[Vile? Mature] Going Too Far.

[The Serge]

Note to self: Xarlen is a DM I would play with, MinscFan probably isn't.

You'd be missing some great sessions...

I think Xarlen deserves praise for being concerned about his players experience. Feeling just anything, to me, is not valid. I don't play D&D to be angry or upset. I play it to tell stories, and enjoy the heroic struggle of the good guys against evil. Sure evil needs to be represented (and I've done some things in my games that would make some uncomfortable...like the children used as power sources for villain's constructs), but I don't think it has to be put forth offensively, players be darned.

I don't think anyone's saying that feeling for feeling's sake is okay... and I don't think anyone has an issue with how Xarlen and his player handled this situation.

That said, I think it's importantly for both DMs and Players to compromise at times when it comes to the more "mature" and "sophisticated" games. What both Minscfan and I do in our games is provide very, very romantic games (romantic in the artistic sense). There's a lot of emotion and a lot of energy. There's also many psuedo-realistic elements as well. Rape, incest, mass murder, torture, and the like. In both our cases, we don't dwell on these elements nor do Players encounter them in every single game. But they are there and when they show up, such elements are used to highlight just how terrible Evil (and sometimes unconcerned Neutrality or misguided Good) can be. I don't think Minscfan, myself, or any other DM should feel the need to constantly exclude these elements from our games or spend extra effort in trying to meet everyone's sensibilities.

On the other hand, a DM interested in playing with people will be somewhat sensitive to elements of general "good taste," but I don't think s/he should be burdened by these thoughts constantly. It's a compromise of goals and desires, but I don't think that a DM should constantly be second-guessing himself any more than Players should be forced to endure what they consider to be harsh and/or offensive. Both sides should be willing and prepared to deal with the issue. Minscfan makes this clear in his statement.

To me, as a DM, knowing my players, their preferences and their tolerances is what a DM DOES. If I want a DM who doesn't care about my experience except to mentally assualt me with his grand design, I can always go play a CRPG. I realize that not everyone plays that way, and that's fine. I wouldn't want someone to be forced to play my way....but I suspect more people play D&D to enjoy a good escapist fantasy than to put themselves in challenging emotional situations. YMMV.

Again, I don't see anyone here saying that they as a DM doesn't care about their Players. What has been said is that a DM cannot be expected to know every possible elements that may be offensive to Players. In one game I played, an off-screen character committed suicide. This occured shortly after my brother committed suicide and in the same manner. The DM had no reason to suddenly sit and figure out if this should be removed from the game. In this situation, the DM knew me well enough to know that I knew what happened in the game was not necessarily of any relavence to what happens in real-life. And even if he didn't know me, how many people commit suicide or have been raped, or have been abused, or what-have-you. If a DM spends all of his/her time trying to second-guess every possible offense, then there is no ability to play because someone may well be offended. Should the DM have a general idea of what to avoid? Perhaps, but that can only go so far and one can only expect so much.

When I introduce terrible scenes of gang rape or blatant racism in a game, I should not have to suddenly wonder if I've offended someone (case in point, I do, but that's my issue and not one I expect from other DMs). Sure, perhaps I should be able to clarify my personal feelings about such subject matter from my role as a game master and story teller, but I should not be solely responsible for how a person may react.

It's a two way street and both parties are responsible for where they end up.

 

[Xarlen]

IMO, there is a big difference between having a mature event have happened in the past, to an NPC, and having such an event happen now, to a PC or a beloved NPC.

BTW, my inner pedant feels compelled to mention a couple of things: most miscarriages happen very early in a pregnancy, so early that the woman probably wouldn't have known she was pregnant except that we now have very good home pregnancy kids; and, it doesn't by itself leave a scar.

</pedant>

I would point out, however, that in this case, the character's background came roaring to the fore, because she thought that Sister Life was trying to come take away more from her, that the PCs were trying to take her away. The fact she sort've centered on the Female PC because the Female PC pretty much was gunning for her to begin with didn't help matters. I should have thought that through.

And, she lost them in an accident, later in the pregnancy. So there was a scar.

 

[Aeolius]

Now, my son has had a couple of "close calls" since - he was down to 4.5 pounds when we took him home from the hospital after being born two weeks LATE and wasn't eating well. Lots of sleepless nights there. At about a month old, he got sick and went back to the hospital for almost a week. Those "close calls" have given me some idea of what it might be like to lose a child - but I still don't truly *KNOW*.

