 | |
| "The Combat Wheelchair" for dnd 5e by Mark Thompson The homebrew that launched a thousand piss-baby's tantrums | |
Howdy, Farmhands-
Twitter is dead. Long live... well, preferably Not-Twitter.
The following is what was once a tweet-thread, collated here for better archival and perusal. It is sadly devoid of the interesting input received upon it's posting from other people in disabled spaces, but despite those conversations happening, I still think the content reflects where I am at personally with this topic. As always, my opinions are my own and reflect my life experiences and biases, so please do not take anything here as some sort of attempt at being authoritative on the matter.
Until Next Time,
-Farmer Gadda
 | |
| "Limitless Heroics" by Wyrmworks Publishing |
A mutual approached me with the request that I write an opinion piece on portraying permanent negative effects for pcs in elfgames. My kneejerk reaction was "This isn't my lane", forgetting my wife is permanently disabled, and I use corrective devices for my personal medical issues. So actually, maybe, hey, I AM in a place to have opinions on Some of this topic.
The tl;dr is that Fifth Edition, especially with it's Conditions as written, is made with the internal assumption that all PCs are able-bodied, with any change to that status quo being a net loss to playability. Mathematically, you're worse than your peers at actions you're expected to be capable of. -if not completely barred from subsections of equipment. A blind individual, if going by 5e's definition of Blinded, is incapable of casting many spells from the outset. This is not a moral judgement or anything, just a statement that RAW, this is how the system is set up to work. I've read a bunch of "fixes" for this. Guidelines for DMs to band-aid over or ignore wording of specific rules, mechanical Feats and Magic Items to "Nuh-uh" those uncomfortable rules away for the one player who wants to play a disabled pc; but none of it addressed (or could address) the core issue.
5e, and honestly, most elfgames that primarily function as a combat engine, are games about causing violence and physical harm to an opponent, while mitigating physical harm to the party. Any state that isn't able-bodied is mathematically meant to be avoided lest it lead directly to a fail state. From a Game Design perspective, being disabled or negatively affected by any physical or mental ailment is undesirable, with a decent chunk of the game mechanics explaining how to Un-Do or preemptively avoid certain kinds of ailments. Stripped down to it's core, that Is The Game.
But saying "Play other games" is not actionable here. The individual WANTS to play an Elfgame, and WANTS to not be shitty about disabled rep in said Elfgames, so what does Gadda suggest trying to meld those two desires into an enjoyable game night with the boys?
As a -baseline-, everyone at the table needs to be aware of the game's biases. They need to understand that the assumptions made while writing the thing were ableist and racist, and that those decisions are unfortunately inherent to the game they've chosen. There are no quick fixes to be had here. And frankly, anyone who claims you CAN fix those issues with the right amount of homebrew is either drinking the Kool-Aid or trying to sell you something. Sorry, not sorry. Being aware of the assumptions the Game makes will make it easier for both players and GM to be able to recognize when the rules are pushing the fiction into uncomfortable territory, and that awareness will then facilitate discussion in the moment of what the table is willing to do to mitigate that
"Hey, GM, the mechanics say that my disabled character should not be able to do this, but that feels bad and like I'm not as useful as the rest of the party." or "Hey guys, this game clearly would reward us for taking this uncomfortable action, but this reeks of [insert social issue here]." No table will be able to solve the game for everyone, but no table should be worried about that. The focus should be on the comfort of the people At That Table, In That Moment.
How would -I- go about it, as a GM? I would assume that, mathematically, a disabled character's "Normal" is on par with an able-bodied character. Conditions that connect to a disability on a flavor level would not be substituted for that disability. If a player wishes to ROLE-PLAY that their disability would negatively affect the NARRATIVE in a scene, I wouldn't hold them back from doing so, but at no point would I attribute a negative roll modifier or bar them from a mechanic for doing so. For Players who intend to role-play the story of an individual OVERCOMING a physical or mental disability, I might offer a small de-buff, but ONLY for that Player, and ONLY if everyone else at the table is comfortable with it. Then I'd dangle an obvious quest with a Feat at the end that "Nuh-uh"s it.
But also, I just wouldn't use 5e or an associated Elfgame to tell those kinds of stories in the first place, but what can ya do.