Quote from: Pat;1146239That has an impact, but companies have always been risk averse. They rarely take a moral stand on issues, because their board has a legal duty to put the company's financial interests ahead of their personal ones. They tend to react strongly to bad press, and want to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, so they're easy to sway by activists.

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

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

* those of us who live in sane worlds might consider this extortion.

It seems to me that there are still actual differences of position on the topic of characters with disabilities. SHARK hasn't replied about his position - but there are other disagreements.

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

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

Quote from: Omega;1146102D&D can handle it in various ways depending on the edition. Bemusingly older editions had more options than newer ones. 5e at least has some options for limb loss and disabled limps.

This could be anything from a loss in an appropriate stat, to other sorts of negatives to combat or movement depending on the situation. Theres also been some articles and bits squirreled away in modules and magazines for options to cover impairments of one form or another.

I agree with Omega that D&D doesn't have any fundamental problem with disabilities such as limb loss. It's handled in other games similar to D&D. To be fair, D&D does tend to assume that wounds don't affect a character's ability at all -- but that's not absolute. There have been special case rules for limb loss, as Omega notes.

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

But the more old-school way is "rulings, not rules" - where the GM just makes a judgement call about how to handle a character, rather than tacking on a mechanical point system.

Quote from: The Exploited.;1146211Yeah, that's very true...

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

WotC are just doing what they wanted to do all along.  Look at Chris Perkins Twitter, someone who self indentifys as a magical unicorn does not need much convincing.

Quote from: jhkim;1146253It seems to me that there are still actual differences of position on the topic of characters with disabilities. SHARK hasn't replied about his position - but there are other disagreements.

Greetings!

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

D&D 5E's next sourcebook Tasha's Cauldron of Everything finally allows players to make characters without racial traits.

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

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

https://www.dicebreaker.com/games/dungeons-and-dragons-5e/news/tashas-cauldron-of-everything-sourcebook-announced

Quote from: SHARK;1146290Jhkim, dude, you really didn't read anything I have said in *several* posts? My position is unclear to you? Really?

I did read your posts, and I replied to you with questions about your campaign world in Post #120. Here was what I wrote:

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

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

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

Have we run out of "oppressed people" for the freaks to fetishize, uh I mean save?

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

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

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

Everyone can min/max for total snowflakeness!!

Its truly hysterical the same people demanding "black people have black voices!" and outraged if anyone doesn't fit into their narrow definition of people & behavior based on skin color are the same worthless garbage who want every PCs to be the most special of the special snowflakes.

It's not even the wheelchair so much that they want to have one and an entire factory of cakes to eat as well.

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

Quote from: jhkim;1146292I did read your posts, and I replied to you with questions about your campaign world in Post #120. Here was what I wrote:

Greetings!

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

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

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

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: sureshot;1146297It's not even the wheelchair so much that they want to have one and an entire factory of cakes to eat as well.

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

Greetings!

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

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1146298Beyond such "corner cases" the reality remains that severely handicapped characters would be weak and helpless, and pose as a distinct liability to any adventuring team. In general, most handicapped characters have problems that make them entirely unsuitable for a career as an adventurer.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Thats what I disagree with. Weaker, less helpful-yes. But utterly no. As I said adventuring teams are not fully logical. In practice what they do should leave them handicapped sooner than later.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1146303Thats what I disagree with. Weaker, less helpful-yes. But utterly no. As I said adventuring teams are not fully logical. In practice what they do should leave them handicapped sooner than later.

Greetings!

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1146306Greetings!

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Makes sense. Quit while you have a head. Regardless combat wheelchairs are dumb. Just make a exoskeleton if you have the resources at that point.

Quote from: SHARK;1146302Greetings!

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

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

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

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

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

Many campaign worlds will simply not allow the level of customization that the fantasy wheelchair allows. I can see it in Eberron, possibly the Forgotten Realms. Dragonlance though it will be more something along the lines of Get smart or Inspect Gadget. Dark Sun good luck.

Quote from: kythri;1146238Instagram contains numerous pictures of her actively engaged in bipedal locomotion with groups of her friends to dispel any potential claims of her being in a wheelchair.

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

This person on the other hand, considering her other antics, yeah thats rather telling that shes walking around so. Could be she can stand for short periods or with support. But who knows at this point. NEVER cast suspicion on yourself when claiming to be disabled because every little thing will be scrutinized.