1137
Had this conversation with someone who chose to no longer be at my table after meeting a blind NPC
(files.catbox.moe)
Another player who was at the table during the incident sent me this meme after the problem player in question (they had a history) left the group chat.
Felt like sharing it here because I'm sure more people should keep this kind of thing in mind.
The issue is that this toes the line on erasure. If a character is disabled but offsetting all of their disabilities with magic, they’re not disabled. The disability is just flavor text at that point, which feels a little bit like wearing an offensive caricature of a race as a Halloween costume.
If you want to include a disabled character in the party, that’s great. But disabilities come with drawbacks that real people with disabilities struggle with every day. If a person with a disability wants to erase their disability in a fantasy setting, that’s cool. At that point, it could simply be a power fantasy, the same way people want to play super powerful wizards and super strong barbarians.
But if an otherwise able bodied person wants to play a caricature of a disabled person without actually role playing the disabled part, it could become downright offensive to the people who actually struggle with those disabilities. Because at that point it’s not roleplaying a disabled person; It’s just leaning on stereotypes when it’s convenient, without actually roleplaying the real life struggles that accompany the disability.
Look at Toph from Avatar as a good example. She was blind and used her abilities to offset that when possible. But the important part is that she was still blind, and still regularly dealt with the drawbacks from being blind. She couldn’t read or write, because braille hadn’t been invented. And if she was ever away from solid ground, (like when flying or on sand) she wasn’t able to see anything. Because her sense of “sight” relied on her physical connection to the solid ground. So when she wasn’t touching solid earth, she was completely blind. And she also couldn’t see anything that was airborne, like when they were attacked by giant flying insects. She was blindly throwing rocks into the air, because she couldn’t see where the enemies were.
"If you have an amputated leg but offset it with a prosthetic leg, you are not disabled"
What if the magic is still not as good as a fully functioning body, for one reason or another?
I think you may have missed my point. Finding creative ways to offset a disability with magic is great. But even that magic would have limitations.
Maybe you have a flying carpet instead of a wheelchair. But even the best magical items have a limited number of daily uses, because magic power isn’t unlimited.
Maybe you have blindsight instead of regular sight, like giant spiders who can see even in magical darkness. But then you’re completely blind outside of the 30’ range, because blindsight only applies to the specified range.
Maybe you’re missing an arm and have compensated with an artificer’s prosthetic that has some built in features/tools. But you don’t have any sense of touch or proprioception (so you tend to bump into things and knock it against things when you aren’t consciously paying attention to where it is,) and have disadvantage on strength or dexterity checks/saves that involve gripping/climbing/etc.
My point isn’t simply that using magic to counteract a disability is wrong. In a world where magic permeates everything, it would be expected. My point is that you can’t simply erase the disability and use it for flavor text only when it’s convenient to you. Because disability permeates the disabled person’s life and inherently shapes how they interact with the world on a day to day basis.
The thing is just that this started with a Psychonauts 2 character, and I haven't played it, so for all I know maybe it makes no difference. But I assume constant telekinesis is at least somewhat inconvenient in that world. What about someone like Toph from Avatar TLA, whose blindness is acknowledged occasionally, but most of the time functions fine?
A question might be, how do you define a sufficient amount of limitations? I'm sure there's a point where everyone will go "yeah, you may as well be healthy", but I assume most situations are a grey area. But I'm also neither disabled nor have experience with disabled people, so I'm probably the furthest from judging.
Also things like, how that magic carpet would be even more useful for a fully functioning person, even with a large amount of uses. Still a disadvantage on the merit of being the only option, rather than being AN option.
So what you're saying is that if she shits her diapers in the game, it's ok? Weird kink, but w/e floats your boat, I guess...