How to avoid RPG dumpster fires like the Far Verona controversy

[Ralif Redhammer]

Any DM out of their teenage years (back when I was a teenager, I ran into plenty of GMs and players that didn't know better, but maybe hopefully teenagers these days know better) that doesn't understand that this sort of thing is problematic is most likely someone I wouldn't want to game with. It's neither edgy, a suitable subject for humor, or an appropriate consequence, only cruel and insensitive.

Sure, I think as GMs we've all had moments where we've missed reading cues from our players, but this is so far beyond that. It should've never been on the table to begin with.

 

[MGibster]

Do you have any experience or opinions about this particular kind of roleplaying dumpster fire?

I don't really have an experience with such things as I've never participated in a game as a player or a GM where we role played a sexual assault. It's on my list of things never to do even in a horror game like Vampire or Call of Cthulhu. I don't include sexual assault scenes in my games because I find them distatesful not because I'm worried about inflicting trauma. When I run a horror game, I consult the players and ask them to tell me if there's anything they don't want included in the game making it clear that they can contact me in privately if they prefer and that I don't need an explanation for why they don't want something included.

Honestly, I very rarely have any fears about any of my games turning into dumpster fires. In games that might potentially deal with "heavy" subjects I don't worry about including isms, common phobias, extreme violence, or a certain level of sexuality because I do not believe it is likely that trauma will be inflicted. Participation in role playing games is not an inherently dangerous activity that warrants such concerns.

 

[Umbran]

Honestly, I very rarely have any fears about any of my games turning into dumpster fires. In games that might potentially deal with "heavy" subjects I don't worry about including isms, common phobias, extreme violence, or a certain level of sexuality because I do not believe it is likely that trauma will be inflicted.

In a game in which you know all the people, and their histories, that's probably okay. If you are playing with folks you don't know well... that belief may not be warranted.

Participation in role playing games is not an inherently dangerous activity that warrants such concerns.

I hope you never play with someone who has PTSD, and you hit a trigger. Because that is not a good scene.

 

[Celebrim]

Yeah, this does not seem to be an area you'd want to go in to without explicitly discussing this sort of thing with your players. And, honestly I think the biggest problem that the GM had wasn't even that, but his attitude to the scene wasn't, "I'm taking this game to a very dark place and very serious place where we explore body horror and lack of consent." (which is not something yo do without player consent), but rather, "Har, har, isn't this funny." That's a fundamental disconnect between what your content means and how you are responding to it. Sexual assault may or may not be a valid event in a game, but it's not a fun one that you the GM should be getting your thrills out of.

 

[MGibster]

In a game in which you know all the people, and their histories, that's probably okay. If you are playing with folks you don't know well... that belief may not be warranted.

I very much think context is important. There may be a world of difference between a game I run in the privacy of someone's home with people I know and a game I run at a public venue like a convention with people I don't know. I am unlikely to run the same game with a group of teenagers as I am with a group of people in their 30s and 40s.

I hope you never play with someone who has PTSD, and you hit a trigger. Because that is not a good scene.

Me too. But I still don't believe gaming is an inherently dangerous activity. If so, then I need to call up all those pastors from the 1980s and 1990s who warned me about how harmful D&D was.

 

[Umbran]

But I still don't believe gaming is an inherently dangerous activity.

I think there may be a great deal buried in that, "inherently dangerous activity" label.

Virtually anything becomes dangerous if you don't do it wisely, and with precautions. And I think your idea about causing trauma is less the issue, as running afoul of trauma the player has had elsewhere in life.

If you were playing backyard (American) football, and one of your players had a trick knee, you might help keep them safer by playing touch rather than tackle, for example. If you're playing with someone who has sexual assault in their background*, or had been bullied and beaten up as a kid for being African American or LGBTQ+ in the wrong town, you'd probably want to avoid those things in your game.

But, a lot of the time, your players don't tell you about those things in their pasts, unless you ask. Thus the bit about consent.



*Pretty much all women in the US live with at least the specter of sexual assault hanging over them, and a great many of them with the reality. So that's why that one should definitely be on the "heavy" list, by default.