My son was born 10 weeks prematurely and has cerebral palsy, due to lack of oxygen at birth. While CP effects everyone differently, I am grateful that my son is as smart as, if not smarter than, his peers. He does have balance issues and muscle stiffness, so he uses a wheelchair. Some parents have children with CP that are non-verbal, must eat through feeding tubes, and more.

Has this made me sensitive to issues, regarding the disabled? You bet. I see people mention "3etard" on the boards, and immediately assume them to have the collective IQ of a dead hermit crab. A judgment call on my part, for ignorance on theirs. They stepped on a nerve and I reacted. I do have a chip on my shoulder; those who belittle the disabled are unworthy of life.

My wife recently miscarried after 10 weeks of pregnancy. If I was in a game and miscarriage was used as a plot element, no matter how briefly, I too would be upset. Whomever said "time heals all wounds" was both incorrect and an idiot. I will be bitter and biased until my dying day.

 

[barsoomcore]

I don't mean to say that there is no wiggle room here, as there should be.

Indeed. I'm all about sufficient wiggle room. Snicker.

Your last paragraph should be chiseled in stone, somewhere.

Oh, it is. I use a VERY OLD interface for posting.

 

[barsoomcore]

Pain Hits Us All

In a more serious vein, I wanted to note that we all of us carry around our own scars and chips and fears. Whether due to miscarriage, poor treatment at the hands of our parents, or a senseless accident in our youth, each and every one of us walks around every day carting about vast reserves of pain.

Sometimes it amazes me how people are able to get on with their lives and even enjoy the world, when you learn how much reason they have to be bitter or unhappy.

I do not, however, advocate a cautious approach to interpersonal relationships as a result. It does no good to spend your life tip-toeing around every potential issue or landmine.

You'll end up English.

Sorry, I said this was serious, didn't I? Sorry, sorry.

There's all the difference in the world between being cautious and being sensitive. The one is based in fear of committing a social blunder -- primarily selfish. A cautious person is one who avoids dangerous topics, sticks to what's safe and uncomplicated and without emotional power. The other is based in an honest desire to help others -- primarily unselfish. Being sensitive is about listening to what the people you're involved with are telling you, and understanding their pains and helping them enjoy their lives.

Both tactics will occasionally fail. There's no way to predict with certainty what another person might find offensive, and so you always face the danger that you will tread on a landmine and injure someone accidentally. The difference is that if your approach is sensitivity, you will notice the pain you're causing much quicker, and you'll have better tools to help heal the wounds.

The other thing about sensitivity as an approach, and a reason I consider it superior, is that it respects the other person more. I assume that the people I come into contact with, both in game and out, will behave with something like self-respect and courage. If I do something that they find offensive, I assume they will tell me and give me the chance to correct my blunder. Caution assumes other people are weak and must be protected. Sensitivity assumes other people are strong and can be trusted.

Finally, I think it behooves all of us, since we have every one of us suffered to one degree or other, not to let our own pain blind us to the fact that not everyone understands our view of things and that sometimes we will have to explain why we find this or that unpleasant. It can be frustrating, but sensitivity must work both ways. We cannot ask for it from others without delivering it ourselves. We are not unique in our pain, and no amount of pain renders us above the need to respect others.

Most often people offend us through their own ignorance. We must remember that another person's ignorance is our opportunity.

 

[SemperJase]

Ooo! I get to follow Barsoomcore!

My position on "vile" campaigns has been well documented. I think they are unneccessary.

That said, I don't think the miscarriage plot and mental illness aspects were "vile" (unless it was caused by someone purposely, accidents are natural). The mood was dark and this is what I would term "mature" content. It is a subject that a certain level of maturity is required in order to deal with it.

It was handled well according to the description of events.

The person who complained obviously had a sensitive spot about that subject. To dismiss you for being young was not appropriate. I'm 33 and have not dealt with a miscarriage. I'm sure most people do not have direct experience with a miscarriage. Age does not mean experience with specific issues.

Your decision to discuss these issues in the future before introducing them into a game is wise. People want to have fun and issues they are sensitive with will not be fun for them. In hindsight one can see that a serious subject like this may strike a nerve with players.

