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

[Bedrockgames]

When fava beans are being sold at my local super-market, they put on a sign to warn those who are allergic. I'm personally not allergic to them, so I can ignore the sign, while still appreciating why it is a very good idea to have it on display.

Physical allergies can kill. And even ones that don’t lead to bad health outcomes (i have celiac disease so definitely want that labeled). But there is plenty of reason to believe content warnings for media cause more harm than good (there is even research suggesting they lead to more prolonged negative episodes). I just don’t think we are equipped as s hobby to be deploying techniques like this particularly when they effectiveness is questionable

 

[Bedrockgames]

That just seems strange to me. Can't they just decline to answer? (I assume it doesn't bother them to the level that the DM should warn them in advance that they'll ask?)

It is a style preference. Some players mind that other players are having that much out of character impact on content. And they don’t want to shape the content either. If feels very customized or bespoke. Some people might want that, and that is fine. But it’s not strange to dislike it

 

[bedir than]

Physical allergies can kill. And even ones that don’t lead to bad health outcomes (i have celiac disease so definitely want that labeled). But there is plenty of reason to believe content warnings for media cause more harm than good (there is even research suggesting they lead to more prolonged negative episodes). I just don’t think we are equipped as s hobby to be deploying techniques like this particularly when they effectiveness is questionable

Link this research that goes against the research that multiple therapists who work in the TTRPG therapy space share regularly?

I'm not denying your poor experiences, but if I have dozens of people who suggest a path and one person who says that oath is harmful I'm going to choose less harm.

The needs of the many and all that as Spock said

 

[Bedrockgames]

I assume people will ignore this like they do all the other things in the books they don't like unless it's like adventurer's guild or at a con.

I am sure they will. My response is more to the posters and people in the hobby saying this is how things ought to be done

 

[Bedrockgames]

Link this research that goes against the research that multiple therapists who work in the TTRPG therapy space share regularly?

I'm not denying your poor experiences, but if I have dozens of people who suggest a path and one person who says that oath is harmful I'm going to choose less harm.

The needs of the many and all that as Spock said

There have been a bunch of studies on trigger warnings: What if Trigger Warnings Don’t Work?

 

[Cadence]

It is a style preference. Some players mind that other players are having that much out of character impact on content. And they don’t want to shape the content either. If feels very customized or bespoke. Some people might want that, and that is fine. But it’s not strange to dislike it

So, do you think those folks would like the DM to let them know in advance that they'll be asking (like they would let them know about system, genre, any big restrictions on the rules, etc...) so that someone not interested wouldn't waste the time showing up?

 

[Bedrockgames]

So, do you think those folks would like the DM to let them know in advance that they'll be asking (like they would let them know about system, genre, any big restrictions on the rules, etc...) so that someone not interested wouldn't waste the time showing up?

No, I don’t think people want or need a preamble to the preamble. But if it’s me, it would just be one thing to consider when I am deciding if the group is a good fit for me. Some people get very uptight about wasting time. It’s a game. No one is guaranteed a perfect session of perfect group. It can take time to find the group that you connect with. I am pretty relaxed so I actually find people who get overly demanding about other players of the group not wasting their time, a terrible fit for me

 

[Bill Zebub]

Because there's a big difference between something you dislike and something that induces an anxiety attack.

True, there is a difference. But I don’t want to be in the position of adjudicating that for others. So if somebody signals that a topic makes them uncomfortable I will try to avoid it, without passing judgment of whether I, in my less-than-infinite wisdom, find it legitimate. I think it’s the kindest, most decent thing to do.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I'm not denying your poor experiences, but if I have dozens of people who suggest a path and one person who says that oath is harmful I'm going to choose less harm.

Sure that is entirely your call. For me I just don’t think you can boil this down to a hard and fast rule. You need to allow for groups to navigate this on their own. I might find the person claiming it is harmful to be unreasonable or not correct, or I might worry about whether catering to that one person, is going to produce growing resentment among the other players. I might also just really want to run a particular concept and not have it be subject to player but in (and obviously I will have a sense of his much if an issue this could be for people)

The needs of the many and all that as Spock said

Not being facetious but doesn’t the Spock quote make the opposite point? (Ie needs of many outweigh the needs of the few)

 

[bedir than]

There have been a bunch of studies on trigger warnings: What if Trigger Warnings Don’t Work?

This is written by someone who says trigger warnings are bad, and yet still lists the difficult subjects that will be covered in class

Their objection is to the name rather than the practice