Engaging learning disabled players

[ffilz]

In this thread (and in past threads), I have mentioned that I have two learning disabled players, one of whom is very hard to engage in the game. She is the wife of the other learning disabled player. They have shared some details of their disabilities with me. One thing that's loud and clear is that they are not interested in reading a lot, and I have adjusted for this by running a game they are already familiar with (D20 - Arcana Evolved) and by choosing a setting that isn't so deep that participation really depends on reading the source material.

But even with all of that, the wife is still very hard to engage. One problem is that if I ask her to make any real decision, she has a tendency to freeze up. Adjusting to that, and the preferences in character type expressed (mostly by her husband), we have settled on her running a flying spell caster, who is primarily a healer (but she has plenty of combat spells also). She responds to high level tactical questions (like, "do you want to fly out of reach and blast them with spells?"). Mostly we give her suggestions as to when to cast healing spells and when to cast attack spells. She does contribute to play by occaisional insightful comments, and occaisional non-sequiter comments. I'm also not convinced that her presence isn't primarily to enable her husband to participate in his favorite activity while sharing time together, though I have never detected any sort of "I would rather not be here" body language or comments, and she does seem interested in what's going on. She often ends up falling asleep, though I'm not sure medication isn't a complicating factor here, and playing in the evening is a complicating factor - but I assume the primary factor is lack of engagement.

From some conversation, especially on the way home from a disastrous Fudge session. I think they like to game with me because I accept them for who they are and don't put them down, and at least make some effort to make them comfortable, and ultimately the rest of our group does the same.

I'm sort of at a loss because the type of game I enjoy (tactically heavy, moderate to high complexity) is not really ideal for her (and not really ideal for him either). They are fun to have in the game, but it disappoints me that the wife especially seems so out of place.

Any thoughts on things I might try to reach out to her better are welcome. Even thoughts on how to ask the right questions.

Frank

[Christopher Weeks]

Can you describe what she's like when she freezes up?  I assume that the worst they are is not engaged, rather than disruptive, and you aren't looking for us to tell you jetison them.  Have you talked, specifically to her, about her condition? 

I'm imagining something like "I'm not trained to deal with your disabilities and you know way more about the way your mind works than I do, so I need your help.  I perceive this, this and this about your level of engagement with the game.  What can we do to improve your level of functioning at the table?  And hey, I don't want you to freak out about this.  If this is the best the game can be for you and there really is nothing to improve, it's all good -- you're not a disruption and you're not bringing the game down."

You say that they're not really up to playing the kind of game you want to play.  But I think you're willing to suffer along, accomodating them because getting other, better players is hard for you and probably because you feel good about helping them (when you're not disgruntled about it, which is natural).  What's your long-term ability to live with the situation?  I'd jetison them and find engaged players.

[Jason Morningstar]

I deal with people with cognitive disabilities pretty regularly, and I don't think your issues are really disability-related as much as communication-related.  I'd suggest sitting them down - seperately - and ask them what's working and what isn't, what they'd like to change about the way the game is going, and what they really like.  You don't even need to bring the disability into it, since that isn't entirely relevant to these questions.  Then answer the same questions from your perspective, for them.  If you can reach some consensus about things to tweak and improve, awesome.  If not, stay friends and stop gaming together. 

--Jason

[ffilz]

When the wife freezes up, she most often burries her face in her hands. Sometimes she just compains that she can't decide. We have minimized these situations by recognizing the types of decisions she just totally freezes up on. It was stunning how severe her reaction to the translator decision was, given the effort we made to present her a way to be the translator without her having to repeat after me - which is how some gamers might do translation, trying to be "in character"' - I and the other players were quite willing to have her just agree that her character would translate, and then I would just conduct the conversation. I think what happened here is that she has a terrible time saying what she means to say, and any thought of actually having to try and talk in an extended manner made her the deer in the headlights to the point she just couldn't see the other options. When we present the options in a way she can understand them, and just has to choose one or the other, she does fine.

So I see a significant element of her disengagement simly caused by her fears of communicating. But that also makes it really hard to talk to her about it. I also sense a lot of damage in their backgrounds. They have mentioned their families teasing them (her family especially) on several occaisions. I think it would be helpful to talk to them separately, but the wife clings to the husband so closely it's hard, and it takes a lot of care to talk to her (it really helps to have her husband reword questions for her and coax answers from her). I suspect her trust level with the outside world is about zero, and it has taken a lot of careful work on my part to build up trust with them.

I think Chris is right that to move forward, I need to have to ask them what (if anything) I could change to make things better for them.

