With regards to representation -- I'm skeptical about all the psychological theory around it. My point in bringing up Harry Potter was as a counter-example to Blankman's idea that there was no identification with nearsightedness. It was intended as a counter to a psychological interpretation - not intended to back any particular psychological theory.

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

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

Quote from: Blankman;1146645Oh, I agree with that. You do you. I just find it odd to be something to scream about wanting included in official art, game rules and such. In some games it would be odd if left out (any game set in the modern world and involving characters in more regular professions for instance), but I think we can get by fine with most depictions of at least heroes and villains in D&D art being able bodied and in good shape (with occasional exception like a Monk with a scarred over eye or a one-handed druid or what have you).

I agree that we can get by. On the other hand, we can also get by with some disabled heroes being depicted.

Quote from: RandyB;1146668Left handed people have a well-known advantage in melee combat. Where is that advantage in the rules!!!!!

Disclaimer: I am strongly right-handed.

That's why I give all Left handed PC's +2 to hit. But everyone starts with d100 Sanity loss.

Quote from: Omega;1146679If its any consolation. Star Frontiers has handedness, and ambidexterity.

Joking aside.

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

/gasp - but that would be asking for permission and establishing a hierarchy outside of the WotC Holistic Universal Tactical command (W.H.U.T.)

Quote from: tenbones;1146701That's why I give all Left handed PC's +2 to hit. But everyone starts with d100 Sanity loss.

Any game where my character can die during the creation process gets a thumbs up from me.

I want Shark and RPGPundit as my sensitivity readers!

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

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

Left-handed people.

D&D has tieflings! Everyone knows lefties are demon spawn.

Quote from: jhkim;1146696From my view -- people like what they like. If some people want to have a wheelchair-using PC in their game, that's fine. If some people don't want to have that, that's fine too. They're entitled to like what they like in games. To the extent that someone is arguing "Everyone *has* to have wheelchair-using PCs in your game" - then I am against that.

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

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

I thought that was what I wrote.

But that's not why it exists.

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

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

Quote from: tenbones;1146782But that's not why it exists.

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

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

I mean, put it in a superhero setting and it's pretty standard, a paraplegic inventor makes a super chair with all kinds of gadgets and gizmos.

The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.  A crippled Necromancer on a skeleton-palanquin, an eastern scholar on a flying carpet, etc.  There are ways to use the concept that aren't pandering or just plain dumb.

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1146786The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.  A crippled Necromancer on a skeleton-palanquin, an eastern scholar on a flying carpet, etc.  There are ways to use the concept that aren't pandering or just plain dumb.

Pandering is the point, intention, and goal. Along with "license to cancel" anyone who is insufficiently enthusiastic about joining in the pandering.

Quote from: kythri;1145671Learn a bit about "the one who made it" - "the one who made it" isn't in a wheelchair.  The one who made it is self-diagnosed with such a mild form of Ehlers-Danlos - so mild that it doesn't impact her life in any way, other than giving her the abilithy to virtue signal by appropriating disability, and using it to get sham jobs like "disability consultant" and "sensitivity reader - she's the "disabled" version of Rachel Dolezal.

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

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

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

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

Personally, I'm holding out for an infinifat mini on a Scootypuff.

I don't want the minis, but I'm tempted to get some empty/broken wheelchairs as scatter terrain.  

Well I have to say, this whole threat got me chuckling. Seriously, people are legitimately upset over a magic wheelchair in D&D? 2020 really has people going BAT-shit crazy (excuse the pun, coming from me) over the most stupidest shit.

If someone came to my table with the concept of a wheel-chair bound character, and say that character is an Artificer well I could totally see that. Even something like a pistol-wielding Fighter (Renegade archetype for 5E) or a Pathfinder Gunslinger, I could see that too. Does it hurt my verisimilitude? Haha, no because I accept the concept that there's magical fucking dragons, powerful undead necromancers, and beings that can literally be summoned from actual Hell. And I'm supposed to have my panties in a bunch because someone wants wheels can calls themselves Iron-Sides? Please...

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1146786The sad thing to me is there's a grain of an interesting idea in there somewhere.

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

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

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

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

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

AKA...at least 50% of Twitter.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: Spinachcat;1146927Agreed. It's tragic. Let's take your Necromancer Palaquin idea. In pre-SJW years, we could discuss the positives and negatives of this concept, how it would offer advantages and disadvantages in different circumstances, all without any concern for anyone's feelings or how our discussion must meet the criteria of the politically correct watchKarens.
 



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



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

AKA...at least 50% of Twitter.

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




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




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

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

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




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

Greetings!

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

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

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK