characters make zero sense in the harsh, real world environment--and they don't somehow make more sense in a harsh, brutal world that also has vampires, bands of savage orcs, and dragons running about seeking to slaughter everything that comes across their path.

The promotion of this nonsense is for the most part promoted by woke, jello-filled morons that are absolutely delusional.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

In Hackmaster 4th Ed, you has quirks and flaws (both mental and physical) for your PC by either cherry pick or roll (3 max by cherry pick). The more quirks and flaws you have, the more building points you get to purchase talents and skills at character creation.

BUT there is a threshold. A saturation point if you will, where the character would be considered unplayable. Through a sheer number of unlucky rolls, your character could become unplayable.  You could end up with a character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional).

My point? Sure you can have a game where PC do have quirks and flaws. HM 4E pulls this off. A PC who is a chronic liar, has unusual body odor, and in near-sighted is not exactly unplayable for example. As a DM, I would on occasion use these quirks and flaws against the PC. Honestly, that's part of my job.

But the guy who is character who is a quadriplegic with chronic nose bleeds, migraines, stutters, and thinks he's a king (delusional)?

No, he's unplayable. Period.

There comes a point where the shit piles up so much, you just have to say to yourself "there is no fucking way this character is playable."

The problem is the Skittle colored hair crowd thinks quirks and flaws are not as they are. They don't understand there are limits.

I don't care how fucking intelligent Steven Hawking was but he isn't climbing a fucking tree.

Intelligent? Yes. Genius? For sure. Run a 500m dash? Fuck NO!

Which is why...

(http://i.imgur.com/NyeVjKK.jpg) (https://imgur.com/NyeVjKK)

Greetings!

Absolutely, my friend! Hackmaster was absolute *genius* too! Definitely a system that makes Woke people REEE and cry!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Indeed. You can strike a balance in HM4E, where your character can have some quirks and flaws to where he has to somehow overcome them (talents and skills can compensate), but there no so detrimental to the PC to where he's...well....a gimp, or a danger to himself or others (Hacklust and HackFrenzy are examples of this).

on a side note: Tropic Thunder is fucking HILARIOUS! Along with Blazing Saddles, is a movie that could NOT be made today.

Quote from: RNGm on March 29, 2024, 07:23:10 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 28, 2024, 09:39:14 PM

Quote from: Slipshot762 on March 28, 2024, 04:58:13 PM
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

That's getting into what the D&D attributes actually represent, which is a whole other can of worms. I see no reason why a wheelchair-bound character could not be an expert marksman, at least with a crossbow or firearm. But I'm also not giving them a dodge bonus to AC. Where that gets complicated is that the Dex bonus to AC theoretically incorporates both parrying and dodging. While being in a wheelchair would badly hinder your ability to fence, it doesn't make parrying impossible, so maybe limit on the max AC bonus they can get from Dexterity would be in order. I'd penalize the shit out of their reflexes-based saving throws, too.

If the wheelchair got suddenly vaporized they would be prone, and that would do whatever it otherwise does in the game rules.

Agreed.  You can have an 18 in dex and be completely helpless in combat with a horrible AC because your (lack of) mobility overrides the general rule of dex and AC just like being restrained.  The dex still has full effect both regardless of whether you're in a wheelchair for appropriate ranged attacks as well as other potentially picking locks or crafting intricate items.

In my HERO System game, I had my wheelchair-bound PC at half DCV in general, which is a common condition in HERO System. If he were out of his wheelchair, I'd probably just keep it at half rather than reduce to a third mostly for simplicity. We also bought down his Strength a bunch compared to pre-injury rating, to reflect his overall strength since most of effective strength is in the lower body. We didn't lower Dex because it is used for so many things that aren't leg-related, like shooting, reaction time, etc.

AC in D&D is strange because it represents armor as well as dodging. A wheelchair-using character shouldn't have much Dex bonus to AC. I'd cap that regardless of wheelchair or not like heavy armor does. Of course they'd still benefit from armor.

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 12:11:27 PM

Quote from: RNGm on March 29, 2024, 07:23:10 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 28, 2024, 09:39:14 PM

Quote from: Slipshot762 on March 28, 2024, 04:58:13 PM
In the opinion of those of you who actually run games, can a wheelchair bound character have an 18 dexterity or equivalent, and does removing the chair alter this in anyway? If say a beholder thanos-sizes the wheelchair out from under your arse are we adjusting your ac or dodge or whatever?

That's getting into what the D&D attributes actually represent, which is a whole other can of worms. I see no reason why a wheelchair-bound character could not be an expert marksman, at least with a crossbow or firearm. But I'm also not giving them a dodge bonus to AC. Where that gets complicated is that the Dex bonus to AC theoretically incorporates both parrying and dodging. While being in a wheelchair would badly hinder your ability to fence, it doesn't make parrying impossible, so maybe limit on the max AC bonus they can get from Dexterity would be in order. I'd penalize the shit out of their reflexes-based saving throws, too.

If the wheelchair got suddenly vaporized they would be prone, and that would do whatever it otherwise does in the game rules.

Agreed.  You can have an 18 in dex and be completely helpless in combat with a horrible AC because your (lack of) mobility overrides the general rule of dex and AC just like being restrained.  The dex still has full effect both regardless of whether you're in a wheelchair for appropriate ranged attacks as well as other potentially picking locks or crafting intricate items.

In my HERO System game, I had my wheelchair-bound PC at half DCV in general, which is a common condition in HERO System. If he were out of his wheelchair, I'd probably just keep it at half rather than reduce to a third mostly for simplicity. We also bought down his Strength a bunch compared to pre-injury rating, to reflect his overall strength since most of effective strength is in the lower body. We didn't lower Dex because it is used for so many things that aren't leg-related, like shooting, reaction time, etc.

AC in D&D is strange because it represents armor as well as dodging. A wheelchair-using character shouldn't have much Dex bonus to AC. I'd cap that regardless of wheelchair or not like heavy armor does. Of course they'd still benefit from armor.

Bold text: You've either never shot a gun before or you're lying. Your foot placement affects your ability to rotate your body to see the target clearly and take the shot. If you don't align and place your feet properly, you are more likely to miss the shot. Improper foot placement can also cause imbalance, which will affect the shot. Ultimately, this can have an affect on reaction time as well.

https://tacticalhyve.com/shooting-stances/ (https://tacticalhyve.com/shooting-stances/) Note there no "wheelchair stance"

in contrast:

https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/self-defense-from-wheelchair/ (https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/self-defense-from-wheelchair/)

TLDR version: it CAN be done, but it takes alot of practice and you need to know your limitations.

IRL, a wheelchair bound person will never be a good as one who's isn't.

But since were talking about a game with elves, dragons, and HEALING SPELLS (yes, I'm not letting that one go. I will die upon that fucking hill. Why be handicapped when the local Cleric can cast Heal?), there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

Quote from: blackstone on March 29, 2024, 12:43:39 PM
But since were talking about a game with elves, dragons, and HEALING SPELLS (yes, I'm not letting that one go. I will die upon that fucking hill. Why be handicapped when the local Cleric can cast Heal?), there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

The character I discussed wasn't from a D&D game -- it was from a gritty superpowers game using the HERO System where there were no elves, dragons, or magic. That's the only wheelchair-using PC that I've had in one of my games, which was many decades ago. Still, I've had that one and plenty of other characters with other disabilities in different games over the years.

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 01:10:28 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 29, 2024, 12:43:39 PM
But since were talking about a game with elves, dragons, and HEALING SPELLS (yes, I'm not letting that one go. I will die upon that fucking hill. Why be handicapped when the local Cleric can cast Heal?), there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

The character I discussed wasn't from a D&D game -- it was from a gritty superpowers game using the HERO System where there were no elves, dragons, or magic. That's the only wheelchair-using PC that I've had in one of my games, which was many decades ago. Still, I've had that one and plenty of other characters with other disabilities in different games over the years.

It doesn't matter if it's D&D or not, nor did I say it was. What I said holds true for fantasy, sci-fi, whatever: there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

Today I learned not having use of your legs in no way impacts marksmanship. Yeah...next thing I'll be told a legless man would be able to punch as hard as if he had legs. Or that you can benchpress just as much without legs. All sorts of stuff like that.

Quote from: blackstone on March 29, 2024, 03:05:05 PM

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 01:10:28 PM

Quote from: blackstone on March 29, 2024, 12:43:39 PM
But since were talking about a game with elves, dragons, and HEALING SPELLS (yes, I'm not letting that one go. I will die upon that fucking hill. Why be handicapped when the local Cleric can cast Heal?), there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

The character I discussed wasn't from a D&D game -- it was from a gritty superpowers game using the HERO System where there were no elves, dragons, or magic. That's the only wheelchair-using PC that I've had in one of my games, which was many decades ago. Still, I've had that one and plenty of other characters with other disabilities in different games over the years.

It doesn't matter if it's D&D or not, nor did I say it was. What I said holds true for fantasy, sci-fi, whatever: there are ways to MITIGATE some negative affect of a disability. Mitigate. Not remove.

Considering some examples:

• From Star Trek, Geordi is congenitally blind, but with his visor, he has better vision than the sighted characters - able to see greater spectrum and distance. He is often called on for his more detailed and sensitive vision.
• From Marvel, Daredevil is blind and this does limit him in a few ways - he can't read signs, and can only read books if he can touch them. But usually, his super-senses make him better than sighted people - able to sense in darkness and in all directions.
• From Star Wars animation, legless Darth Maul with his spider-legged getup is more mobile than those with legs, and they're strong. He might well be more dangerous with them than without.
• More conventional-appearing cybernetics often make the person stronger, like amputees Darth Vader or Steve Austin.

So I'd say it depends on the specifics of the sci-fi or fantasy.

Quote from: Brad on March 29, 2024, 03:30:12 PM
Today I learned not having use of your legs in no way impacts marksmanship.

My apologies - it was a casual remark about broader use of Dexterity. It would have been better to say lock-picking as RNGm noted. I'm fine applying a penalty in general for shooting from a seated position (maybe -2 in HERO's 3d6?) -- though I'd think that it wouldn't affect shooting from prone, as snipers often do.