It sure would be easier for me to ditch them, but my UU beliefs just don't let me take the easy route given that they are not destructive to the game environment. The husband has definitely become more conversant with the rules.

Jason, are you sure their disabilities aren't playing in here, or at least hers? I think the husband's disability really only comes into play in his disinterest in reading reams of background material, and his imperfect social skills, but the wife is at least reacting to a complex history which her disability is tightly wound into, at least that's my non-expert read.

Frank

[Jason Morningstar]

No, I'm absolutely sure their disabilities are having an impact on their experience.  But they are experts on managing their disabilities, so asking us what to do about them isn't the greatest strategy.  I assume they are using whatever techniques they know work for them already, so an open discussion about what is working and not working in the game ought to be productive, just like it would be for any player.  Obviously I'm working from zero information here, and you should proceed as you think best, but I can't see how some constructive conversation would hurt, anyway.

It also occurs to me that the husband/wife dynamic may be a factor, as well as their (no doubt complex) experience with mutual disability.  It's pretty cool that they are gaming together, but they might have more fun apart, you know? 

--Jason

[ffilz]

Ah, ok, I get your suggestion now. Makes sense.

I tried to call them this weekend because I was going to suggest they come over a bit early so I could talk to them separately, but I didn't reach them, and had about decided to just start the next session with a discussion about how this key/hero point mechanism seems like it's almost there, but not quite, and open a group discussion on what the players want as a group and individually. If any hesitation seems to come out of that, I can then talk to individual players, but my gut feeling, reinforced by your point about them already knowing how to cope suggests the ship is already pretty much on an even keel and just needs fine tuning.

I do agree that they might be better off gaming seperately, but who am I to intefere in their dynamic so long as it seems to be working for them and not causing anyone else problems. If I sensed any level of "I'd rather not be here." from the wife, I'd thing otherwise (in fact, on occaision, she has been the one to ask when the next game is - so on some level she is engaged).

I'm still open for suggestions of things to watch for where I might be able to do something differently and improve their experience, and thoughts others have had on including cognitively disabled gamers in their play.

Frank

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Frank,

I've been thinking about this thread a lot. I have no experience with disabled folks in role-playing, but quite a bit when it comes to teaching martial arts. I don't know whether the parallel is valid, and certainly a lot rests on the actual nature of the disabilities/delays, so I'll tell you what I've experienced and you can seee how it fits.

I'm most familiar with developmental delays. The students I teach are high-function people who proceed through adolescence and modes of learning slower than most of us. They are especially striking in terms of how well they learn, once you find the presentation pace and method that works for that person, for that topic. I'm really happy that I don't have to teach dumbed-down martial arts - I just have to teach it in a way which works for these students, and then they learn spectacularly.

It drives me nuts that so many people prior to this recent generation were just written off as "retarded" and semi-institutionalized when they were in fact capable of learning incredibly well given the right methods. But I digress.

Anyway, I bring this part up because I'm wondering whether the folks in your group are hitting the learning curve of role-playing (about all sorts of things) in a way which works for them.

Also, emotional cues among people are a big deal in the community I'm working with. A lot of the students are in the 13-16 emotional and social range, although they're in their 20s and 30s. So how they interact, and about what, is something I have to get used to and deal with in the right range. It may be (heavy emphasis on the "may" because I have no idea what conditions are going on in your group) that the social and communicative cues you and others use during the role-playing are "off the screen" or "on another screen" for these players. In which case, if you adjust that a little, you might be surprised at how much interaction and input could be forthcoming.

Best,
Ron

[ffilz]

Thanks Ron, I think you're spot on.

Almost certainly part of why this couple feels comfortable playing with me is that I have taken the time to work with them to get characters they will enjoy playing (at least to the extent I can understand what they get out of playing). I think it's also key that I resist the urge to play system of the week with them, staying with a single game system is really beneficial for them.

The husband has learned a lot about creating focused characters, though he still tries to do too much sometimes. When he was creating his current character, his wife even was telling him to be more focused, so she certainly is not clueless. When I present decisions in terms she can understand, the wife is comfortable with making decisions, and makes effective decisions.

So I will keep on doing what I'm doing, and keep paying attention.

Frank

[mutex]

Hello, based on some things I've read on here in the past, my junior college psychology class :D, and from the description of your players, it seems like the RP'ing is actually therapeutic for your players.  I mean, they're able to make decisions with consequences, but they don't have to be afraid that they will be ridiculed or beaten.  There characters may get injured, but it's doubtful that you're the kind of GM who will wantonly slaughter players.

