D&D 5E Content Warning Labels? Yeah or Nay?

[HammerMan]

So we are in agreement. Virtually all of D&D should come with a trigger warning, as every source of canon contains at least one creature/ situation that will trigger someone. Most sources of canon contain many many such creatures/ situations.

you Missed the second to last part... the wrap up
everyone is different, and we can NEVER label everything... but that doesn't mean we don't try to get the big things.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

you Missed the second to last part... the wrap up
everyone is different, and we can NEVER label everything... but that doesn't mean we don't try to get the big things.

I am being deadly serious. How does ANYONE decide what is big, and what is trivial? Even if WOTC hires a number of censors, how do those people, even amongst themselves, decide what is something that needs a trigger warning and what does not?

What cultural and social norms are used, if D&D transcends humanity's cultural boundaries?

 

[HammerMan]

I am being deadly serious. How does ANYONE decide what is big, and what is trivial? Even if WOTC hires a number of censors, how do those people, even amongst themselves, decide what is something that needs a trigger warning and what does not?

What cultural and social norms are used, if D&D transcends humanity's cultural boundaries?

thats simple... the editors and writers decide. just like one is here asking for our help

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

thats simple... the editors and writers decide. just like one is here asking for our help

That still does not answer the question. Frankly, I would not put a trigger warning on a single thing the OP has laid out. And I did not say WHO makes the decisions at WOTC. I asked HOW they do it, and by WHAT cultural norms.

I could give many examples (I AM NOT going to) of human behaviour that is not only revolting, but positively gruesome, to many human cultures, but embraced by other human cultures.

 

[HammerMan]

That still does not answer the question. Frankly, I would not put a trigger warning on a single thing the OP has laid out. And I did not say WHO makes the decisions at WOTC. I asked HOW they do it, and by WHAT cultural norms.

I could give many examples (I AM NOT going to) of human behaviour that is not only revolting, but positively gruesome, to many human cultures, but embraced by other human cultures.

again look at this thread, it is full of hows...

 

[Dire Bare]

So we are in agreement. Virtually all of D&D should come with a trigger warning, as every source of canon contains at least one creature/ situation that will trigger someone. Most sources of canon contain many many such creatures/ situations.

Whooosh . . . .

 

[jayoungr]

Understandable if you missed it, but I posted upthread it's about 10%

I did miss it--thanks.

 

[Scribe]

That still does not answer the question. Frankly, I would not put a trigger warning on a single thing the OP has laid out. And I did not say WHO makes the decisions at WOTC. I asked HOW they do it, and by WHAT cultural norms.

I could give many examples (I AM NOT going to) of human behaviour that is not only revolting, but positively gruesome, to many human cultures, but embraced by other human cultures.

Look man, you know the answers, you know it's imperfect, and you know why you are pushing.

You also know the lines are already drawn and 99.9% of people won't shift.

 

[Dire Bare]

I am being deadly serious. How does ANYONE decide what is big, and what is trivial? Even if WOTC hires a number of censors, how do those people, even amongst themselves, decide what is something that needs a trigger warning and what does not?

What cultural and social norms are used, if D&D transcends humanity's cultural boundaries?

I feel you aren't arguing in good faith, but . . . .

What is triggering varies, and when and how you should use warning labels is subjective. Of course. The decision rests with the author or editor of a product. Of course.

@Sacrosanct could forgo all warning labels entirely, that would be a fair choice. Or instead, they could label every single monster entry with detailed discussions of problematic elements, that would be fair also. Or anything in between.

Personally, if I felt my gaming product contained elements that could make folks uncomfortable or trigger them, in particular, regarding violence and oppression, I'd include some warnings. Perhaps a blanket warning on the back cover and in the front matter, "This product contains themes of violence and discrimination pulled from folklore and some may find them offensive or disturbing."

One issue we find in folklore, literature, and the roleplaying games based on them is problematic elements that are not obvious to those of us with degrees of certain privilege. For example, I don't always recognize folkloric themes based on racism, sexism, ageism, or lookism (I'm white, male, cis-gender, not super old yet, really good looking) . . . but they are there, they offend or trigger some folks, and others would like to BECOME aware of them (if they aren't already).

I absolutely loved @Sacrosanct's paragraph example upthread that discussed specifically what was potentially problematic for a specific creature. It's a warning . . . but it's also EDUCATION. And, personally, I love learning about the sources of monsters for D&D, and discussing elements of those monsters I may not be aware of, including problematic elements.

With that paragraph, it can help me avoid the use of certain monsters that either I, or my players, might find too problematic. Or perhaps give me a heads up, so I can use them, but with care. Or perhaps modify them to remove elements I find problematic. This warning gives me OPTIONS on how to use the particular beastie, and I LOVE that. Even with monsters that I don't find too problematic or triggering personally, I still like learning about the origins of the creatures, even if those origins are in the darker aspects of human psychology.

Some great examples of problematic elements that could probably use warnings and/or discussions include:

• Consent, rape, and sexual violence
  [*]Incest
  [*]Child abuse, abduction
  [*]Sexism, usually against women
  [*]Ageism, usually against the elderly
  [*]Racism, discrimination, genocide
  [*]EDIT (add): lookism and ableism, discrimination against the disabled and/or ugly
  [*]This list is not all inclusive . . . .

EDIT: I'll add . . . warnings can also help distinguish between authorial intent and folkloric source material. If a particular monster is all about rape . . . is it @Sacrosanct who thinks that's an okay basis for a monster, or is it the source material they are pulling from?

Does that help?

 

[Scribe]

Some great examples of problematic elements that could probably use warnings and/or discussions include:

Put this under a spoiler please, some of us are not here for these topics.

You laugh, but I'm serious. Don't want to see it.