I don't think that changes anything about the general issue. Being legless like Darth Maul or paralyzed like Professor X is unquestionably a disadvantage, but particularly in a world with supertech and/or magic, it doesn't necessarily make the character unplayable. It depends on the campaign, system, and GM.

As Grognard GM noted in his Mer-People hypothetical, sometimes simply being human is an unplayable disadvantage in a game.

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 04:11:45 PM

Quote from: Brad on March 29, 2024, 03:30:12 PM
Today I learned not having use of your legs in no way impacts marksmanship.

My apologies - it was a casual remark about broader use of Dexterity. It would have been better to say lock-picking as RNGm noted. I'm fine applying a penalty in general for shooting from a seated position (maybe -2 in HERO's 3d6?) -- though I'd think that it wouldn't affect shooting from prone, as snipers often do.

I don't think that changes anything about the general issue. Being legless like Darth Maul or paralyzed like Professor X is unquestionably a disadvantage, but particularly in a world with supertech and/or magic, it doesn't necessarily make the character unplayable. It depends on the campaign, system, and GM.

As Grognard GM noted in his Mer-People hypothetical, sometimes simply being human is an unplayable disadvantage in a game.

I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think JHKIM is drawing a distinction here between realistic world emulation and trying to emulate a genre. I would tend to agree that it should depend on what people are trying to do with their campaign. The problem here isn't having a combat wheelchair. The issue is there has been a shift where if you don't have it, or if you treat a disability like a real world disadvantage, that is looked upon as offensive or cruel. I see it as a constraint on art and entertainment issue. I don't want there to be a limit on people being able to have characters who are disabled and dealing with the disadvantages that confers, but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think JHKIM is drawing a distinction here between realistic world emulation and trying to emulate a genre. I would tend to agree that it should depend on what people are trying to do with their campaign. The problem here isn't having a combat wheelchair. The issue is there has been a shift where if you don't have it, or if you treat a disability like a real world disadvantage, that is looked upon as offensive or cruel. I see it as a constraint on art and entertainment issue. I don't want there to be a limit on people being able to have characters who are disabled and dealing with the disadvantages that confers, but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

OK, you might be right that that is the underlying issue for people's emotions about this, but it isn't the arguments actually being expressed.

From my view, wheelchair-using PCs seems like an issue that doesn't show up in actual play -- even among highly liberal gamers. At least with a controversy like the X-card, I've seen it actual introduced in real play (although almost never actually invoked). I haven't seen any wheelchair-using PCs, though, even regularly playing at liberal SF Bay Area conventions. I've had one in my games, but that was many decades ago.

I'm sure there are a few activists out there on the Internet who think it is offensive or cruel to have Professor X be limited by his disability -- and on the other hand, there's some people out there who think Professor X is unacceptable to play. I don't think it's actually an issue either way for most gamers, though.

To clarify a little - I mentioned that I've only had one PC who was wheelchair using, so I should clarify what that was like.

It was a gritty superpowers game (called "Paranormals"), using the HERO System. One of the PCs ("Circuit") was originally non-disabled and was a brilliant engineer with electrical powers. Partway into the campaign, he was captured and held hostage with a gun to his back, and another PC charged to save him, and he was shot to exactly the death threshold (-1 x BODY). I offered the player to have him survive but rewrite the character with his spine severed, changing his attributes and powers. We reduced his Strength and Running, gave him half DCV and other limitations, but added to other powers. He could activating his own neurons using his electrical powers, but it required concentration of his powers and it didn't work long-term.

He had a tricked-out motorized wheelchair as well as lightweight one, and also often acted as driver in a tricked-out car. The campaign didn't have super-technology like power suits, but he had above-average gadgets because none of his devices needed heavy batteries.

Even though he could have dashes of running using his powers, he generally stayed by the car and/or wheelchair because it gave him more stuff to work with and freed up his powers to do other things.

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 07:37:31 PM

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think JHKIM is drawing a distinction here between realistic world emulation and trying to emulate a genre. I would tend to agree that it should depend on what people are trying to do with their campaign. The problem here isn't having a combat wheelchair. The issue is there has been a shift where if you don't have it, or if you treat a disability like a real world disadvantage, that is looked upon as offensive or cruel. I see it as a constraint on art and entertainment issue. I don't want there to be a limit on people being able to have characters who are disabled and dealing with the disadvantages that confers, but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

OK, you might be right that that is the underlying issue for people's emotions about this, but it isn't the arguments actually being expressed.

I am going by seeing both these arguments being made on social media. I think most of this stuff isn't as common at the game table as it is online (at least I don't see these kinds of things in play in my groups, which is a limited perspective, granted)

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 07:37:31 PM

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think JHKIM is drawing a distinction here between realistic world emulation and trying to emulate a genre. I would tend to agree that it should depend on what people are trying to do with their campaign. The problem here isn't having a combat wheelchair. The issue is there has been a shift where if you don't have it, or if you treat a disability like a real world disadvantage, that is looked upon as offensive or cruel. I see it as a constraint on art and entertainment issue. I don't want there to be a limit on people being able to have characters who are disabled and dealing with the disadvantages that confers, but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

d.

From my view, wheelchair-using PCs seems like an issue that doesn't show up in actual play -- even among highly liberal gamers. At least with a controversy like the X-card, I've seen it actual introduced in real play (although almost never actually invoked). I haven't seen any wheelchair-using PCs, though, even regularly playing at liberal SF Bay Area conventions. I've had one in my games, but that was many decades ago.

I am guessing this is probably the case. I haven't seen much of this at the table

Quote from: jhkim on March 29, 2024, 07:37:31 PM

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
I don't think this is particularly controversial. I think JHKIM is drawing a distinction here between realistic world emulation and trying to emulate a genre. I would tend to agree that it should depend on what people are trying to do with their campaign. The problem here isn't having a combat wheelchair. The issue is there has been a shift where if you don't have it, or if you treat a disability like a real world disadvantage, that is looked upon as offensive or cruel. I see it as a constraint on art and entertainment issue. I don't want there to be a limit on people being able to have characters who are disabled and dealing with the disadvantages that confers, but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

I'm sure there are a few activists out there on the Internet who think it is offensive or cruel to have Professor X be limited by his disability -- and on the other hand, there's some people out there who think Professor X is unacceptable to play. I don't think it's actually an issue either way for most gamers, though.

I think it is less fringe when it comes to the industry. These conversations have been going on for a while now and there is definitely a "do this don't do that" element to it. And it can get kind of moralizing too, which always turns me off. I do agree, mostly it is an online thing, but that includes what kind of products are getting made, how criticisms are being framed, etc. It is a little hard to distill to one thing or example, but my point is more that if someone say takes criticism with a combat wheel chair on believability grounds (which I think is fair even though I am not as wedded to realism like that myself), it gets framed as people being exclusionary towards those with disabilities (which I do not the think the criticism is intended to be, it is just more about what is plausible to the person). Similar things are said if people find something like the wheel chair accessible dungeon on the silly side. And I think people react to the On the other side  you get the kind of things I have mentioned (where if something even looks 'woke' it is an issue----even if it just there because that is what the designer thought was interesting, not because they were trying to make any particular point about the world). I do think, given how all consuming these culture war issues have become in gaming discussions online, it isn't just a few activists. At the same time we keep running into these kinds of conflicts where people just imagine the other side will somehow permanently go away if they get 'owned' enough and I think for the hobby to be healthy we all need to be able to be in the same room with one another again.

Come on! We all know that 6e is going to have wheelchairs with floating disks and magic missile firing chain-guns mounted on the sides, and it's going to be in the equipment section of the player's handbook right where any player can see it and buy it.

You as DM will have to suck it up and let it into your game or get called an ista-phobe for being so ableist.

LOL this is classic jhkim cognitive dissonance.  Watching you guys wrestle with the pig in the mud is funny. (it's not like I haven't done a few rounds there) ;D

Don't change man.

Quote from: Svenhelgrim on March 29, 2024, 08:59:19 PM
Come on! We all know that 6e is going to have wheelchairs with floating disks and magic missile firing chain-guns mounted on the sides, and it's going to be in the equipment section of the player's handbook right where any player can see it and buy it.

You as DM will have to suck it up and let it into your game or get called an ista-phobe for being so ableist.

At least the variant ridable Tensers floating Disk is a thing in D&D. And makes 100% more sense than a combat wheelchair.

I have run NPCs on crutches helping out the party during unsuspecting encounters before, so I can't truly shit on cripples adventuring in my games completely.  ??? But yeah, wheeling up to the wizard's tower and being thwarted by stairs is quite funny.  ;D The easiest solution would be a strong laborer NPC willing to take direction to carry the wheelchair-bound.  8)

To accomodate all of imagination to be American Disabilities Act compliant smacks of dystopian goodrightthink. ::) But then I also expect those who want to try such extra challenges to be good roleplayers with voluntary ideas on how to make it work seamlessly in my campaign. I do the same in skill-based games where I favor not giving extra points for disabilities and flaws -- in fact, I like to reserve them as extra privileges for players I know will put in the work to roleplay them out in full. Seen more than a fair of munchkinism in GURPS and White Wolf and the like to tire of the pleas for extra points.  ;)

This just feels like theater kids needing extra spotlight attention. 8) If they can hang as an understudy or supporting character, basically "share the table", they might be a keeper. Otherwise I'd expect more drama somewhere else down the road if you relent here, too. ;) Asking for a campaign premise to remain on theme shouldn't be a mortal breach of trust...

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

We're way past that.
I cringe whenever I see anyone who isn't an able bodied white male on TV because I expect every other demographic to be there for political reasons, and not talent or story reasons.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 31, 2024, 03:06:50 PM
I cringe whenever I see anyone who isn't an able bodied white male on TV because I expect every other demographic to be there for political reasons, and not talent or story reasons.

Honestly, that's the worst part of this whole thing. Can't wait til this stuff eats itself and we can go back to just having good stories again.

Quote from: Zenoguy3 on March 31, 2024, 11:56:29 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 31, 2024, 03:06:50 PM
I cringe whenever I see anyone who isn't an able bodied white male on TV because I expect every other demographic to be there for political reasons, and not talent or story reasons.

Honestly, that's the worst part of this whole thing. Can't wait til this stuff eats itself and we can go back to just having good stories again.

Therein lies the problem. Seeing stuff like these damn wheelchairs is going to set people off because at this point the odds of it being legitimately just there because it interested the artist or designer, and not for woke points or outrage marketing is about zero now.

Whats really vile is that they do it to piss off handicapped people just for some free advertising.

When I see this sort of thing, I ask one question.  Why does this exist?  The only reason that this exists is, as far as I can tell, symbolic representation.  It's not about playing a disabled character and the role-play that might arise from that because the first thing is does is to eliminate any disability that might result from the character's disability.  It's also so hilariously over-powered for what it costs than there's no reason why every character wouldn't be using one.  If not for the virtue signaling angle, people would immediately write this off as just more over-powered homebrew.  Instead, they are calling people istaphobes for not allowing this thing.

Overall, the idea of a wheelchair accessible dungeon is stupid. In general, dungeons are dangerous places with monsters and traps, not a theme park where you have disabled accessible areas. Unless you're purposely make the dungeon that way. In that case, you're either a skittle haired doofus or you have a sinister ulterior motives....like trapping an access ramp, which I approve.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on March 31, 2024, 03:06:50 PM

Quote from: Bedrockbrendan on March 29, 2024, 07:02:38 PM
but I also don't want it to become a backlash where having the One Armed Swordsman or Professor X is suddenly a politically charged idea that people can't accept.

We're way past that.
I cringe whenever I see anyone who isn't an able bodied white male on TV because I expect every other demographic to be there for political reasons, and not talent or story reasons.

Pretty much everyone I know is like this now. But we're all adults, so let's just vote with our dollars and our attention and give them none of it. I have plenty to do outside of blind consumption.

Quote from: Omega on April 01, 2024, 02:05:28 AM
Therein lies the problem. Seeing stuff like these damn wheelchairs is going to set people off because at this point the odds of it being legitimately just there because it interested the artist or designer, and not for woke points or outrage marketing is about zero now.

Whats really vile is that they do it to piss off handicapped people just for some free advertising.

What you're talking about here is people's motives - but others have been arguing that any wheelchair-using PC is ridiculous without regard to the motives of the GM or player.

---

I don't even know that I disagree.

When you say "these damn wheelchairs" - what are you talking about? The published examples mentioned in this thread are Lord Weathermay from Ravenloft II, and the cover of the Terminator: Resist sourcebook. Three years ago, I bought Candlekeep Mysteries because I was curious after Pundit's claim that the combat wheelchair was in it, for example -- but there were no wheelchairs at all in the book.

This all seems to me like an invented controversy from social media, not actual gaming or even actual gaming products.

Quote from: jhkim on April 01, 2024, 02:20:37 PM
This all seems to me like an invented controversy from social media, not actual gaming or even actual gaming products.

Quote from: tenbones on March 29, 2024, 11:30:18 PM
LOL this is classic jhkim cognitive dissonance.  Watching you guys wrestle with the pig in the mud is funny. (it's not like I haven't done a few rounds there) ;D

Don't change man.

(https://i.imgur.com/ud2ItGr.gif)

Quote from: jhkim on April 01, 2024, 02:20:37 PMbut others have been arguing that any wheelchair-using PC is ridiculous without regard to the motives of the GM or player.

We're talking about wheelchairs don't belong in high fantasy settings where healing magic is common, you disingenuous goober.

Stormbringer (early editions) is a very good game.

You rolled randomly for your character background.

You could be a diseased vagrant. Your character could begin VERY messed up and that character would rarely live very long.

Feel free to play messed up characters in dangerous RPGs.

Just don't complain when they don't survive.

One good thing this thread got me thinking about is how dungeons are always built around the assumption that everyone is around 6' tall. 

Imagine a group of players hired to raid a kobold's fortress, and when they arrive, they discover the kobold roof is around a whopping 3' 4" high.  Which is cozy for kobolds, and pretty awful for anyone else.  The humans and elves and tieflings and dragonkin and what not are literally crawling through the place, the dwarfs are scrunching over, and even the halflings feel a little cramped maybe.  And then the kobolds run around in the "murder shafts" above the party, poking them with dung covered spears when they aren't pouring boiling oil or molten lead on their heads (they save that for the special areas!).  But I digress.

Point is, I -do- think there's a place for diversity in body types and frames (and skin tones and what not), but it needs to either be accepted as window dressing or else embraced for its reality.  Otherwise at best it's virtue signaling to randos on the internet, or at worst it's diversity tourism for the sake of your character being "quirky".  Wheelchairs in D&D?  Hey, if your setting can figure out airships I figure wheelchairs aren't that big a deal.  Wheelchairs as viable dungeon vehicles?  Try rolling that thing down those kobold tunnels bitch.     

The closest thing to wheelchair in any of my dungeons are minecarts.

Given that most modern consumers of 5e these days don't see most of their "campaigns" are in proverbial minecarts and on a track, they should feel right at home.

The only good use of such minecarts in my games are to out-perform Temple of Doom. Or to unexpectedly drop on PC's.

Quote from: Habitual Gamer on April 02, 2024, 11:40:32 AM
One good thing this thread got me thinking about is how dungeons are always built around the assumption that everyone is around 6' tall. 

Imagine a group of players hired to raid a kobold's fortress, and when they arrive, they discover the kobold roof is around a whopping 3' 4" high.  Which is cozy for kobolds, and pretty awful for anyone else.  The humans and elves and tieflings and dragonkin and what not are literally crawling through the place, the dwarfs are scrunching over, and even the halflings feel a little cramped maybe.  And then the kobolds run around in the "murder shafts" above the party, poking them with dung covered spears when they aren't pouring boiling oil or molten lead on their heads (they save that for the special areas!).

I ran exactly this in an earlier campaign. The PCs had followed a enemy tribe of kobolds in the Underdark back to their lair, and their lair was in caves that the full-size characters simply couldn't enter. Two players temporarily took over playing NPC goblin henchmen while their PCs guarded the entrance, and the druid went in as a wolverine or something.

Another issue in the Underdark was light. Carrying a light source when in the Underdark was often a real liability, because it was a beacon for creatures. The party had a lot but not completely characters with darkvision. So sometimes they would just have no light source, and lead along the two PCs without darkvision. Some players would refer to this as the disability of "dark-blindness".

It all depends on the campaign. In some campaigns, being a human is a major disability. For example, Grognard GM suggested a hypothetical earlier of an all-underwater campaign where being air-breathing is a lethal disadvantage.

Quote from: Habitual Gamer on April 02, 2024, 11:40:32 AM
Point is, I -do- think there's a place for diversity in body types and frames (and skin tones and what not), but it needs to either be accepted as window dressing or else embraced for its reality.  Otherwise at best it's virtue signaling to randos on the internet, or at worst it's diversity tourism for the sake of your character being "quirky".

I agree about embracing reality to a degree, but it depends of the reality of the campaign. For example, in the Transformers cartoon, Chip in his wheelchair attaches a device to a Decepticon's leg during a fight. That's OK, I think, because it fits with the reality of the kids cartoon. Likewise, if I'm playing in a heroic game where a (non-magic) character can fall five stories and immediately run from where they hit, then that sets the tone for the limits I'm setting. If I'm playing Call of Cthulhu or HarnMaster, then the reality limitations will be much more strict.

Quote from: Insane Nerd Ramblings on April 01, 2024, 04:50:38 PM

Quote from: jhkim on April 01, 2024, 02:20:37 PMbut others have been arguing that any wheelchair-using PC is ridiculous without regard to the motives of the GM or player.

We're talking about wheelchairs don't belong in high fantasy settings where healing magic is common, you disingenuous goober.

People other than you and I have been talking about everything from Terminator to martial arts movies.

If a GM wants to rule that there are effectively no crippling disease or injuries in the game world, that's their call. Also, there are plenty of other settings where wheelchairs don't belong. For example, the world of my current D&D campaign doesn't have worked iron or wheeled transport - so a wheelchair would be out of place there as well.

In particular, D&D is used for settings ranging from Ravenloft (with wheelchair-bound Lord Weathermay), Gothic Earth, A Mighty Fortress and other historical settings, and lots of others. I don't think one can generalize about all of them. In Eberron, for example, magic and healing are common -- but it's also a dark and gritty setting and there are a lot of hostile magics that could counter healing. I think it fits well with the setting for there to be crippled veterans of the Last War.

/cannonballing into the pig-pen...

Why do you REALLY think this wheelchair nonsense is even being discussed, jhkim?

C'mon. Show me you can shoot for the outiest-outlier of examples to justify your rationalization.

jhkim, here is an article for you.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries

QuoteAs an ambulatory wheelchair user, Kretchmer says that is was important to her that her dungeon was a place that she could explore. As such, it's filled with fantasy elevators (whether they functioned by pulley or by magic, she didn't say), and ledges are accessible by ramps rather than by stairs.

Now let's do madlibs:

Because I am a ______, I included a ______ in the adventure I wrote.

The D&D wheelchair is obviously a case of representation and tokenism. But besides that, it is antithetical to good adventure design. It conflates real life with a fantasy world. It chips away at what a fantasy world is supposed to be: a coherent and believable world.

Some old vampire in a wheelchair is not the problem. The problem is people wholesale importing anachronisms into fantasy worlds in the name of "representation." There people are wrong and should be mocked. Like the person in OP's video said, they should be tossed out of the hobby.

Here is another link for you. It's the first hit when searching d&d wheelchair.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/pddtg9/combat_wheelchair_30_released_today/

Look at how powerful it is. Why wouldn't every character use this thing? It is cynical and condescending. It says: hey cripples, now you can finally enjoy d&d because I made you a wheelchair that makes the game easy for you.

Now go back to the madlibs above. Run through it a few times for yourself.

Because I am short, I included some elevator shoes in the adventure I wrote.

Because I have dyslexia, I omitted books from the adventure I wrote.

Because I am diabetic, I included some cookies in the adventure I wrote.

This is a forest and you are very much focused on the trees, so I expect you won't appreciate this argument or what others have tried to tell you.

