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/ Note there no "wheelchair stance"

in contrast:

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)

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.