Wolfpack48
Hero
But the problem is we are not having a reasonable discussion about. This feels more like a moral panic than a reasonable discussion (which is why I invoked the satanic panic).
So far it’s been pretty reasonable to me anyway!
But the problem is we are not having a reasonable discussion about. This feels more like a moral panic than a reasonable discussion (which is why I invoked the satanic panic).
I like to feel I'm having a reasonable discussion about it. But I might be wrong.
And if the player hasn't seen or read Game of Thrones?
It's not a universal block on discussion. It's respecting that individuals get to set their own boundaries and then respecting those boundaries.
The only people here making hyperbolic panicked arguments are those who oppose the document
Actually the act of roleplaying is a very mental activity. I’m not saying we need to be psychologists, but using healthy psychological techniques in a hobby focused on shared storytelling and imagination seems like the exactly right place to have these conversations.
But it does so by saying there is no room for debate. You are just reframing 'there is no room for debate' as 'respecting that individuals get to set their own boundaries'. Sometimes you have to have a conversation about something. And if you can't have a conversation this player and that group might not be a good fit.
So, how hard to you want to argue against the idea that we should take a few moments to be considerate?
And while there is a certain bit of selfishness in a group not wanting to drop everything that they've invested in to accommodate the guy that has disclosed a phobia of rats, that's life. Sometimes you have to weigh the happiness of the six people already playing against the potential happiness of adding that seventh player, because that accommodation can't be done without cost. Is anyone happy about it. No, probably as soon as the buddy says, "There is this thing I should tell you... I'm afraid of rats.", everyone is going to have this crestfallen look, and there will be a lot of uncomfortable glances because no one wants to tell him.
Now if you can't possibly imagine not dropping a four year old campaign that you've invested hundreds of hours in to include that new person, well good for you. But perhaps you should really think about the cost of what you are asking for.
But beyond that, and probably more importantly than that, this isn't in any fashion like a group of people excluding someone because they are black, or gay, or a girl, or whatever. Playing a game that is all about rats (err, is there anyone in the thread seriously phobic of rats?) isn't inherently immoral. It's not like they are including content that is objectively problematic. It's only problematic because tragically a friend or acquaintance has an irrational fear. It's not a question like, "Well, our group objectifies female NPCs all the time, and we're fond of using demeaning terms for women at our table, and well adding a woman to our game would just cramp our style.", or whatever immoral BS that is going on out there in the wide world. Equating the two actually makes understanding either clearly worse. If that is the source of a problem of inclusivity, paper documents aren't going to fix what is wrong in the heart.
Sorry, we are playing an Arabian Nights campaign and it's pretty much all desert. Sorry, I'm very sad to hear that you have a terrifying fear of large bodies of water and drowning, but this is a piratical nautical themed campaign and it might not be for you. But, on the other hand, if you know our friend can't handle spiders, well we can all choose not to play a campaign against the Drow. Small sacrifice. Worth it to keep or friend at the table.
I'm not reframing anything, I'm merely providing the context you've missed by glossing over all the text after "there is no room for debate". The reason there's no room for debate is because otherwise you would be disrespecting other people's clearly stated boundaries by insisting on a debate.