Yes OF COURSE it depends on the specific setting and what the table expects and wants. That goes without saying. But that seems to be your entire argument in this thread: wheelchairs are not inherently unsuitable because here are some examples. We are not IDIOTS. This is fucking obvious. What you seem genuinely baffled by is regular gamers who don't want tokenism and "representation" used as a wedge to fuck with the games that they love. 

The combat wheelchair rules that people are talking about are for D&D 5e so I will address it in the context of that game.  The entire idea makes no sense for that system on a very fundamental level.  The reason is that 5e has no rules for lingering injuries.  When you take damage, your hit points go down.  When you heal, your hit points go up.  That's it.  Hit points go down.  Hit points go up.  Critical hits have no effect other than probably making your hit points go down more.  A lingering injury like a spinal cord injury is not something that even can happen in the system.  You would need to add your own lingering injury rules or just do it by fiat for this to even happen. 

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 01:58:29 PM
People other than you and I have been talking about everything from Terminator to martial arts movies.

The original conversation was obviously about the plausibility and viability of wheelchair-bound characters in a D&D setting.  You responded by talking about super hero rpgs.  You have refused to engage with the topic that people were actually talking about since then.  You have managed to divert the conversation to some extent by talking about tangentially related topics though.

Quote from: jhkim on April 01, 2024, 02:20:37 PM
What you're talking about here is people's motives - but others have been arguing that any wheelchair-using PC is ridiculous without regard to the motives of the GM or player.

---

I don't even know that I disagree.

When you say "these damn wheelchairs" - what are you talking about? The published examples mentioned in this thread are Lord Weathermay from Ravenloft II, and the cover of the Terminator: Resist sourcebook. Three years ago, I bought Candlekeep Mysteries because I was curious after Pundit's claim that the combat wheelchair was in it, for example -- but there were no wheelchairs at all in the book.

This all seems to me like an invented controversy from social media, not actual gaming or even actual gaming products.

I'm talking about this point because too many here are just blindly lashing out at anything which lessens or even nullifies any valid arguments. Which may be the whole motive of a few here.

Candlekeep is a great example of WotC baiting people and just how well Pundit fell for it, again. wotc has been pulling this stunt for a while now because they know that they 100% will get free advertising by getting people outraged. And if the book just happens to not have that thing in it then it discredits anyone speaking out. Win Win in wotc marketing eyes.

As long as people keep falling for it they will keep being wotc's trained lapdogs working for free for wotc.

And it will happen again and again because people like Pundit keep falling for it.

Quote from: Habitual Gamer on April 02, 2024, 11:40:32 AM
One good thing this thread got me thinking about is how dungeons are always built around the assumption that everyone is around 6' tall.

Not really. Most dungeons halls and rooms are 10x10. I think AD&D averaged human height to 5'6" at best. I'd have to dig through. I do not think any edition has had humans at a standard 6ft tall.

(watch it turn out that 4e did...)

Quote from: tenbones on April 02, 2024, 03:50:09 PM
Why do you REALLY think this wheelchair nonsense is even being discussed, jhkim?

C'mon. Show me you can shoot for the outiest-outlier of examples to justify your rationalization.

I can only speculate about why other people in this thread are discussing it. I'll say why I'm discussing it, and other people can discuss about why they are. I'm discussing it because some posters made blanket statements about how it is unworkable to have a wheelchair-bound character in a game -- and this conflicts with my experience, because I've played with one wheelchair-using PC and dozens of PCs with various other disabilities.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
jhkim, here is an article for you.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries
...
The D&D wheelchair is obviously a case of representation and tokenism. But besides that, it is antithetical to good adventure design. It conflates real life with a fantasy world. It chips away at what a fantasy world is supposed to be: a coherent and believable world.

Some old vampire in a wheelchair is not the problem. The problem is people wholesale importing anachronisms into fantasy worlds in the name of "representation."

OK, I've read the article, and I've read Kretchmer's adventure ("The Canopic Being"). The adventure has no wheelchairs in it. It does have ramps, but it is an Egyptian-style tomb, and many real-world Egyptian tombs are built with ramps - like the Great Pyramid at Giza. That's not an anachronism. That's historical accuracy.

So no, I think you're wrong about it "importing anachronisms".

Kretchmer was evidently inspired by her disability in choosing that dungeon design which uses ramps. I'm sure there is some psychological or ethical complexity to that, but I don't have an immediate reaction. By parallel, Charles Saunders was a black author, and he wrote the Imaro stories about a black fantasy hero. Is that tokenism? I don't know, but I do know that I love the Imaro stories. They're awesome.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
Here is another link for you. It's the first hit when searching d&d wheelchair.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/pddtg9/combat_wheelchair_30_released_today/

Look at how powerful it is. Why wouldn't every character use this thing? It is cynical and condescending. It says: hey cripples, now you can finally enjoy d&d because I made you a wheelchair that makes the game easy for you.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
Yes OF COURSE it depends on the specific setting and what the table expects and wants. That goes without saying. But that seems to be your entire argument in this thread: wheelchairs are not inherently unsuitable because here are some examples. We are not IDIOTS. This is fucking obvious. What you seem genuinely baffled by is regular gamers who don't want tokenism and "representation" used as a wedge to fuck with the games that they love.

If the problem isn't with wheelchairs in general but with only the specific cases (like Thompson's homebrew rules), then the discussion should be "these wheelchairs suck - here's the right way to have wheelchair-using PCs in a game".

But that isn't what most posters have been saying. There's been tons of venting about how any wheelchair-using PC is completely ridiculous and unworkable.

If you want to talk about what are good ways to have a wheelchair-using PC, then I'd be open to that. All this talking about it has poked at my imagination some about what I might like in one of my fantasy games.

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM
It does have ramps,

Why does it have ramps?  We know the answer.

"As an ambulatory wheelchair user, Kretchmer says that is was important to her that her dungeon was a place that she could explore. As such, it's filled with fantasy elevators (whether they functioned by pulley or by magic, she didn't say), and ledges are accessible by ramps rather than by stairs.  Kretchmer was evidently inspired by her disability in choosing that dungeon design which uses ramps."

So don't even pretend that this isn't about the author making in wheelchair accessible.  We know it was.  Pretending otherwise is deeply disingenuous.

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PMIs that tokenism?

No, it's self-involved narcissism.  These people make everything they do about themselves.   

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
jhkim, here is an article for you.

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries
...
The D&D wheelchair is obviously a case of representation and tokenism. But besides that, it is antithetical to good adventure design. It conflates real life with a fantasy world. It chips away at what a fantasy world is supposed to be: a coherent and believable world.

Some old vampire in a wheelchair is not the problem. The problem is people wholesale importing anachronisms into fantasy worlds in the name of "representation."

OK, I've read the article, and I've read Kretchmer's adventure ("The Canopic Being"). The adventure has no wheelchairs in it. It does have ramps, but it is an Egyptian-style tomb, and many real-world Egyptian tombs are built with ramps - like the Great Pyramid at Giza. That's not an anachronism. That's historical accuracy.

So no, I think you're wrong about it "importing anachronisms".

Kretchmer was evidently inspired by her disability in choosing that dungeon design which uses ramps. I'm sure there is some psychological or ethical complexity to that, but I don't have an immediate reaction. By parallel, Charles Saunders was a black author, and he wrote the Imaro stories about a black fantasy hero. Is that tokenism? I don't know, but I do know that I love the Imaro stories. They're awesome.

Kretchmer explained why she put the ramps in the dungeon. She did not mention historic fidelity. She literally said it was so that she, Kretchmer in the 21st century, could explore it. The fact that you find it to be historically accurate is irrelevant. Besides, the Egyptians used ramps because they rolled heavy objects on logs. Again, not a wheelchair.

I've never read the Imaro stories, but obviously that's a case of an author building a world based on his vision. I'm sure his world is internally consistent because, as you say, they are great stories. I don't know what else to say if you think this could be tokenism or is at all comparable to Kretchmer's expressed design intent.

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
Here is another link for you. It's the first hit when searching d&d wheelchair.

https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/pddtg9/combat_wheelchair_30_released_today/

Look at how powerful it is. Why wouldn't every character use this thing? It is cynical and condescending. It says: hey cripples, now you can finally enjoy d&d because I made you a wheelchair that makes the game easy for you.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PM
Yes OF COURSE it depends on the specific setting and what the table expects and wants. That goes without saying. But that seems to be your entire argument in this thread: wheelchairs are not inherently unsuitable because here are some examples. We are not IDIOTS. This is fucking obvious. What you seem genuinely baffled by is regular gamers who don't want tokenism and "representation" used as a wedge to fuck with the games that they love.

If the problem isn't with wheelchairs in general but with only the specific cases (like Thompson's homebrew rules), then the discussion should be "these wheelchairs suck - here's the right way to have wheelchair-using PCs in a game".

But that isn't what most posters have been saying. There's been tons of venting about how any wheelchair-using PC is completely ridiculous and unworkable.

If you want to talk about what are good ways to have a wheelchair-using PC, then I'd be open to that. All this talking about it has poked at my imagination some about what I might like in one of my fantasy games.

We have published examples with clear design intent to be "inclusive" or "allow" a disabled person to play. This is what we are criticizing.

You say that it's workable. Okay, so that remains to be seen, but the first question is: why?

Tomb of Horrors should be rewritten, to include wheelchair ramps.  Acererak would welcome those using them, with open arms.  Shucks, wheelchair ramps should also be installed in Rapan Athuk.  Orcus would also welcome those using them, with open arms.

Quote from: Man at Arms on April 02, 2024, 11:45:23 PM
Tomb of Horrors should be rewritten, to include wheelchair ramps.  Acererak would welcome those using them, with open arms.  Shucks, wheelchair ramps should also be installed in Rapan Athuk.  Orcus would also welcome those using them, with open arms.

Well, there is one ramp in the Tomb of Horrors...

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 11:15:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM
OK, I've read the article, and I've read Kretchmer's adventure ("The Canopic Being"). The adventure has no wheelchairs in it. It does have ramps, but it is an Egyptian-style tomb, and many real-world Egyptian tombs are built with ramps - like the Great Pyramid at Giza. That's not an anachronism. That's historical accuracy.

So no, I think you're wrong about it "importing anachronisms".

