Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9149446" data-attributes="member: 177">I agree - one size fits all doesn't work well.  But it isn't ever the job of any one gaming product to fit all sizes!  Third party materials, especially, are presented for you to pick-and-choose what works for you. So, I find "they only present one way to handle it" to be kind of bogus, I'm afraid.If we agree that there should be a discussion, a major goal of that discussion should be to determine what, if anything, might be issues for the table.  Claiming issues of verisimilitude and game balance before that discussion is inappropriate, putting the cart before the horse.  Figure out the needs first, then talk about what fills the needs well or poorly.  It is all-too-easy to depersonalize these discussions.  It is easy to talk about mechanics, and we will tend to do so in the view of some hypothetical default game.  And it looks really bad when we do that.  Because, if there is a real person, sitting there in a wheelchair in a Session Zero, asking to play a character like themselves, "But lava!" would seem a heartless approach to the discussion, but it looks like the approach we take.There's also a big issue that a lot of folks will raise various complaints when, for them, it is a hypothetical.  They don't have a disabled person at their table, ever, but are raising mechanical complaints about wheelchair implementations they will never use.  That's going to come off as inappropriate, too.  I will reserve "hate" for far more clear cases - but here, the approach to the topic can raise questions of priorities, open-mindedness, empathy, or entitlement.</blockquote>

Verification