The (Not a) Wheelchair Problem

Because of a new RPG coming out that (if I recall) has a wheelchair available for PCs, the entire discussion about wheelchairs in a fantasy setting has come around again.  Here's my stance on it:
It isn't a problem.

People are making excuses, though.  Who'd want to adventure with someone in a wheelchair? How would they navigate dungeons?  Why do they even have wheelchairs, when magic can fix everything?

Here's the thing.
Not everyone has the ability to choose their course in life.  Not everybody has access to 'magic' that can fix everything.  And it's amazing what one can do with good friends who are willing to give them a hand.

Dragonlance is a good example, in fact, with Raistlin.  Why didn't they dump his anemic ass and get a 'real wizard' to help them out?  They didn't.  Because he's a friend.  Oh, how about Charles Xavier of the X-Men.  You know there's skads of people in the Marvel Universe who could fix his legs - but he doesn't go about for that typically.

If a player wants to make a character who needs a wheelchair - as long as the rest of the table is cool with it, no harm, no foul.  Need help going down the stairs in a dungeon?  Fine.  So it takes them an extra few minutes.  This isn't a big issue in game-time, since it can be as hand-waved as the party going down any other way.  It's an issue if the GM makes it an issue.

Why would the character go adventuring?  That's up to the player to decide.  Maybe the character and their sibling lost their entire village to pillaging orcs (and maybe that's why the character's wheelchair bound, even).  They have nowhere else to go, so they're getting out there and they're doing what they can.

Who'd adventure with them?  Friends.  Or professionals that they've hired.  That's for the PC party, not the GM, to decide.
 
Why aren't they getting it fixed with magic?
Well, here's the thing.  If it's congenital, no healing magic's going to fix it - it's the 'perfect state' of the body.  So that's not going to do much.  If it's a wound that healed 'wrong', then cure spells aren't going to fix it (in D&D), because cure doesn't work that way.  The spell Regenerate could (probably).  But that's a significant spell, so you need either money, or a high level to get that one done. This even presumes the magic in the setting can heal that kind of injury, not every fantasy setting can.

Magic items?  Sure, a wheelchair that levitates.  Oh, you mean to 'make' the character walk?  Again, that's the player's choice.  Maybe they never find one.  Or maybe the ones they find don't 'suit' them. Optimization isn't the only way to play.

Oh, yes.  That.
'It isn't optimal' - you have game masters who go with the idea that the players have to be at their peak - that every path and every choice is to make the characters 'better' so they can fight monsters better.
 
That... is such a one-dimensional way to think. Not every player thinks that way.  Some people want to make characters with a certain aesthetic, and with no eye towards optimization.  (I'm looking at my bard who is absolutely pitiful in a fight, can't hit the broad side of a barn, and doesn't have the bardic inspiration ability, because his archetype does something else).

Or my sister's 3 STR / 5 CON Cleric who has to ride a pony everywhere because she doesn't have the stamina for long walks.  Or her Marshall character who, due to pitiful STR / CON stands in the back row to shout orders, because going into melee would get her killed, even though the class is a front-line class.

You play the character to have fun.  Whatever your definition of fun is.  If you're having fun, and the other players are having fun - that's all that matters.  And if that fun includes having a character in a wheelchair - if the group's cool with it, then what exactly is the issue again?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tainted with... Good?

You've heard the stories many times before. The land is corrupted and foul things rise up to torment humanity. A dark god rebels and spawns evil beings across the land. An evil sorcerer crafts an artifact that twists all who use it. Cool, fine, we've been down this path thousands of times. But why not the other way? A land blessed and divine things rise up? A god of light descends and spawns angelic beings across the land. A good priest crafts an artifact that guides others to the light? Consider the Story of Garg and Moonslicer But how would this be a 'bad thing', you might wonder? Where's the conflict that will drive the story? Well, that it needs to create conflict isn't a given. Not everything has to cause people drama and angst. But if you absolutely must -- it's unbalancing. A land with such an abundance of prosperity draws the attention of nations that don't have such benefits, and that can lead to war. Or you have a population that think they kno
Read more

The Balancing Act

Balance Balance might be the #1 thing talked about in gaming when you go into game theory and play. We talk about balanced rules, balanced parties, balanced encounters... Here's the thing. Mechanical balance isn't possible. Not really. Not without harming the game itself. Because for true 'mechanical balance', you need to have the mechanics control the decisions that the players make - right at character creation. It needs to control the choices players can make in an encounter. It needs to control the choices the characters make in the setting. It needs to control the choices the characters make as they level up. What gear they get. What bonuses they get. Who they encounter. What they can get from each encounter. What they can gather out in the world. The characters get pushed into smaller and smaller boxes, with less and less choices, all in the name of 'balance'. And what this does is make the character sheet really bland, and the mechanics really bland. You
Read more

It doesn't have to be about combat

Saw a post on FaceBook today, by a GM asking other GMs how to get the PCs to actually engage in combat -- the GM was upset that the players were going for non-combat solutions to their encounters. Personally? Let them have their non-combat solutions. If the PCs are anti-murder hobo, why not let them? Another GM wondered at hearing the players drive the story, and responded with, "what, I should just suck it up? My desires don't matter?" That's a pretty raw take of the situation, so here's my thoughts: 1) The GM's desires matter at the table. However... 2) The players drive the story. And their desires matter to. And what you need is equilibrium. You want combat? Sure, put in combat. There's some people who just don't listen to reason - they're there to have a fight, and trying to talk them out of it pisses them off more. Go for it. But if the players don't want combat? Then hold back on the combat -- let them have their roleplay. This is a role
Read more