It's good that your gentleman friend is learning to focus, while his lady is learning to socialize and make decisions (albeit slowly).  If I were in your position, I definitely wouldn't eject them.

[ffilz]

Mutex - I hadn't consciously thought of the game in those terms, but that's a real good point. And I guess that's why I feel good about their participation. If I saw that it really wasn't working for people, I'd show them the door. I was also sort of surprised the other night. The husband said he had done a lot of reading in the book trying to figure out a new character.

Frank

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Frank,

I was doing a little more thinking about this thread. Coincidentally, last Friday evening was our annual demonstration to the delayed/disabled program that we do at the parents' night which opens each school year. I'm one of the instructors so participated in the demonstration; sometimes, I run it, but not this time.

I'd been the students' primary instructor over the course of the past school year, so was alert to the changes that I could see in their skills, compared to last year's demonstration.

And here's my point: the improvements were considerable. Now, I'm not saying this in order to brag about what a great instructor I am. But I do know what I've learned from the head instructor about teaching learning-disabled and developmentally-delayed students, and this demonstration showed me very concretely that what I've learned has had positive results.

Here's what I learned and applied: that you don't give breaks to people in terms of performance corrections because they are delayed/disabled. They get all the corrections anyone else does. What changes is only the instructor's understanding of (a) whether this sort of correction is working and (b) what rate improvement appears.

But if an instructor gives the students easy-passes, no-corrections teaching, because, you know, they're retarded, then the instructor is betraying the student. This is not "Special" martial arts. They are learning the real stuff, both the art per se (patterns, etc) and applications (self-defense, both social and physical). They are learning the same stuff I teach to my other classes (and in fact, the developmentally-delayed students are welcome to participate in those classes, too, as our senior instructor has decreed, and he's right).

I can't emphasize this enough. Let me tell you about Julia.* Julia is a woman in her late twenties who graduated from this particular educational program a few years ago. She lives in her apartment, has a car, has a job, and generally functions as a full adult citizen. Physically, she's a "leaner." Her head tilts to one side, she puts her shoulders out of alignment with her hips, she puts her weight on one leg. When talking, her head shifts from one side to another.

As you might imagine, these tendencies play havoc with martial arts techniques. "Punch," I say, and Julia punches, and her stance is crooked and her head is folded to one side.

What is the typical instructor response: "Oh, look, it's nice the poor retarded girl is taking martial arts. It's so nice they let her do that. And here she is, punching, all off-looking but it's so uplifting that we are so magnanimous to include her."

I don't mind telling you that attitude makes me furious. It's totally fucked. My response?

"Julia! Head up!" (following up on some before-drills work we all did in standing, elevating our heads, tucking our chins, breathing from the lower body) And over time, just as with any diligent martial arts student who learns to "listen to her body." Julia does it.

At the demonstration, she kept her head up and presented some great technique, and shattered all sorts of lumber.

Again, this isn't about me, but about the teaching. I didn't have any expectations about Julia's rate of improvement, but I did expect her to improve. Not just "be there" and "try," but to learn and to perform better. She can and she did.

I urge you to consider this point in regard to your friends. I am not accusing you of lowering your expectations, because I'm not there and I don't know you guys, but I do know it's very common for people to do so - kind of the bear-on-bicycle thing, if you're familiar with that analogy. "No one expects the bear to ride well, they are impressed that the bear rides at all." It's a bad thing.

If you combine (a) fair expectations in terms of learning rate, (b) flexibility on your part in figuring out what ways to communicate are most effective, and (c) concrete and expressed expectations in terms of performance/participation ... well, I think you might be surprised at how excellent a pair of role-players you might be dealing with.

Best,
Ron

* I have never before used pseudonyms on the Forge. I'm doing it in this case.

[ffilz]

Thanks for those thoughts Ron.

I know I'm not perfect, but I think that is pretty close to the avenue I'm taking with the husband (and he is learning, lately he's been creating cool characters that are pretty well thought out, I sometimes have to remind him to focus, but then I'd do that for any player who came up with a really non-focused character design). Unfortunately, I'm still at a loss how to better reach the wife. I wonder sometimes if she'd be better off playing without her husband because he definitely does compensate for her, and I think she's used to leaning on him for support. How to undo the damage to her confidence that creates is going to be a task.

I should probably kick myself for not taking the opportunity to talk to her the one time she came to a session without her husband (he had a conflict and arrived several hours later). I also kick myself for not participating in a workshop my church held on working with kids with disabilities (of all sorts).

I will definitely try to pay more attention to how I interract with them though, and make sure I'm not giving them an easy pass.

Frank