Quote from: bromides on July 08, 2024, 02:22:09 PMWhat was fixed by inclusion on TV? Nothing. Racial disparities have gotten worse in this country for the 99% (even if the 1% Hollywood star elites have been rewarded).

It's a distraction from real, actual social issues... like fixing Urban American schools. Fix the dang schools already. You won't need a rigged, racist Quota system if you fixed the dang primary school system!

I agree about quotas and the school system. I don't agree with inclusion in the sense of quotas or equivalent, like a Captain Planet style cast where there is exactly one character each who is Asian, black, Latino, disabled, etc.

On the other hand, some people are pushing the opposite - that there shouldn't be disabled RPG characters at all. The whole discussion over it started me thinking about a Savage Eberron one-shot adventure. There's nothing inherently wrong with having disabled characters - and it's been supported in systems like HERO and GURPS for decades.

I would say the balance isn't to kick up a fuss over any disabled RPG character. It's to show good examples of disabled characters to contrast with bad ones.

Quote from: jhkim on July 08, 2024, 03:59:58 PMOn the other hand, some people are pushing the opposite - that there shouldn't be disabled RPG characters at all

Yes. Some of the people on this very forum pushing that just comes across as some sort of New Woke.

Quote from: jhkim on July 08, 2024, 03:59:58 PM

Quote from: bromides on July 08, 2024, 02:22:09 PMWhat was fixed by inclusion on TV? Nothing. Racial disparities have gotten worse in this country for the 99% (even if the 1% Hollywood star elites have been rewarded).

It's a distraction from real, actual social issues... like fixing Urban American schools. Fix the dang schools already. You won't need a rigged, racist Quota system if you fixed the dang primary school system!

I agree about quotas and the school system. I don't agree with inclusion in the sense of quotas or equivalent, like a Captain Planet style cast where there is exactly one character each who is Asian, black, Latino, disabled, etc.

On the other hand, some people are pushing the opposite - that there shouldn't be disabled RPG characters at all. The whole discussion over it started me thinking about a Savage Eberron one-shot adventure. There's nothing inherently wrong with having disabled characters - and it's been supported in systems like HERO and GURPS for decades.

I would say the balance isn't to kick up a fuss over any disabled RPG character. It's to show good examples of disabled characters to contrast with bad ones.

Right, and disabled characters in HERO & GURPS have also ZERO repercussions for their disability right?

Jhkim being disingenuous and invocating whataboutism, in other news water is wet.

Quote from: jhkim on July 08, 2024, 03:59:58 PM

Quote from: bromides on July 08, 2024, 02:22:09 PMWhat was fixed by inclusion on TV? Nothing. Racial disparities have gotten worse in this country for the 99% (even if the 1% Hollywood star elites have been rewarded).

It's a distraction from real, actual social issues... like fixing Urban American schools. Fix the dang schools already. You won't need a rigged, racist Quota system if you fixed the dang primary school system!

I agree about quotas and the school system. I don't agree with inclusion in the sense of quotas or equivalent, like a Captain Planet style cast where there is exactly one character each who is Asian, black, Latino, disabled, etc.

On the other hand, some people are pushing the opposite - that there shouldn't be disabled RPG characters at all.

I'd go a step further and there should be no characters at all. And that's due to the current "creatives" being a bunch of creatively bankrupt ideologues who have a political agenda for every thing they do when making a game. I don't want to see their depiction of whites or blacks or asians or mexicans. They're terrible and make me want to hork.
But we can pluck out some egregious examples, like disabled people, and how they're being disingenuous in their means of "inclusion".

QuoteThe whole discussion over it started me thinking about a Savage Eberron one-shot adventure. There's nothing inherently wrong with having disabled characters - and it's been supported in systems like HERO and GURPS for decades.

https://analoggamestudies.org/2018/03/blinded-by-the-roll-the-critical-fail-of-disability-in-dd/

They're not talking about including disabled charaters. They're talking about a an ideological narrative surrounding disability.

QuoteI would say the balance isn't to kick up a fuss over any disabled RPG character. It's to show good examples of disabled characters to contrast with bad ones.

Tell that to WOTC.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on July 08, 2024, 12:30:58 PMWe weren't explicitly acknowledged or included, but we didn't need to be because nothing in the games functionally ex-cluded us, in the sense of making characters like us counterproductive to play in the game -- we (meaning characters who shared our own real limitations) were never consistently and regularly on the short end of situations which required actions most people could execute at least moderately well but we couldn't (being able to climb stairs, run fast, see or hear adequately, speak clearly, manipulate objects precisely, read quickly and accurately, respond apropos and coherently, etc.). Fish don't appreciate that their own water is clean if they've never had to swim in dirty waters.

Bullshit.  No one ever made a character like my teenage self, because a character like my teenage self would have been killed in any dungeon in the first 5 minutes (along with the characters based on all of the friends that I played with).  I was absolutely excluded... if excluded means "play a character just like yourself as a fantasy super-hero in a fantasy medieval world."  Luckily, it doesn't mean that.  The people who do mean that are dangerous narcissists and should be avoided at all costs.

Please give me an example of what "limitations" are not punished by AD&D?  Weak (low strength)?  Uncoordinated (low dexterity)?  Sickly (low con)?  Seems like any of those issues are just as unviable for an adventurer in D&D as they are in real life.  So what are those limitations?  Blindness?  Yeah, uhhhhh, try to make it through a dungeon without being able to see.

