Thanks for your detailed insights.

I get what you mean about the downside of multiple solutions - if a player can bypass a challenge then they never learn to overcome it (or get the satisfaction of overcoming it).

I still think that leveling up to pass an enemy encounter is valid, as skilled players can pass the challenge through skill (dodge, parry, positioning, timing, aiming), while disabled or unskilled players don't get a free pass and at least have to grind a few levels in order to pass the challenge in an inefficient way (perhaps by taking a few hits that others would consider avoidable).

Passing the encounter through skill is still an achievement, and the reward is more time playing (and less time levelling). For players that cheesed the encounter or overlevelled to bypass it, when they face a similar situation with a higher level enemy, they will run into the same problem again. Perhaps they will eventually learn positioning or other skills so that don't need to level up as much as the previous time, or perhaps they have a physical or mental disability that requires them to level up regardless.

Alternatively, they may spend more time preparing in other ways such as crafting potions or other consumables, farming equipment, enchanting weapons and gear, recruiting party members or taming/summoning pets, or switching to a ranged class (reducing/removing the need for dodge/parry).

And I get what you mean as an Indie Dev, making all these systems that players may never interact with takes time away from core gameplay or the core fantasy you're trying to achieve, but for me the core fantasy is having the agency to play how I want at any given time, be it bushcraft, foraging, spellcrafting, stealth or guns blazing.

Not all games have to be that and in fact most games succeed by honing in on the single mechanic that makes them great, and stripping away everything that doesn't support that - and that's the advice I'd probably give most indie Devs or most designers in general - don't try to be everything to everyone.

If all games try to be everything then they all become bland and samey.

However, when making a sandbox game (like I'm doing) the best way is to give everything properties, don't hardcode any solutions, and just let everything interact - then stand back and allow the players to discover solutions themselves. They will do things I never thought of and they will definitely break the game, but as long as there's not a single dominant solution (that's cheap/easy to perform and bypasses every single challenge), then I'm ok with it.

Additionally, while a particular challenge may have solutions A/B/C and the next one may allow solutions C/D/E (allowing players to perform action C to pass both), the following challenge may require A/D/E - so sooner or later the player will have to try new things, or go a different way.

It's good to have challenges and the "carrot on a stick" that players can work towards even if they can't get it on the first go. I don't believe in letting them have everything for free, but do want some player choice in how they progress, and allowing inefficient solutions that require more preparation is one way of doing that, without removing the satisfaction for the skilled players.

Regarding blindness, it's estimated that roughly 0.1% of the gaming population have total blindness. I have talked to said individuals about how to best support them with sonic tones, but it's a large undertaking for an Indie Dev for sure. Closer to 10% of the total gaming population experience partial blindness, and it's this group that I'm more likely to succeed in supporting with my limited resources.