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.

  • Cagi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    In the United States, millions and millions of people walk around with conditions we can treat with our own kind of magic: modern medicine. So why don’t they get that prosthetic arm, treat that chronic pain, get that surgery, or take those pills? They can’t afford it. Why don’t they get that vaccine? They don’t believe in it. If magic exists to eliminate all disabilities, then there should be no smart, rich people with disabilities in your world building, certainly. Plenty to go around otherwise though.

    • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      There could be magic, but not magic capable of curing diseases. If the extent to which your mages are capable of manipulating the elements is spewing fireballs or perhaps summoning a storm, treating an infection might be beyond their capabilities. You might also have a setting where disabilities are the result of curses that only mages of exceptional capabilities are able to treat.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Also could be a warhammer fantasy/40k situation where magic is kinda unstable and a good chunk of mages are batshit or kinda weak. Sure nobody would complain if Teclis or Malcador offer you healing but neither are insane or weak. Also the reason for that comparison is that I suspect the two are roughly comparible to eachother in their respective settings.

        Also the Emperor is the 40k equivelent of Nagash. I will take no questions.

        • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          Also could be a warhammer fantasy/40k situation where magic is kinda unstable and a good chunk of mages are batshit or kinda weak. Sure nobody would complain if Teclis or Malcador offer you healing but neither are insane or weak. Also the reason for that comparison is that I suspect the two are roughly comparible to eachother in their respective settings.

          As a Bright Wizard, I take offense to this. I am not weak. My flames purify entire hordes of filthy rat men. Now, if you can excuse me. There is a horde of Northmen at the gate and my tea is getting cold.

    • Shirasho@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Likewise, if fantasy magic did exist in our world that could cure illness we would have a large percentage of our population calling it fake and saying it doesn’t work.

      It is easier and cheaper to pretend it doesn’t exist and they want that to extend to fantasy as well. They don’t want to think about real problems.

    • Brutticus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      There is also another dimension to this; millions are still direly ill because they can’t afford treatment.

      And even in our modern world, with all our magic, there are some diseases and conditions we haven’t been able to cure. There is more than one problem that has the same output (blindness) so maybe in the fantasy world they have magic to fix someones macular degeneration but not their optic nerves

    • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If magic exists to eliminate all disabilities, then there should be no smart, rich people with disabilities in your world

      I disagree. I know plenty of smart people with disabilities who wouldn’t take a cure if it was possible. Most of them are autistic. Autism is a disability in a world that doesn’t accommodate it, but it doesn’t have to be. It’s a disability politically, not intrinsically. And deafness is pretty undeniably a disability, but I’ve read about deaf people not wanting to join in on hearing society because they think the deaf community is better.

      This might sound hard for you to understand if you’re fully abled, so I’ll put it in terms you can understand. Imagine if tomorrow scientists invented a cheap, painless procedure to install a third arm in your chest. Everyone’s getting them because they’re so useful, and clothing stores are quickly switching to shirts with three arm holes. It’s getting hard to find shirts with only two arm holes, in fact. Even if everyone you knew said they preferred having three arms, would you get one?

      • Cagi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I am disabled. I would take a magic cure in a second, as would the vast majority of disabled people.

          • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think if you do not want or need a cure, it’s not a disability. Doesn’t make sense to call it a disability then.

            • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Autism is a disability mostly for social reasons, not for intrinsic reasons. I guess you could say that I do want a cure, if the cure is society becoming more tolerant. But I don’t want a cure that changes my intrinsic nature, because there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with being autistic.

              • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                What is a disability “for intrinsic reasons” or that is “intrinsically wrong”? Only disabilities that cause direct pain?

                Per definition, a disability is something that gives you a handicap for living in how the world is.

                • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  A disability for intrinsic reasons would be something like paraplegia or deafness. There is no social relativity to whether people with these conditions can do less things. But whether something is intrinsically wrong with that person is up to their own judgement. They are free to set their own standard in that case, and determine whether they really should be able to walk or hear, just as I’m free to determine whether I really should be able to make eye contact or process speech. (It is my opinion that the loudness of public spaces is unnatural and unjust, and that people need to fucking speak clearly instead of being lazy and making me do the work of listening closely)

                  But I think you’ve ignored my point. Which is that I don’t want to be cured of my mind’s nature, but I do want to be free of a society that disables autistic people. My question to you is, do I want to be cured? Is social acceptance and accommodation a cure?

                  • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    I don’t care. The definition of what a disability is, is clear. When all people would be deaf, would deafness be a disability? No.

                    It doesn’t matter whether you personally want to be cured or not. If someone has no legs and they like it, it’s still a disability because the person has a clear handicap in the current world. It doesn’t matter that, in a hypothetical world where heaving legs doesn’t matter, it wouldn’t be seen as a handicap.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I mean, some people literally just don’t view their conditions as disabilities. We don’t even need to talk about ability to afford something.