Kretchmer was evidently inspired by her disability in choosing that dungeon design which uses ramps. I'm sure there is some psychological or ethical complexity to that, but I don't have an immediate reaction. By parallel, Charles Saunders was a black author, and he wrote the Imaro stories about a black fantasy hero. Is that tokenism? I don't know, but I do know that I love the Imaro stories. They're awesome.

Kretchmer explained why she put the ramps in the dungeon. She did not mention historic fidelity. She literally said it was so that she, Kretchmer in the 21st century, could explore it. The fact that you find it to be historically accurate is irrelevant. Besides, the Egyptians used ramps because they rolled heavy objects on logs. Again, not a wheelchair.

I've never read the Imaro stories, but obviously that's a case of an author building a world based on his vision. I'm sure his world is internally consistent because, as you say, they are great stories. I don't know what else to say if you think this could be tokenism or is at all comparable to Kretchmer's expressed design intent.

In general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

Here, I think you're conflating real world motivation and fictional consistency. For example, an author might want to write a story for the money. One could then say "That sucks. He doesn't give a shit about the consistency of the fictional world at all, and he'll write absolute crap just for the money." But I think that's mistaken. He could want to develop consistency because he thinks it will make him more money.

So if I ask "Why do demons have four wings in his fantasy world?" One could answer "To make money." -- and that's technically correct, but that doesn't mean that the fiction is inconsistent. The fictional world is always written for real world reasons. Authors don't work just to serve their fictional worlds. They need to eat real food, and they have real-world interests and dreams that guide their writing.

---

Regarding Saunders, he could be accused of tokenism because he explicitly wrote a black fantasy protagonist because of his frustration with white-authored fantasy. Here's him talking about starting his writing career:

QuoteIt was when I discovered fantasy that I also discovered that I wanted to be a storyteller - a griot, although I hadn't yet discovered that term. I soon would, though. I spent my university days at a historically black college in Pennsylvania, Lincoln. I started in 1964 and graduated in 1968. Seldom has so much changed during a four-year period. So much was going on, from three-piece suits and processed hair to Afros and dashikis. From integration to Black Power... From non-violent demonstrations to riots in the streets... From punching somebody for calling you black to shouting 'Black is beautiful!' Lincoln had a lot of students from Africa at the time, and I learned a great deal from them. I started reading more about the history and culture of Africa. And I began to realise that in the SF and fantasy genre, blacks were, with only few exceptions, either left out or depicted in racist and stereotypic ways. I had a choice: I could either stop reading SF and fantasy, or try to do something about my dissatisfaction with it by writing my own stories and trying to get them published. I chose the latter course. I was crazy enough to think I could break into what was essentially a white genre - at the time, I didn't know Chip Delany was black, even though I'd read, and enjoyed, his work. That fact wasn't exactly advertised back then.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110607105724/http:/www.zone-sf.com/crsaunders.html

All of you just collectively walk away from the discussion with JhKIM.

Seriously why put up with all the disingenuousness of  a poster who is clearly not wanting to argue in good faith.

It's like dealing with the rpg version of Dave Meltzer in his defence of AEW wrestling. Nothing good can come of it.

Why do you think I am not engaging with him because it's more of the same old BS.

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM
In general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

Here, I think you're conflating real world motivation and fictional consistency. For example, an author might want to write a story for the money. One could then say "That sucks. He doesn't give a shit about the consistency of the fictional world at all, and he'll write absolute crap just for the money." But I think that's mistaken. He could want to develop consistency because he thinks it will make him more money.

So if I ask "Why do demons have four wings in his fantasy world?" One could answer "To make money." -- and that's technically correct, but that doesn't mean that the fiction is inconsistent. The fictional world is always written for real world reasons. Authors don't work just to serve their fictional worlds. They need to eat real food, and they have real-world interests and dreams that guide their writing.

OK, so you stand for game content and authors should be able to eat. You've generalized so much that nobody can disagree. Congrats, you win the argument!

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM

Regarding Saunders, he could be accused of tokenism because he explicitly wrote a black fantasy protagonist because of his frustration with white-authored fantasy. Here's him talking about starting his writing career:

QuoteIt was when I discovered fantasy that I also discovered that I wanted to be a storyteller - a griot, although I hadn't yet discovered that term. I soon would, though. I spent my university days at a historically black college in Pennsylvania, Lincoln. I started in 1964 and graduated in 1968. Seldom has so much changed during a four-year period. So much was going on, from three-piece suits and processed hair to Afros and dashikis. From integration to Black Power... From non-violent demonstrations to riots in the streets... From punching somebody for calling you black to shouting 'Black is beautiful!' Lincoln had a lot of students from Africa at the time, and I learned a great deal from them. I started reading more about the history and culture of Africa. And I began to realise that in the SF and fantasy genre, blacks were, with only few exceptions, either left out or depicted in racist and stereotypic ways. I had a choice: I could either stop reading SF and fantasy, or try to do something about my dissatisfaction with it by writing my own stories and trying to get them published. I chose the latter course. I was crazy enough to think I could break into what was essentially a white genre - at the time, I didn't know Chip Delany was black, even though I'd read, and enjoyed, his work. That fact wasn't exactly advertised back then.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110607105724/http:/www.zone-sf.com/crsaunders.html

"He could be accused..." - I'm not going to argue against speculation in passive voice. You raised Saunders and now seem to be arguing with someone else, maybe a ghost or maybe yourself. Sort out whether you think Imaro is tokenism and get back to us.

QuoteIn general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

That's the whole point of this thread: intent. IF the intent of the author to include wheelchair access to a dungeon because they're wheelchair bound in real life, it is a bit narcissistic and potentially anachronistic depending on the campaign.

But we can all read between the lines: WoTC fulfilling D.E.I. (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) requirements as laid out by a D.E.I. consulting firm and dictated by WoTC H.R. Dept.

We know Wizards is doing this by hiring one four years ago:

https://articles.starcitygames.com/news/wotc-seeking-diversity-equity-inclusion-manager/ (https://articles.starcitygames.com/news/wotc-seeking-diversity-equity-inclusion-manager/)

There's your answer to why this is happening folks. It's not game content. It's not even GOOD game content.

It's fulfilling D.E.I. not just in the real world, BUT IN A GAME.

Which ultimately leads to WoTC wanting to dictate what YOU can have in 5E:

-by going away from print to almost all digital
-doing away with "half" races like half orc and half elf, because they consider it racist
-and having the insane and laughable concept of a wheelchair accessible dungeon

You can believe what yo want, but don't blow sunshine up my ass and tell me it just "making content".

It's an agenda.

Quote from: blackstone on April 03, 2024, 10:41:19 AM

QuoteIn general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

That's the whole point of this thread: intent. IF the intent of the author to include wheelchair access to a dungeon because they're wheelchair bound in real life, it is a bit narcissistic and potentially anachronistic depending on the campaign.

But we can all read between the lines: WoTC fulfilling D.E.I. (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) requirements as laid out by a D.E.I. consulting firm and dictated by WoTC H.R. Dept.

We know Wizards is doing this by hiring one four years ago:

https://articles.starcitygames.com/news/wotc-seeking-diversity-equity-inclusion-manager/ (https://articles.starcitygames.com/news/wotc-seeking-diversity-equity-inclusion-manager/)

There's your answer to why this is happening folks. It's not game content. It's not even GOOD game content.

It's fulfilling D.E.I. not just in the real world, BUT IN A GAME.

Which ultimately leads to WoTC wanting to dictate what YOU can have in 5E:

-by going away from print to almost all digital
-doing away with "half" races like half orc and half elf, because they consider it racist
-and having the insane and laughable concept of a wheelchair accessible dungeon

You can believe what yo want, but don't blow sunshine up my ass and tell me it just "making content".

It's an agenda.

Greetings!

Absolutely right, my friend! Jhkim's complete failure to truly understand this and acknowledge this salient reality is simply a reflection of his delusion, at best--or his actual agreement and support for such a corporate agenda.

I'm inclined to believe that Jhkim totally supports the Woke BS, because he is a Leftist to begin with. He likes the Woke BS, and is totally on board with all of it. He likes to tap dance and hedge, and always run interference for it, while claiming that he is some kind of reasonable, neutral-aligned centrist. Or some other figure of reasonableness. All the while though, defending the Woke BS, or gaslighting people that it really isn't that bad, or it isn't what people think, or it is really just the product if a few extremists on the Left. You know the drill. Gaslighting, running interference, promoting word salads, proclamations of being reasonable, and also constant efforts at derailing, misdirection, deflection, and confusion.

Jhkim loves to shriek about Pundit claiming the wheelchairs were in the WOTC adventure, and somehow, they weren't there, so Pundit was wrong, supposedly.

And yet, I have often reminded Jhkim that Pundit did not make it up, or lie at all. Where did he get this idea from? I saw the whole wheelchair BS talked about by Clownfish, The Quartering, and more--in addition to WOTC talking about how important wheelchairs and inclusivity was in their adventures, on their website. There was some official article of WOTC that talked about it, and then I think some twitter posts or something by WOTC developers themselves. So, Pundit did not lie about anything. Pundit did not distort anything, or misrepresent anything. If the actual published adventure was somehow cleansed of the fucking wheelchair in the last minute before publication, that isn't Pundit's fault. It could also be like Omega likes to talk about, WOTC publicly signaling they are including whatever BS, and then at the last minute, scrubbing it, or otherwise the real actual content is actually fairly minimal--because it is simply an effort of WOTC marketing to harvest outrage and support from the Woke activists, and cultivate publicity from the public, like Pundit and others, pulling them into giving WOTC more advertising, clicks, and exposure.

I'm not sure I agree with Omega's theory entirely, but I can definitely see that aspect as a contributing factor. Still, though, that all makes Pundit's video entirely vindicated. Pundit was talking about something very relevant. Jhkim doesn't like that, so he always tries to shriek about Pundit being wrong, and on and on. *Laughing*

I just cycle back to the huge TRUTH that Pundit didn't invent the whole wheelchair BS, the Kretchmer woman did, and then WOTC promoted and encouraged it. Bottom line. Exactly how much or how little of it they explicitly included in some adventure is irrelevant. I KNOW that WOTC wants to, and has included all kinds of Woke BS in the books ALREADY. Jeremy Crawford himself--a homosexual--declares that D&D is going to get a lot more gayer, guaranteed.