I will never use "vile" content, but had I been running a campaign with a dark mood, I may have used the same plot line had I thought of it. Now that you bring this thread up, I would reconsider it without knowing the participants personal experience.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Random comment - I am suddenly reminded of a time when I as a player may have inadvertently touched a nerve on the dm. I had a character who was a semi assassin (not the class yet) who had self trained in order to kill her husbands. The background was that she was a noblewoman in a soceity where that basically meant "brood mare for sale" and had a maternal line history of serious childbirth complications. She somehow got it stuck in her head that the only way she was gonna live past 30 was to be a widow, so she set about it. I wrote a story as character background, replete with middle ages worst case childbirth scenerios. later it occured to me that giving this story to a guy whose wife was currently pregnant with their first child might have been somewhat insensitive.

he never brought it up and since I had been openly gung ho for homebirths (I lent his wife Spiritual Midwifery) I doubt he had taken this as my actual veiw of birth. But I felt bad about it and resolved not to use this character is the future without makingit clear that this was a combination of her bad genes, a worst of both worlds time in childbirth and her personal instability, not a message that pregnancy in general was dangerous enough to kill to prevent.

kahuna burger

 

[Aeolius]

I suppose there is a safety in writing/designing what you are familiar with. With that in mind, I often incorporate NPCs with cerebral palsy, into my games. For example, for my undersea campaign, I devised the Prophet A'nan.

"The Prophet A'nan - Years ago, a child was born to the Tribe Farosh, a small band of humans which live upon a single spire. The child, in his infancy, would not develop as would his peers, for he had shown signs of "the stiffening", a disabling palsy. The elder shaman of the Farosh, claiming to have foreseen the coming of the child in dreams and omens, sacrificed the infant on the night when both moons shone full. Casting the child into the open ocean, the shaman claimed that the boy was A'nan, an undying prophet whose people would suffer a terrible plague. The elder shaman hoped, that by sacrificing the child, he would alter his premonition.

Years later, stories emerged regarding the emergence of the anemoid, a race of diminutive humanoid anemones. Their leader, whom they called A'nan, had been nurtured by a giant anemone. The boy and anemone had bonded, gifting the child with the ability to survive beneath the waves and immunity to the toxins of sea creatures. The anemone flourished, as it partook of the child's remarkable intellect. The anemoid claim that their founding members were born from A'nan himself, having grown from buds which separated from his body. The anemoid have recently counted clerics among their numbers.

Legend has it that the elder shaman died from an unknown ailment. "

(from my "Aquan Adventures" notes)

 

[Desdichado]

I think barsoomscore hit the nail exactly on the head (then again, I often agree with barsoomscore on a lot of things, though.) Sensitivity and communication and empathy are crucial to this kind of game. However, these types of topics shouldn't necessarily be avoided unless you know specifically that with this group the topics should be avoided. Personally, I find it trite to trot out the "RPGs are escapist entertainment" argument. To me that most certainly is not true. To me, RPGs are "serious" entertainment, like reading a novel. And since the novels I enjoy are often dark, grim and gritty, I want my RPGs to be the same way. I like campaigns that Monte would probably call borderline vile, with demonist, sadist, twisted and perverted villians. Much like George R.R. Martin writes, in many ways.

So, yeah, they are as much fair game for rpgs as they are for novels. But you have to know that going into it. You don't want to spring that on a group of players who is expecting the kind of evil you get in Disney's Beauty and the Beast.

And I doubt that such a low number of people have had a personal experience with miscarriages as [someone] mentioned. I've lost 5 siblings, a son (or daughter) a niece (or nephew) and the children of several really good friends. Some of them (although not my wife and I's miscarriage) were fairly advanced states of pregnancy. As with other "mature" themes, miscarriage, child abuse, and the like, they can make powerful emotional defining moments in characters. That's why a lot of writers use these types of things. Writers don't worry about upsetting potential readers too much. RPGs, because of the more personal interaction require more sensitivity and warning: I would never introduce elements like this without knowing that it would fly in the group I was running, but I prefer to have dark campaigns with ambiguous morality and really bad villians.

 

[DwarvenBrew]

Don't beat yourself up...

Xarlen, I think you crossed the line, but I wouldn't beat yourself up about it either.

IMO, one of the hardest things to do as a DM is to "read" your group. Some people want Terry Brooks, some want Robert Jordan, and others want G.Martin/Goodkind (I'm using books because I read a lot).

It sounds like you went Martin/Goodkind when your players want something lighter. An honest mistake, but it's something that I think a DM needs to be aware of. Just learn from it and move on, and patch things up the best you can.

Not everyone wants darker themes in their games. Just do your best to know your audience.

I don't think your age really had much to do with it, and I think that an older player would be just a likely to make that mistake as you did. The conflict is really about your groups prefered flavor of fantasy. Otherwise, how would your group explain the immense populartiy of writers like Martin and Goodkind (who cross the line in my book frequently, but that's ok, we just have different preferences)?

By the way, I personally think that it sounds like a very compelling story. Good luck!