D&D 5E Player consent required -spoilers for new adv book

[MGibster]

It's not just D&D. It could be anything where people with trauma or PTSD or phobias have things shoved in their faces by people, especially people they thought were friends or might become friends. It feels like it shouldn't be hard to avoid shoving stuff in someone's face once one knows about it being a thing for them. And once one knows a sizeable group might have that issue, it doesn't feel hard to check on it in advance.

Shoved in their face? That's kind of an interesting description. Look, I get that there are people who have genuine trauma, but it's on them to figure out how to deal with subjects that they find difficult. If dealing with it is telling people they can't have certain topics in the game, fine, tell people. i.e. They're the ones that need to take proactive steps rather than expecting the rest of to make decisions revolving around their needs.

 

[Hussar]

Shoved in their face? That's kind of an interesting description. Look, I get that there are people who have genuine trauma, but it's on them to figure out how to deal with subjects that they find difficult. If dealing with it is telling people they can't have certain topics in the game, fine, tell people. i.e. They're the ones that need to take proactive steps rather than expecting the rest of to make decisions revolving around their needs.

Wow.

This is so entirely lacking in basic human decency.

The idea that you put your pretend elf games ahead of actual people is abhorrent. The hobby does not need this.

Like at all.

 

[MGibster]

Wow.

This is so entirely lacking in basic human decency.

The idea that you put your pretend elf games ahead of actual people is abhorrent. The hobby does not need this.

Like at all.

Before starting any horror game I ask my players to tell me what they don't want to see in the game. What can I allude to and what do I need to avoid in its entirety? I'm not going to bring anything up in a game when I know it will bother someone. But it's their responsiblity to tell me what bothers them.

 

[Longspeak]

WotC can't send thugs to your house to enforce their "requirements."

Not the same situation, of course... but didn't we have a whole thing a while ago because because WotC sent thugs to someone's house to enforce their requirements?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Does it matter?

Is it ok to hurt your friends? Is it ok to hurt strangers? Why would you want to hurt either group of players?

Than the argument that it matters when you're playing with strangers is meaningless.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What would your feelings be on this if by turning into a tentacle monster, you no longer can wear armor? You no longer have appropriate appendages to use your weapons or most skills? You no longer know the proper somantic gestures?

What's your buy-in threshold for that?

I'd probably play a new character. And I'm  always fine with that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not the same situation, of course... but didn't we have a whole thing a while ago because because WotC sent thugs to someone's house to enforce their requirements?

Of course, that was about  money.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Nobody is hurt by a game of D&D. Back in the 80s, it was the likes of Patricia Pulling and William Dear that claimed AD&D was psychologically damaging and a contributory cause of the suicides of Irving Pulling and James Eggbert, III. Do we need to apologize for them for mocking them all these years about their claims of role playing games being harmful? It's just weird to hear players these days claiming the game can be harmful.

Then it's time for us to hold a seance and apologize to Patricia Pulling because she and others were completely on track in reagards to the psychological damage a game of AD&D can cause.

Please tell me you understand the difference between saying D&D is intrinsically harmful (it isn’t) and someone running scenarios/adventures/campaigns that may be related to someone’s pre-existing phobias or traumas.

And if you understand THAT, tell me you understand that deliberately & knowingly engaging in the second without explicit permission from the player who may have an outsized reaction is intentional infliction of emotional distress.

 

[MGibster]

And if you understand THAT, tell me you understand that deliberately & knowingly engaging in the second without explicit permission from the player who may have an outsized reaction is intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Yes, deliberately running a scenario you know that a player will have an outsized reaction to is wrong.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I wouldn’t expect the GM to railroad players into a transformation, but if a transformation can happen if the right cut stances arise in a scenario, I don’t feel the Gm needs my permission or anything (just like the GM doesn’t need permission for my character to die if he gets breathed on by a dragon). At the end of the day it is still just a game