Jeremy Crawford. Lead designer at WOTC. How much more BS do we need shoveled into our mouths before we Yeah, realize that WOTC is absolutely committed to promoting the fucking Woke, Marxist, BS agenda? Kretchmer, WOTC, The Quartering, Clownfish, and I think a few other YouTubers talked about wheelchairs in the WOTC adventures and in the hobby BEFORE Pundit did. So, as I said, Pundit didn't make this shit up, or pull it out of thin air.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 03, 2024, 09:56:31 AM

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM
Regarding Saunders, he could be accused of tokenism because he explicitly wrote a black fantasy protagonist because of his frustration with white-authored fantasy. Here's him talking about starting his writing career:

QuoteIt was when I discovered fantasy that I also discovered that I wanted to be a storyteller - a griot, although I hadn't yet discovered that term. I soon would, though. I spent my university days at a historically black college in Pennsylvania, Lincoln. I started in 1964 and graduated in 1968. Seldom has so much changed during a four-year period. So much was going on, from three-piece suits and processed hair to Afros and dashikis. From integration to Black Power... From non-violent demonstrations to riots in the streets... From punching somebody for calling you black to shouting 'Black is beautiful!' Lincoln had a lot of students from Africa at the time, and I learned a great deal from them. I started reading more about the history and culture of Africa. And I began to realise that in the SF and fantasy genre, blacks were, with only few exceptions, either left out or depicted in racist and stereotypic ways. I had a choice: I could either stop reading SF and fantasy, or try to do something about my dissatisfaction with it by writing my own stories and trying to get them published. I chose the latter course. I was crazy enough to think I could break into what was essentially a white genre - at the time, I didn't know Chip Delany was black, even though I'd read, and enjoyed, his work. That fact wasn't exactly advertised back then.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110607105724/http:/www.zone-sf.com/crsaunders.html

"He could be accused..." - I'm not going to argue against speculation in passive voice. You raised Saunders and now seem to be arguing with someone else, maybe a ghost or maybe yourself. Sort out whether you think Imaro is tokenism and get back to us.

OK, that's fair. I felt like diving into "tokenism" was a new can of worms, but I've already done so anyway.

I would say that tokenism is disinterested checking of boxes. The classic being a film producer who says "We need one Latino, one black, and one wheelchair-using character" - and doesn't give a damn otherwise as long as the token role is filled. For example, including a token black character in a horror film, only to have that character be the first one killed off. A film like The Wiz is not tokenism. The creators clearly cared a lot about it and weren't just checking off boxes, and it wasn't just a single token character or inclusion.

Saunders writing about a black protagonist in fantasy Africa, and Kretchmer writing about dungeons with ramps aren't tokenism. As authors, they are writing about what they are interested in, not just checking off boxes to be inclusive.

---

There is a parallel to tokenism in audiences as well -- where someone declares that they love a work simply because they heard the author was some minority, and not because they actually read and liked the work. I see this in many liberals. Someone might say how much they love Thompson's combat wheelchair just because of the representation, and not because they have actually played with it and enjoyed gaming with it. Or they say they love Imaro without even having read it.

The converse is hating something simply because of the representation. I'm pretty sure that if Kretchmer's adventure had appeared in some third-party OSR-compatible collection without mentioning that she uses a wheelchair, that it would have raised no comment. It's an adventure in an Egyptian-style tomb with a mummy lord and a mystery about the canopic process.

I think both of these are similarly dumb.

Quote from: blackstone on April 03, 2024, 10:41:19 AM

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM
In general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

That's the whole point of this thread: intent. IF the intent of the author to include wheelchair access to a dungeon because they're wheelchair bound in real life, it is a bit narcissistic and potentially anachronistic depending on the campaign.

Intent is different than results. As I noted, the particular dungeon by Kretchmer is not at all anachronistic. It has ramps in the same style as real Egyptian tombs do, and there are no wheelchairs of any sort in the adventure. (The dungeon also isn't wheelchair-accessible as a whole, since it is entered via a ladder and has pits.)

I have no idea about what Kretchmer is like as a person -- but it isn't inherently narcissistic for an author to write about their personal interests. Hell, even writing an autobiography isn't inherently narcissistic. It's writing what you know. The author might be a narcissist, but it isn't proven just by writing about themselves.

Quote from: SHARK on April 03, 2024, 01:49:20 PM
Jhkim loves to shriek about Pundit claiming the wheelchairs were in the WOTC adventure, and somehow, they weren't there, so Pundit was wrong, supposedly.

And yet, I have often reminded Jhkim that Pundit did not make it up, or lie at all. Where did he get this idea from? I saw the whole wheelchair BS talked about by Clownfish, The Quartering, and more--in addition to WOTC talking about how important wheelchairs and inclusivity was in their adventures, on their website. There was some official article of WOTC that talked about it, and then I think some twitter posts or something by WOTC developers themselves. So, Pundit did not lie about anything. Pundit did not distort anything, or misrepresent anything. If the actual published adventure was somehow cleansed of the fucking wheelchair in the last minute before publication, that isn't Pundit's fault.

Put up or shut up, SHARK. Give a link (or archive) where anyone other than Pundit claims that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries.

I read a bunch of the articles cited at the time three years ago, and none of them - other than Pundit - made this claim. There were articles that discussed both Kretchmer's adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries and Thompson's combat wheelchair, but no one claimed that the latter was part of the former.

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 02:20:53 PM

Quote from: SHARK on April 03, 2024, 01:49:20 PM
Jhkim loves to shriek about Pundit claiming the wheelchairs were in the WOTC adventure, and somehow, they weren't there, so Pundit was wrong, supposedly.

And yet, I have often reminded Jhkim that Pundit did not make it up, or lie at all. Where did he get this idea from? I saw the whole wheelchair BS talked about by Clownfish, The Quartering, and more--in addition to WOTC talking about how important wheelchairs and inclusivity was in their adventures, on their website. There was some official article of WOTC that talked about it, and then I think some twitter posts or something by WOTC developers themselves. So, Pundit did not lie about anything. Pundit did not distort anything, or misrepresent anything. If the actual published adventure was somehow cleansed of the fucking wheelchair in the last minute before publication, that isn't Pundit's fault.

Put up or shut up, SHARK. Give a link (or archive) where anyone other than Pundit claims that the combat wheelchair was in Candlekeep Mysteries.

I read a bunch of the articles cited at the time three years ago, and none of them - other than Pundit - made this claim. There were articles that discussed both Kretchmer's adventure in Candlekeep Mysteries and Thompson's combat wheelchair, but no one claimed that the latter was part of the former.

Greetings!

Ahh, no, Jhkim. I don't keep the links from this BS from years ago. Sorry. I don't care that a wheelchair, specifically, can't be found statted out in Candlekeep. The larger point being is that WOTC promoted this BS, and you know they did. They wrote about it, in some online article, and or twitter comments. As you acknowledge--and I pointed out--The Quartering, Clownfish, and others, also talked about this Woke BS before Pundit did, in his video. Pundit does not even have the Candlekeep book, so, *shrugg*--some of his predictions are sometimes off. So what? Pundit's video was however, very relevant to WOTC intentions and program. I remember reading WOTC people crowing about this BS, Jhkim.

Another member here said that you always see the trees, but always miss the forest. I think that is accurate. You have this weird, pedantic obsession with minutia, while completely missing the larger point or meaning. And you do shriek about this, concerning Pundit's video. *Shruggs* It makes me wonder, simply, what is your fucking point? A member here--OMEGA--often talks about how WOTC markets books and modules--proclaiming it is about A, B, and C. Then, somehow, when it is actually published, the book only has "A" in it, and doesn't have "B" or "C" in it. Again, so what? We all know that WOTC embraces the Woke agenda. They push and promote this agenda to varying degrees in every product--some more, and some less. Omega says it is marketing, aimed at harvesting publicity and outrage. I can definitely see that as an additional element. WOTC is also committed to the Woke agenda. WOTC can easily embrace two different goals at the same time--Woke agenda, and marketing. I think Omega is correct about that reality, to a large extent.

So, we can easily see a scenario where WOTC markets one thing, Pundit makes a video talking about it, then the book is published, and there are differences between what was marketed and what is actually published. Pundit has not always been entirely accurate with his predictions concerning several WOTC products--some predictions or assessments have been exaggerated. I have also talked about those instances. I own the books, so I often know very well what is in them and what isn't.

The larger point being though, Pundit is usually very accurate in his predictions and assessments of WOTC and game products in general. Sometimes he misses the mark, or exaggerates a point of argument or assessment. Again, though, so what? How long have you watched Pundit's videos? This isn't a new revelation.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

  Maybe all the leftist hijackers can go out and be like Saunders and create their own thing and their own original stories and freaking STOP hijacking established intellectual properties if they are so frustrated with the IPs as they exist. 

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM
If the problem isn't with wheelchairs in general but with only the specific cases (like Thompson's homebrew rules), then the discussion should be "these wheelchairs suck - here's the right way to have wheelchair-using PCs in a game".

But that isn't what most posters have been saying. There's been tons of venting about how any wheelchair-using PC is completely ridiculous and unworkable.

If you want to talk about what are good ways to have a wheelchair-using PC, then I'd be open to that. All this talking about it has poked at my imagination some about what I might like in one of my fantasy games.

1+2: Thats what some of is were doing in another thread. But it got derailed by the usual "no it cant be used anywhere" screeching.

=3: Been there, done that. Aint gonna happen in this thread though where it will just get lost again. But my personal take is that a real non-magic wheelchair is going to be a huge hindrance  unless you have party members willing and able to haul the PC around wen needed.

And what happens when that handler gets taken out in a delve? What happened in a morally challenged group when you become dead weight and the party really wants to haul back all that gold and you are impeding that?

Quote from: yosemitemike on April 02, 2024, 10:20:45 PM

fantasy elevators (whether they functioned by pulley or by magic, she didn't say),

Sidenote here. Used to be you could actually find elevators in some dungeons. And ramps. But the moral guardians conveniently forget all that and pretend they are so brave and bold as to invent this thing thats been a thing since probably the get-go.