Seems to me that all of the "limitations" that get held up now as being "unseen" are things completely irrelevant to the game.  Like race.  Is there any advantage or disadvantage to being black in AD&D?  Nope.  Did a black player have to play a white character to be viable?  Nope (one of my first players was a black guy who played black characters all the time.  Which made no difference in the game... just like being a white character in game).

Or the other group that demands to be "seen" on social media: gays.  What disadvantages were there in AD&D to making a gay character?  How about none.  You could have all the butt-secks you want, and your dungeoneering would be exactly the same as the straight characters.  OK, maybe we might have made you play an elf (and speak with a elf-lisp), but that was probably just a table rule.  Funny how the love that dared not speak its name is now the love that won't shut up...

So why exactly do we need black, queer, trans, demi-sexual furries to be represented in D&D as important characteristics (pro tip: we don't!)?  Why do they need to be "seen"?  Nothing has ever prevented that kind of character from being viable (other than the fact that no sane human would play a game with a person who identified as that, much less the character).

So, bullshit.  No one was excluded from playing.  The rules may have made your self-insert character less than viable, but hey, that's as it should be!  Anyone that plays a self-insert is a broken person, anyway, and needs to be gatekept out of the hobby.

having this be in the market place is a fantastic thing let it be promoted by those who have a disability fetish.  In this way if I ever hear anyone say "buy this suppliment" I can immediately boot them from my group for being an even bigger degenerate then normal.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 08, 2024, 07:19:43 PM

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on July 08, 2024, 12:30:58 PMWe weren't explicitly acknowledged or included, but we didn't need to be because nothing in the games functionally ex-cluded us, in the sense of making characters like us counterproductive to play in the game -- we (meaning characters who shared our own real limitations) were never consistently and regularly on the short end of situations which required actions most people could execute at least moderately well but we couldn't (being able to climb stairs, run fast, see or hear adequately, speak clearly, manipulate objects precisely, read quickly and accurately, respond apropos and coherently, etc.). Fish don't appreciate that their own water is clean if they've never had to swim in dirty waters.

Bullshit.  No one ever made a character like my teenage self, because a character like my teenage self would have been killed in any dungeon in the first 5 minutes (along with the characters based on all of the friends that I played with).  I was absolutely excluded... if excluded means "play a character just like yourself as a fantasy super-hero in a fantasy medieval world."  Luckily, it doesn't mean that.  The people who do mean that are dangerous narcissists and should be avoided at all costs.

Please give me an example of what "limitations" are not punished by AD&D?  Weak (low strength)?  Uncoordinated (low dexterity)?  Sickly (low con)?  Seems like any of those issues are just as unviable for an adventurer in D&D as they are in real life.  So what are those limitations?  Blindness?  Yeah, uhhhhh, try to make it through a dungeon without being able to see.

Seems to me that all of the "limitations" that get held up now as being "unseen" are things completely irrelevant to the game.  Like race.  Is there any advantage or disadvantage to being black in AD&D?  Nope.  Did a black player have to play a white character to be viable?  Nope (one of my first players was a black guy who played black characters all the time.  Which made no difference in the game... just like being a white character in game).

Or the other group that demands to be "seen" on social media: gays.  What disadvantages were there in AD&D to making a gay character?  How about none.  You could have all the butt-secks you want, and your dungeoneering would be exactly the same as the straight characters.  OK, maybe we might have made you play an elf (and speak with a elf-lisp), but that was probably just a table rule.  Funny how the love that dared not speak its name is now the love that won't shut up...

So why exactly do we need black, queer, trans, demi-sexual furries to be represented in D&D as important characteristics (pro tip: we don't!)?  Why do they need to be "seen"?  Nothing has ever prevented that kind of character from being viable (other than the fact that no sane human would play a game with a person who identified as that, much less the character).

So, bullshit.  No one was excluded from playing.  The rules may have made your self-insert character less than viable, but hey, that's as it should be!  Anyone that plays a self-insert is a broken person, anyway, and needs to be gatekept out of the hobby.

Agreed. The whole argument about RPGs not being inclusive in the past is a bald face lie. IF anything, they're gaslighting everyone to think it wasn't.

The whole concept of being someone else in a fantasy setting was the appeal to me and the vast majority of players before the hand of woke-ness started to creep across the RPG landscape.

I've known all different types of people in my past 40+ years of gaming. I didn't care what race, creed, or sexual preference you were. We did have one thing in common: we were GEEKS. We were nerds. We didn't fit in to the norm. The RPG community was our escape. We could be ourselves: the geeks. That was the unifying factor.

...and now the woke-ness wants to divide us based upon our real world differences IN THE RPG COMMUNITY.

To me this is insane.

Flying combat wheelchair, bionic arm, blindness curing googles, the retard is the black wahmen wizard?

I've got one burning question:

If you can have a prosthetic arm why not prosthetic legs?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on July 24, 2024, 03:01:59 PMFlying combat wheelchair, bionic arm, blindness curing googles, the retard is the black wahmen wizard?

I've got one burning question:

If you can have a prosthetic arm why not prosthetic legs?

That's some of the worst artwork I've seen in an D&D-related product since some of the utter trash during the original d20 glut. INB4 "not an official product!"

"neurodivergence" has morphed into a term that means whatever personality quirks a person may have are some kind of disability.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 24, 2024, 04:12:33 PM"neurodivergence" has morphed into a term that means whatever personality quirks a person may have are some kind of disability.

Seems so. But its just another woke magic word made up. Every wave has a few of these.