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

[Micah Sweet]

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.

Does that apply in the context of it being a game in which one player has an issue the other players don't? Can't that person just not play in that game, or do we always have to change the activity in order to accommodate any individual if they have an issue?

 

[bedir than]

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

Yes, but Spock didn't force others to sacrifice. Not accommodating others is forcing them to sacrifice for your pleasure. That's the opposite of what Spock did

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes, but Spock didn't force others to sacrifice. Not accommodating others is forcing them to sacrifice for your pleasure. That's the opposite of what Spock did

Again, what does accommodation mean in the gaming context about which we are theoretically discussing?

 

[bedir than]

Does that apply in the context of it being a game in which one player has an issue the other players don't? Can't that person just not play in that game, or do we always have to change the activity in order to accommodate any individual if they have an issue?

Yes, an individual can not play. Of course! That's the point. Empower people to make the decisions that are best for them.

D&D is supposed to be fun, not an obligation to harm yourself or others

 

[Bedrockgames]

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

I think this is not a good take away from that article, they basically say and point to research that if doesn’t work, and one expert even says renaming it to content note doesn’t help because people understand a content note is effectively a trigger warning.

But the reason I linked it wasn’t the individual writers opinion but on the research the linked to

 

[Bedrockgames]

Yes, but Spock didn't force others to sacrifice. Not accommodating others is forcing them to sacrifice for your pleasure. That's the opposite of what Spock did

But aren’t you forcing the other people to sacrifice what they said okay to over a single objection?

 

[Cadence]

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

Here's a meta-analysis. The abstract should be visible and googling the authors might turn up a preprint or the like.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21677026231186625

 

[Morrus]

Oooookaaay... so what we have now is two groups of people dug in the sand on different sides of a different line of ideology, all reporting each others' posts, sometimes validly, often on pretty flimsy grounds, but certainly en-masse, all reporting each other. So it's either give like everybody a warning or shut the thing down. Guess which is easier?

But for the record, the general obnoxious use of the post reportage aside, if you don't want to use safety tools, then I guess don't; but also don't tell people that their choice to be considerate is wrong.

Closed. Because it's Sunday night, and I have things to do.

 

[Umbran]

As an added bonus, it signals our virtue...

The thought police can go...

Mod Note:
Morrus wasn't able to handle this at the time, but it bears mentioning.

It pays to read the Terms and rules, linked on the bottom of every forum page.

In our inclusivity policy - use of terms like "virtue signaling" and "thought police" to dismiss opinions is not acceptable. Either address the specific thoughts expressed, or not. Slapping a derogatory label upon it so that it can be overlooked by association is not appropriate.