Quick example was the idea that beholder and mind flayer lairs had no stairs as neither race had never had need. Examples of making something that would be validly wheelchair accessible. But no. They cant do something reasonable like that anymore.

Beholders and mind flayers are the opposite of wheelchair-accessible, unless you've got one of the new models that flies.

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 02:11:05 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 03, 2024, 09:56:31 AM

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM
Regarding Saunders, he could be accused of tokenism because he explicitly wrote a black fantasy protagonist because of his frustration with white-authored fantasy. Here's him talking about starting his writing career:

QuoteIt was when I discovered fantasy that I also discovered that I wanted to be a storyteller - a griot, although I hadn't yet discovered that term. I soon would, though. I spent my university days at a historically black college in Pennsylvania, Lincoln. I started in 1964 and graduated in 1968. Seldom has so much changed during a four-year period. So much was going on, from three-piece suits and processed hair to Afros and dashikis. From integration to Black Power... From non-violent demonstrations to riots in the streets... From punching somebody for calling you black to shouting 'Black is beautiful!' Lincoln had a lot of students from Africa at the time, and I learned a great deal from them. I started reading more about the history and culture of Africa. And I began to realise that in the SF and fantasy genre, blacks were, with only few exceptions, either left out or depicted in racist and stereotypic ways. I had a choice: I could either stop reading SF and fantasy, or try to do something about my dissatisfaction with it by writing my own stories and trying to get them published. I chose the latter course. I was crazy enough to think I could break into what was essentially a white genre - at the time, I didn't know Chip Delany was black, even though I'd read, and enjoyed, his work. That fact wasn't exactly advertised back then.

https://web.archive.org/web/20110607105724/http:/www.zone-sf.com/crsaunders.html

"He could be accused..." - I'm not going to argue against speculation in passive voice. You raised Saunders and now seem to be arguing with someone else, maybe a ghost or maybe yourself. Sort out whether you think Imaro is tokenism and get back to us.

OK, that's fair. I felt like diving into "tokenism" was a new can of worms, but I've already done so anyway.

I would say that tokenism is disinterested checking of boxes. The classic being a film producer who says "We need one Latino, one black, and one wheelchair-using character" - and doesn't give a damn otherwise as long as the token role is filled. For example, including a token black character in a horror film, only to have that character be the first one killed off. A film like The Wiz is not tokenism. The creators clearly cared a lot about it and weren't just checking off boxes, and it wasn't just a single token character or inclusion.

Saunders writing about a black protagonist in fantasy Africa, and Kretchmer writing about dungeons with ramps aren't tokenism. As authors, they are writing about what they are interested in, not just checking off boxes to be inclusive.

---

There is a parallel to tokenism in audiences as well -- where someone declares that they love a work simply because they heard the author was some minority, and not because they actually read and liked the work. I see this in many liberals. Someone might say how much they love Thompson's combat wheelchair just because of the representation, and not because they have actually played with it and enjoyed gaming with it. Or they say they love Imaro without even having read it.

The converse is hating something simply because of the representation. I'm pretty sure that if Kretchmer's adventure had appeared in some third-party OSR-compatible collection without mentioning that she uses a wheelchair, that it would have raised no comment. It's an adventure in an Egyptian-style tomb with a mummy lord and a mystery about the canopic process.

I think both of these are similarly dumb.

Quote from: blackstone on April 03, 2024, 10:41:19 AM

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 01:30:01 AM
In general, what I care about in an adventure is the game content. For the vast majority of RPG adventures, I don't know the author and don't care enough to examine their motivations for writing the adventure.

That's the whole point of this thread: intent. IF the intent of the author to include wheelchair access to a dungeon because they're wheelchair bound in real life, it is a bit narcissistic and potentially anachronistic depending on the campaign.

Intent is different than results. As I noted, the particular dungeon by Kretchmer is not at all anachronistic. It has ramps in the same style as real Egyptian tombs do, and there are no wheelchairs of any sort in the adventure. (The dungeon also isn't wheelchair-accessible as a whole, since it is entered via a ladder and has pits.)

I have no idea about what Kretchmer is like as a person -- but it isn't inherently narcissistic for an author to write about their personal interests. Hell, even writing an autobiography isn't inherently narcissistic. It's writing what you know. The author might be a narcissist, but it isn't proven just by writing about themselves.

You missed the whole point of the argument AGAIN: intent. Somebody already pointed out earlier the author's intent when creating the adventure. I don't give two fucks if there were ramps in Egyptian tombs. So fucking what? There are ramps used in other Bronze Age cultures.

The designer said they wanted to make a dungeon to where "They can go exploring in".

Coupled with WoTC'S DEI protocols WHICH YOU ARE CONSTANTLY IGNORING AND THEY HAVE STATED...

Fuck it. I'm done.

(http://i.imgur.com/yxCK864.jpg) (https://imgur.com/yxCK864)

I should have know better to have a discussion with someone who thinks RPG.net is a good RPG resource. https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/links.html (https://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/links.html)

Good day Sir!

Quote from: jhkim on April 03, 2024, 02:11:05 PM

OK, that's fair. I felt like diving into "tokenism" was a new can of worms, but I've already done so anyway.

I would say that tokenism is disinterested checking of boxes. The classic being a film producer who says "We need one Latino, one black, and one wheelchair-using character" - and doesn't give a damn otherwise as long as the token role is filled. For example, including a token black character in a horror film, only to have that character be the first one killed off. A film like The Wiz is not tokenism. The creators clearly cared a lot about it and weren't just checking off boxes, and it wasn't just a single token character or inclusion.

Saunders writing about a black protagonist in fantasy Africa, and Kretchmer writing about dungeons with ramps aren't tokenism. As authors, they are writing about what they are interested in, not just checking off boxes to be inclusive.

---

There is a parallel to tokenism in audiences as well -- where someone declares that they love a work simply because they heard the author was some minority, and not because they actually read and liked the work. I see this in many liberals. Someone might say how much they love Thompson's combat wheelchair just because of the representation, and not because they have actually played with it and enjoyed gaming with it. Or they say they love Imaro without even having read it.

The converse is hating something simply because of the representation. I'm pretty sure that if Kretchmer's adventure had appeared in some third-party OSR-compatible collection without mentioning that she uses a wheelchair, that it would have raised no comment. It's an adventure in an Egyptian-style tomb with a mummy lord and a mystery about the canopic process.

I think both of these are similarly dumb.

D&D has been around for 50 years and the combat wheelchair only came to us in the last few of years. Some new entrants showed up and, quite literally, declared that because of their new creations disabled people will finally feel welcome in the game. As if disabled people haven't been welcome and playing D&D perfectly fine for 50 years! Aside from missing the mark of what an RPG is supposed to be (hint: you play a hero, not yourself), it comes across as new entrant over-enthusiasm. That over-powered broken-homebrew combat wheelchair in particular reads like it was written by someone who does not understand the game or maybe does not even play the game at all.

It would be like me going over to the Story Game world (which I only barely know) and publishing a homebrew for, I dunno, randomly generated ethnic hairstyles. Finally, thanks to me, all you troglodyte story gamers can finally welcome diverse hair-play into your games! Representation! The story gamers would be rightly pissed and answer that nobody fucking asked for this and, if there was a genuine need, it would have been solved years ago.

So the combination of new entrant-ism, anachronism, and crap design-ism (the -ism trifecta) rightly pisses a lot of people off. People who defend this, as if there is some kernel of value buried in the heap of crap (who knows?), well you specifically, are stretching trying to analogize the combat wheelchair to other accepted game content. You may ultimately be correct in that a well-designed, verisimilitude-respecting combat wheelchair is possible. However, the retard new entrants have burned through the patience of regular gamers with their idiotic intent and design. This kind of thing happens all the time and it's human nature. Idiot #1 poses some stupid idea, normal guy argues that there's a kernel of truth to the idea, and nobody cares because idiot #1 already torched all possible goodwill. Only time fixes that.

Continuing this conversation is probably not going to change anyone's mind. So, you should just publish a good homebrew D&D wheelchair and let people use or dismiss it as they wish.

Edit:

Presentation matters. It speaks to intent. The loud idiots squawk about representation and give us broken homebrew as if they are some savior of the hobby. Had some regular gamer just published a thoughtfully designed wheelchair and said "One of our characters lost his legs last session, so the party hired a gnome tinkerer to build this..." it would have received the reception it deserved, muted "Looks cool, thanks," just like all other homebrew magic items. Instead we get a 68-page mess of I don't know what the fuck.

Quote from: Omega on April 03, 2024, 03:32:58 PM
Sidenote here. Used to be you could actually find elevators in some dungeons. And ramps. But the moral guardians conveniently forget all that and pretend they are so brave and bold as to invent this thing thats been a thing since probably the get-go.

Indeed, I remember seeing elevators in mega-dungeons going back to the late 70s.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 04, 2024, 02:25:46 PM
You may ultimately be correct in that a well-designed, verisimilitude-respecting combat wheelchair is possible. However, the retard new entrants have burned through the patience of regular gamers with their idiotic intent and design. This kind of thing happens all the time and it's human nature. Idiot #1 poses some stupid idea, normal guy argues that there's a kernel of truth to the idea, and nobody cares because idiot #1 already torched all possible goodwill. Only time fixes that.

Continuing this conversation is probably not going to change anyone's mind. So, you should just publish a good homebrew D&D wheelchair and let people use or dismiss it as they wish.

OK, that's fair. The discussion has been jostling my creative thoughts, so I'll post about that on another thread.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 04, 2024, 02:25:46 PM
D&D has been around for 50 years and the combat wheelchair only came to us in the last few of years. Some new entrants showed up and, quite literally, declared that because of their new creations disabled people will finally feel welcome in the game.
...
So the combination of new entrant-ism, anachronism, and crap design-ism (the -ism trifecta) rightly pisses a lot of people off.

When you say "new entrants" - you're talking about Thompson's homebrew combat wheelchair from 2020, right? Is there anyone else other than Thompson who is doing what you're saying? There's also Lord Weathermay in Ravenloft II, but I don't think any of this applies to him. Ravenloft is explicitly based in Gothic Horror like Dracula and Frankenstein, which includes technology like wheelchairs. Several posters here have referred to Kretchmer's adventure, but it has no wheelchairs and no anachronism.

