Consent in Gaming - Free Guidebook

[monsmord]

You always get pushback when offering new tools/ways especially if those tools/way will only benefit a small subgroup. People feel you're telling everyone who doesn't/hasn't used the new thing that they're having BADWRONGFUN.

I don’t think anyone here is demanding that everyone use the doc. It’s an optional tool to facilitate conversation. The fear over it seems to be connected to an idea that the document is now The Law and that everyone must obey. I don’t hear anyone saying that.

After reading through here and various far-worse dumpster fires across the Webz, I may have to agree with Nagol. While there's been some interesting discussion about the usefulness, universality, and propriety of the approach, most detracting comments seem more along the line of "how dare they." There are some very intensely negative, intensely personal reactions out there, as though deeply insulted this doc exists. Whether that insult is taken on how they approach gaming with their group, on the types of content they prefer, or on some principal of what they construe as "censorship," I can't tell. Maybe all. But all those claims of "SJW infiltration" and "censorship" point more to alt-right outrage and/or apologist shame, and not to a concern that they have another document to maintain or rule to abide.

Every game begins with consent: what genre, what system, what goals, what player interactions are and aren't allowed, etc. When gamers can't find common ground on their play, games fall apart. Adding content consent seems as natural, respectful, and productive to a mutually enjoyable gaming experience as any other type of consent. And like any system, rule, adventure, DM screen, or other game aid, if your group doesn't like it or need it, great. No need to get crazy mad about it. It's not censorship, it's agreement: whatever gaming your group all has fun doing, enjoy.

If I have any criticism about the doc, it's on a fundamental principal of asking that participants reveal very personal info. Some people find it easy to share what troubles, scares, or triggers them, others don't. What a person is bothered, triggered, or traumatized by X can be an intensely difficult thing to reveal, not the sort of thing they may be inclined to write on a paper and hand over to a GM, worse if that's a stranger at a con or a new face at the FLGS.

Then, the same is true of any during-game solution. By dropping an X-card when something happens, I'm signalling something to my fellow gamers, something that maybe I don't want them to know about me. Same with just walking away from the game.

This is a tough nut to crack, harder for strangers. Wish I had a better suggestion than this doc or combining it with some in-game tools. Until I do, I wouldn't mind encountering this doc at a con or at a new game at the local shop.

"Consent" is not synonymous with "S&M". It is, or at least should be, synonymous with "sex".

No, it has far broader applications than sex, even in purely legal terms (at least in the U.S. - for instance, as in police asking for "consent to search" a vehicle, property, etc.) The word "consent," though nowadays prevalent in various adult communities, is widely appropriate for many non-sexual and non-adult situations and relationships.

 

[Gradine]

No, it has far broader applications than sex, even in purely legal terms (at least in the U.S. - for instance, as in police asking for "consent to search" a vehicle, property, etc.) The word "consent," though nowadays prevalent in various adult communities, is widely appropriate for many non-sexual and non-adult situations and relationships.

I suppose I should say that it is the other way around "ie, sex is synonymous with consent"; or at least that consent should be involved in all manner and variety of sexual activity, from the most vanilla to the kinds that require safe words.

But yeah, consent clearly has other applications; this product demonstrating one of them.

 

[macd21]

Well, I don't think any single question or incident can really necessary change anyone's personal overall outlook or mores at the drop of a hat. It's going to end up being many ideas and many discussions and many reflections over the years that may or may not change our own personal feelings and opinions. So any specific thing that makes us think one side has some good points and then the other side also has some good points basically ends up defaulting us to how our societal norm is at a '5' in the first place.

But the fact that this document has actually made you take a few moments to actually think about what you believe in, and make you think about how other people might see things... that lovely term of 'empathy'... means that you are in good stead to continue analyzing your beliefs in the future. And for the most part, I think we as people tend to actually move forward and past what we would consider the 'status quo' when there are enough people out there commenting that the status quo kinda sucks.

All this. As much as anything else, this document is getting people to talk about this stuff, and that talking gets people thinking. Even GMs who never use the consent form may put a little more thought into using difficult content in their games, and maybe talking to their players about it beforehand. People sharing their bad experiences may prompt others to be a bit more considerate.

It’s a lot of little shifts in perspective that overall lead to a more welcoming community and more comfortable gaming experience overall.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Isn't this, like, all of history? I feel like breaking out into the Circle of Life.

One day, we all become our parents.* And our children will hate us for it. Until they become us. And so on, and so forth.


*What, you're the "cool parent?" No, no you're not.

Of course it is. But as each generation grows up they forget about it. And thus we are doomed to repeat that history ad nauseum.

Which is why I just can't help but roll my eyes when the comedians I loved as a teen are now complaining about "political correctness". Yes, Jerry Seinfeld, yes Chris Rock... the stuff you used to joke about isn't found funny anymore because society has changed and you haven't. And if you can't understand or come to grips with that... perhaps you aren't as smart or intuitive as we all thought you were.

 

[Umbran]

Wow, this thread started slow and then exploded over the weekend, didn't it. I do have a few points to add though:

1. "Consent" is not synonymous with "S&M". It is, or at least should be, synonymous with "sex".

I think that's way too narrow. Consent should be synonymous with "permission,". You may get consent for sex. You can also get consent for a platonic hug. Or, for raiding someone else's refrigerator for snacks.

 

[DEFCON 1]

But that being said... there are also plenty of things that "don't offend me" that offend the heck out of a lot of other people (starting mainly from the Millenial and Gen Z generations.) But that's not because they are wrong to be offended... but merely because I still remember the stuff from my parents and grandparents generations that were much worse. And thus to my mind the stuff being complained about seems "tame" by comparison. But that doesn't mean the stuff doesn't actually suck and is wrong. Cause it sure as heck does and is, I just don't see it in the same way. But that's my issue and problem, not theirs.

 

[billd91]

I think a tool such as this is a little overwrought for a con game (where specific content warnings are likely to be best practice; a simple "R" rating alone doesn't actually communicate much) or one-shot, but might be a great tool for folks who don't know each other that well at first but plan on making gaming as a group a long-term prospect. Again, those "looking-for-group" type situations seem to be the best fit for a product like this.

Yes, clearly it's primary design is for a game in which the GM is including content based on the responses from his or her players. In a convention game, the game is already designed. However, it's not completely useless. Obviously, there's the game's MPAA-style rating or suggested age. But even the other elements of the questionnaire could be useful. A GM could fill them out based on their own intended style and content and potential players can review the list for pick-up games and small con events managed by on-site signup lists. The GM could also fill out the form and use that as a reminder on what to include as disclaimers when writing their event marketing blurb at larger cons with more formal registration like Gen Con or GameholeCon.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Yes, clearly it's primary design is for a game in which the GM is including content based on the responses from his or her players. In a convention game, the game is already designed. However, it's not completely useless. Obviously, there's the game's MPAA-style rating or suggested age. But even the other elements of the questionnaire could be useful. A GM could fill them out based on their own intended style and content and potential players can review the list for pick-up games and small con events managed by on-site signup lists. The GM could also fill out the form and use that as a reminder on what to include as disclaimers when writing their event marketing blurb at larger cons with more formal registration like Gen Con or GameholeCon.

I actually wouldn’t mind a movie-like rating system at cons for a game with a general description of each category, and then a more detailed description for each game being held. More advance info is better for everyone.

 

[Arnwolf666]

I’m just worried what kind of people will be seeking out the position to enforce these rules. That’s alot of power. And then if this is just the beginning of policing these games for other thought crimes.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I’m just worried what kind of people will be seeking out the position to enforce these rules.

They already do. They're called 'Dungeon Masters'.