Taking away someone's intentional, roleplayed disability definitely falls under "infringing on someone's fun", though. If the player (not just the character) is also disabled and trying to represent themselves in the game, this goes beyond infringing on fun straight into lowkey offensive. I would never let this nat 20 work. Maybe it fixes the wheelchair or something.
Main issue is the wheelchair itself. No adventurer would ever use a wheelchair, the only reason we can use wheelchairs now are uniform roads and ada mandated ramps. Magic carpets exist and are cheap in game and don’t make you a liability.
I mean, have you considered a dwarven wheelchair made from the shields of the fallen, using their frames for wheels that grant comparable protection while gaining grip compared with a wooden spoke?
Or a druidic wheelchair of entire roots that bonded to the druid when they were mortally wounded on the forest, bonding them permanently?
Or a warlock who walks with an artificial leg of miasma and lurching tentacles that his patron restored him to in exchange for his soul debt?
Literally no reason and no way a wheelchair in game is more a liability than some geriatric old fucking wozard breaking his hip or your characters having a concussion and needing an EMT.
If I cast "Greater Restoration" and say I'm going to cure your of your Warlock pact, and roll a nat 20, and you are vehemently against this, it's not "for the sake of fun" if I go ahead and "cure" you of your chosen character traits and path.
I hear you, and I'm not rigid in spell use within reason, but this is well outside just RAW and more into the latter part of everyone having fun at the table. Your fun shouldn't come at the expense of another player having to give up agency over their character, which are personal avatars people can sometimes be quite attached to.
If you're in a table where characters are dying left and right maybe they aren't. But even then, if they don't want it, that's the red line. Just like using Mind Control on a party member to do something unspeakable. RAW could they? Sure. But unless this is a game built on betrayals or where players are expecting a PvP element, absolutely not. Because the IRL consequences of this and the real anger a player at the table may feel trump mechanics.
Everything in moderation, everything on balance. Player agency is something you should try not to let other players trample on. And even as a DM, it should be subtle or not at all when you are moving the scenery to guide something. Again, subjective.
Why do people think this? Like, I'm not mad at you, just amazed at how common this belief is.
Wheelchairs were around, and in use on surfaces that were abysmal in comparison to modern ones, but they worked.
Whether or not an adventurer would use one is a different issue, but folks really don't know shit about wheelchairs it seems.
I'm not saying it would be fun, or easy, but I've been out in the woods on paths barely wide enough to fit a chair, and had people, my patients, push themselves the entire way, lumps, ruts, rocks, roots and all. And rubber tires aren't magic for that. They help, but they don't make the impossible possible, just the edge cases easier.
... the only reason we can use wheelchairs now are uniform roads and ada mandated ramps.
That is not about the fantasy world, unless ada means All Drow Associated or something, though why drow would mandate ramps, I have no idea. Maybe because spiders don't like steps?
So your fantasy world has asphalt roads and uniform sidewalks and paved connections between every village? If your 99.9% of dnd games you are playing in the mideaval era world with magic. So just use the fucking magic items.
I described plenty of magically enhanced wheelchair options alin a different comment, and then the complaint was that they're still wheelchairs.
It feels like people just don't think disabled people can or should exist in a fantasy realm, and that's kind of hilarious considering how many famous characters in fiction have prosthetics or other aids.
Professor X does okay for himself.
"But why doesn't he just levitate all the time!"
Because he's fine seated and there's no issue with it.
You do know that like, wagons and shit existed for millenia and went over completely unpaved and incredibly rough terrain as well, right? Any wheelchair in a DnD setting could easily have a mild enchanment for grip and strength enhancement that would make it offroad capable.
The problem is the wheelchair is not condusive to an adventuring environment, and minor changes do not make them work and any large changes make them no longer wheelchairs.
Disabled people exist, and they exist in fantasy and in history, but when your world has magic and “advanced technology” (artificers), there are so many better options than a simple wheelchair. Having your pc have an optional disability, then choosing the least optimal way to work around the disability, then complain when people begin to attempt to fix or change the disability is entirely on you.
Professor X lives in a time of asphalt and pavement.
Wagons and wheelbarrows don’t go adventuring. They go on predetermined dirt paths or in fields. Areas where a wheelchair CAN go but is not optimal. Any magical fantasy setting would never have wheelchairs because they are simply imprsctical for the period and multiple magical alternatives thst are objectively superior.
Obviously they don’t need them. But the prevalence of wheelchairs is because of out modern world and architecture. I did research on the history of wherlchairs. The first self propelled chair was invented in 1655 in Germany. Before this point you had to be carted around. No afventurer is going to be carted around, wheelchairs simply did not exist during the typical dnd time period. Besides, the early wheelchairs were only for the wealthy, those who did not have to labor and could pursue other interests. Paved roads as we know them came into existence in the 18th century, and around this time hospitals began using them to cart patients around. Then wheelchairs became more widespread.
I have had players make persuasion checks against me before when they want to do something that's explicitly outside the rules but I think it would be cool. Depending on how cool I think it would be, the DC can be anywhere from 10 to 20, and the player doesn't have proficiency
Yes, but in table top unless you signed up for a PvP game, other players don't get to dictate how your character is. And even the DM shouldn't railroad.
the GM can make players do things they don't want, if players disagree it is at best a contested check but in almost all cases the controlling player controls their own character
D&D is ultimately a set of rules to guide a group improv storytelling session. One of the first rules of improv is "yes and" so you go with it within the confines of the game rules as well as what people are comfortable with. This is where /u/starbuck@lemmy.world's suggestion of "Ranlar slowly rises from his wheelchair before collapsing under his own weight as his atrophied legs give out. Your party must now find a way to move him away from the orcs without using his newly healed legs, perhaps on a nearby chair with wheels." Fits so well. It "yes and"s the spell while remaining true to the other player's wishes.
The DMs job is to maintain the fun for the players, and if one player is ruining others fun they need to be spoken with and kicked out if they aren't able to be a team player. Personally, I treat a NAT20 (and critical failures) as an opportunity to do something comical that helps advance the story and improve the lore, because that creates the moments you tell to others when sharing fun stories about D&D