So people are exploding in outrage over a four-year-old homebrew that as far as I know has never been adapted or included in any published product.

I don't mean to be defending Thompson's homebrew. It's non-setting-specific, so anachronism didn't bother me, but I was bugged that it can hover, but only over stairs. That seemed particularly illogical, and also non-functional, as there is a lot of terrain other than stairs that can foul a wheelchair.

Player asked me if he could make a Ranger in a wheelchair. I said sure. It worked out well. Here's a clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGQevaXj3tQ

Quote from: Corolinth on April 03, 2024, 03:39:47 PM
Beholders and mind flayers are the opposite of wheelchair-accessible, unless you've got one of the new models that flies.

Lots of ramps. Why would a beholder especially ever make stairs? And Illithids do not due to the whole organic architecture thing.

Quote from: Aglondir on April 04, 2024, 10:15:43 PM
Player asked me if he could make a Ranger in a wheelchair. I said sure. It worked out well. Here's a clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGQevaXj3tQ

I KNEW that's what it was before I even clicked on that link...

Quote from: oggsmash on April 03, 2024, 03:25:22 PM
  Maybe all the leftist hijackers can go out and be like Saunders and create their own thing and their own original stories and freaking STOP hijacking established intellectual properties if they are so frustrated with the IPs as they exist.

Even if they had the talent, which they usually don't, the point is to tear down existing media and replace it with their "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" versions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_hegemony

Quote from: Omega on April 04, 2024, 10:39:37 PM
Lots of ramps. Why would a beholder especially ever make stairs?

This confuses me. Why would a beholder make ramps? Vertical chutes are way more efficient.

QuoteThis confuses me. Why would a beholder make ramps? Vertical chutes are way more efficient.

They usually hover along the ground.

Greetings!

In my Thandor world, I have special disc-shaped flying creatures that can hover about as well as fly. They often come in metallic colours, or bizarre, neon-colours. Some have reptilian skin, while others have smooth skin, or even furry bodies. The creatures have a broad mouth full of teeth, and love devouring live prey as food. These creatures are often used as mounts by certain kinds of powerful Warriors and Sorcerers.

Crippled, disabled people that cannot walk with their legs can get these creatures to ride around on.

However, there are some rather unusual side-effects that go along with becoming the master and rider of one of these unusual creatures. *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quoteambulatory wheelchair user

Like Raymond Burr or Patrick Stewart?

(https://i.pinimg.com/564x/e4/47/4b/e4474ba776f574b1dc87c37788519653.jpg)

I watched a magical girl show wherein the suits that the magical girls wore were able to support physically disabled characters. This is Tougou Mimori and she spends 2 seasons paralyzed from the waist down before being cured by magic.

There is a lack of imagination that stems from this controversy. Nobody is complaining about prostheses or eyeglasses, because those fit better into a D&D setting. It is more natural. There is no mention by the fantasy wheelchair advocates of any alternatives for people with mobility issues. None of them have brought up the use of spells or armor as alternatives. There are only two options given: use wheelchair or not use wheelchair.

I have wanted to play as a disabled character before because I wanted to play as someone very different from me, but I don't think that most trpgs have the mechanics to properly simulate such a thing.

The difference being that the Magical Girl overcomes her disability using magic (granted, not exactly the same thing as healing magic). But the mouth-breathing narcissistic midwits pushing the Combat Wheelchair want to act like healing magic in D&D doesn't exist or that it takes the 7th Cleric spell Regenerate to fix these problems. Its not just that they're unwashed Tourist asswipes, they refuse to acknowledge the fact that the magic system is predicated on fantastical elements. They're the same verminous cretins that have invaded damn near every other hobby (wargaming, Star Wars, anime, etc) and they act like they're the 'fans' and the rest of us (some of whom have been in the fandom going on 5 decades or even longer) simply don't exist.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 11:15:31 PM

Quote from: jhkim on April 02, 2024, 10:05:17 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 02, 2024, 07:49:06 PMjhkim, here is an article for you (https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries).

QuoteAs an ambulatory wheelchair user, Kretchmer says that is was important to her that her dungeon was a place that she could explore. As such, it's filled with fantasy elevators (whether they functioned by pulley or by magic, she didn't say), and ledges are accessible by ramps rather than by stairs.

The D&D wheelchair is obviously a case of representation and tokenism. But besides that, it is antithetical to good adventure design. It conflates real life with a fantasy world. It chips away at what a fantasy world is supposed to be: a coherent and believable world.

The adventure has no wheelchairs in it. It does have ramps, but it is an Egyptian-style tomb, and many real-world Egyptian tombs are built with ramps - like the Great Pyramid at Giza. That's not an anachronism. That's historical accuracy.

Kretchmer explained why she put the ramps in the dungeon. She did not mention historic fidelity. She literally said it was so that she, Kretchmer in the 21st century, could explore it. The fact that you find it to be historically accurate is irrelevant.

But you're the one who claimed accuracy was relevant. The only thing irrelevant here is the designer's motives, as they didn't lead to an incoherent or unbelievable world.

I think the nature of role playing is that you pretend to be what you are not, so why do that all the way and ditch the wheelchair? Or maybe replace the wheelchair with something that's part of the atmosphere of the game, like maybe a floating chair, riding a small creature, or floating using certain spells.

Quote from: ralfy on April 18, 2024, 11:38:25 PMI think the nature of role playing is that you pretend to be what you are not, so why do that all the way and ditch the wheelchair? Or maybe replace the wheelchair with something that's part of the atmosphere of the game, like maybe a floating chair, riding a small creature, or floating using certain spells.

To answer that, back away from the topic for a moment to consider an analogous case: 

You are playing in a game that is a somewhat disguised Western with magic as tech.  That is, almost every character uses a wand that has a limited number of shots before it needs to be "reloaded", they wear robes and cowboy hats, boots with spurs to kick their wyverns into action.  There's lots of stand-offs, and evocative but sparse scenery descriptions of an often desolate landscape.  Matters of person responsibility, pride, etc. are frequent character motivations.  It's not meant to be a pastiche, despite all of the above, but played straight within those constraints. That's the pitch.

Whether you talk more in depth before the game (Session Zero) or not, in a group of new players, even if most of them are fully on board, there will be at least one or two who will absolutely insist on playing this game focused on busting the disguise at ever turn.  They are incapable of taking the setting seriously on its own terms.

Given the example, I can't say that I would blame them.  I'd find it hard to to take such a setting seriously, too, because the disguise is so thin as to be all most transparent.  1:1 mapping to the disguised setting tends to have that effect. However, there is also the side issue that some players would immediately try to play this as a deconstruction of the western genre.  That is, the thin fantastical element laid on top is an excuse to not take the setting on its own terms.

Now, back to the topic.  This is why the wheelchair is insisted upon, and any setting appropriate replacement is not acceptable to such people.  You are interfering with their deconstruction and agendas (yes, multiple agendas), and there was never any intention to take the setting seriously on its own merits.  Such a person having to explain logically why wheelchair can't be replaced is going to be forced into the uncomfortable territory of admitting to not caring about the setting.  Even the ones that aren't rationale enough to understand this at least sense it.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on April 19, 2024, 08:26:03 AMTo answer that, back away from the topic for a moment to consider an analogous case: 

You are playing in a game that is a somewhat disguised Western with magic as tech.  That is, almost every character uses a wand that has a limited number of shots before it needs to be "reloaded", they wear robes and cowboy hats, boots with spurs to kick their wyverns into action.  There's lots of stand-offs, and evocative but sparse scenery descriptions of an often desolate landscape.  Matters of person responsibility, pride, etc. are frequent character motivations.  It's not meant to be a pastiche, despite all of the above, but played straight within those constraints. That's the pitch.

Whether you talk more in depth before the game (Session Zero) or not, in a group of new players, even if most of them are fully on board, there will be at least one or two who will absolutely insist on playing this game focused on busting the disguise at ever turn.  They are incapable of taking the setting seriously on its own terms.

Given the example, I can't say that I would blame them.  I'd find it hard to to take such a setting seriously, too, because the disguise is so thin as to be all most transparent.  1:1 mapping to the disguised setting tends to have that effect. However, there is also the side issue that some players would immediately try to play this as a deconstruction of the western genre.  That is, the thin fantastical element laid on top is an excuse to not take the setting on its own terms.

Now, back to the topic.  This is why the wheelchair is insisted upon, and any setting appropriate replacement is not acceptable to such people.  You are interfering with their deconstruction and agendas (yes, multiple agendas), and there was never any intention to take the setting seriously on its own merits.  Such a person having to explain logically why wheelchair can't be replaced is going to be forced into the uncomfortable territory of admitting to not caring about the setting.  Even the ones that aren't rationale enough to understand this at least sense it.

So they're basically just dicks who have no real interest in playing games?

Quote from: Zalman on April 05, 2024, 07:41:26 AM

Quote from: Omega on April 04, 2024, 10:39:37 PMLots of ramps. Why would a beholder especially ever make stairs?

This confuses me. Why would a beholder make ramps? Vertical chutes are way more efficient.

Henchmen gotta get around, too.

Quote from: rytrasmi on April 19, 2024, 09:40:32 AM

Quote from: Zalman on April 05, 2024, 07:41:26 AM

Quote from: Omega on April 04, 2024, 10:39:37 PMLots of ramps. Why would a beholder especially ever make stairs?

This confuses me. Why would a beholder make ramps? Vertical chutes are way more efficient.

Henchmen gotta get around, too.

Fair, but I'd still go with chutes and ladders if I were a behenchman'd beholder.

Quote from: Brad on April 19, 2024, 08:43:38 AMSo they're basically just dicks who have no real interest in playing games?

Oh, they are playing "games".  Just not the one supposedly being played.

Quote from: Brad on April 19, 2024, 08:43:38 AMSo they're basically just dicks who have no real interest in playing games?

Yes, just like others of their ilk do the same crap in every fandom they invade. They're worse than locusts, because at least a locust can die and give back to the soil. They're like hematophagous parasites that destroy the host target before being passed to the next unlucky SOB near them.