 

[MGibster]

Virtually anything becomes dangerous if you don't do it wisely, and with precautions. And I think your idea about causing trauma is less the issue, as running afoul of trauma the player has had elsewhere in life.

Saying virtually anything becomes dangerous if you don't do it wisely or with precautions is a meaningless statement. Getting six of your buddies together to run through Castle Ravenloft, to troubleshoot for friend Computer, or prevent the Camarilla from sinking its fangs into your city is exceedingly unlikely to cause harm to any of the participants.

If you were playing backyard (American) football, and one of your players had a trick knee, you might help keep them safer by playing touch rather than tackle, for example.

On the other hand, American football is an inherently dangerous activity where participants are commonly subjected to contusions or abrasions during the normal course of play. Furthermore, it is understood by participants that they make suffer more serious injuries such broken bones or concussions and in the extreme catastrophic injuries resulting in paralyzation or death.

But, a lot of the time, your players don't tell you about those things in their pasts, unless you ask. Thus the bit about consent.

I already ask players to tell me what things they don't want included in the game. I still categorically reject the idea that gaming is inherently unsafe. Other than that, if players have something they don't like it's up to them to tell me before the game starts. Just like that football player with the trick knee takes it upon himself to tell everyone else he shouldn't play tackle football.

Of course I don't ask them what they don't want to see because I'm worried about harming them. I ask because we're all here to have fun and something doesn't have to be personally traumatic or harmful for them not to want it in a game.

 

[mythago]

Participation in role playing games is not an inherently dangerous activity that warrants such concerns.

I'm puzzled at this repetition of 'inherently dangerous' and 'inherently unsafe', as well as the comparison of any negative effects from, say, a GM dropping a rape scene on a player to the anti-D&D hysteria of the 1990s.

Also, given the NFL's long history of covering up and minimizing the risks of brain injuries among players, not sure that's the best analogy for 'they knew the risks and should speak up if they have a problem'.

 

[Eltab]

I cannot construct any plot line where you "have to" include an assault scene. Even if the villain is styled after Jack the Ripper, user and murderer of prostitutes.

Kenny Rogers' song Coward of the County handles the subject without being gross but makes it a defining pivotal moment in the story.

I was a player for a game session where the DM tried to use an NPC to seduce his IRL girlfriend's PC. After about 5 minutes of acute embarrassment, pizza arrived and the session broke. While we ate, I took the DM aside and said "You know you've got four voyeurs listening in on this?" and indicated the other players plus myself.
He turned white and she turned red.
But when we resumed play, it was the next morning and we got back to the adventure.

 

[MGibster]

I'm puzzled at this repetition of 'inherently dangerous' and 'inherently unsafe', as well as the comparison of any negative effects from, say, a GM dropping a rape scene on a player to the anti-D&D hysteria of the 1990s.

The OP uses a rape scene in a game as a case study and you'll note that I already agreed it's not something I'd ever include in my game. But there's a difference in philosphy as I wouldn't use it because I find it crass and distasteful not because I'm afraid of triggering someone. If you read the entire OP, and you'll have to expand the text scroll down to do so, you'll see the post is about more than just that one game scene as we are advised against the inclusion of any "heavy" subject without player consent. Heavy subjects including common phobias, any sexual content, any ism, and extreme violence.

Let's say I include a Wizard in my campaign who is more goth than Siouxsie Sioux in the Paris catcaoms at midnight on All Hallow's Eve and his magic missile are actually bolts of blood. Hemophobia, the fear of blood, is a common phobia which is a heavy subject according to the OP. If the DM makes a unilateral decision to use such a villain in his game he's abusing his power according to the OP. The OP's point about consent in gaming is predicated on the idea that it is an inherently dangerous activity one which I vehemently disagree with.

Also, given the NFL's long history of covering up and minimizing the risks of brain injuries among players, not sure that's the best analogy for 'they knew the risks and should speak up if they have a problem'.

The example used was backyard American football. I don't know where you're from, but in the United States this is typically going to involve neighborhood kids and there is unlikely to be any pads, helmets, or even a referee. It's like a pickup game of basketball or baseball. The NFL's long history of covering up and minimizing brain damage has nothing to do with backyard football.