Consent in Gaming - Free Guidebook

[S'mon]

This feels an awful lot like shaming her for consensual sexual activity. Not cool in my book.

I really don't think it is. BDSM play clearly does need a different notion of consent from, say, a typical dinner party. Saying that isn't shaming anyone writing such advice - AFAICS they're doing a valuable thing.

Also some RPG play does go into similar territory, and in that case a similar approach is advisable. I remember back around 2001/2 a friend of mine stumbled into an online freeform email RPG where two participants (one of them also a friend of mine, hence the connection) were engaged in some pretty extreme text-BDSM style play. For him it was quite a traumatic experience, and really there should have been warnings up and informed consent.

Edit: Also the document actually does begin by indicating it's for use in potentially problematic sorts of play. But that seems to get lost as it goes on.

 

[Celebrim]

This feels an awful lot like shaming her for consensual sexual activity. Not cool in my book.

No, I don't really want to in an RPG forum get into the ethics of BSDM, and I would like to think that in an RPG forum we have no reason for doing that. My thoughts on sexual activity are characteristically complex, and I don't feel the need to go into that, but I am certainly not trying to shame anyone.

What I am saying is that I don't think it is necessarily helpful to view tabletop RPing activity as being equivalent to sexual RP, whether BSDM or not, and I don't think necessarily helpful to view the hobby in that way or to encourage others to view it in that way.

Now I recognize that there are table top RPGs that have wanted to heavily engage in and with sexual and erotic content, and perhaps for those tables there is some overlap between BSDM roleplay and what they are doing with their dice and character sheets. But I do not believe that is the norm for most traditional RPG groups. And I'm not so sheltered in my experience to not know that a lot of what the MU* community was doing in private was tinysex, but even then there is a huge gap between engaging in text based browser exchanges with a remote party and bondage play.

And by golly, you've got me discussing the ethics of BSDM.

You have been around the roleplaying scene long enough to know most of this comes from the indie scene and has been part of the indie scene since it was a thing. Lines and veils are from Sorcerer.

Don't get me started on Sorcerer. That's another discussion that I don't really want to get into.

 

[billd91]

I DMed a family (stepfather -- a good friend, mother, daughter and son) for a short while. I stopped because the RL mother/children dynamic gave me the willies. The mom was taking advantage of her RL position with the kids to exploit them in game. It was nothing I could tap an X-card over even if it existed at the table, but I beat a hasty retreat and "got too busy" pdq.

I’d clamp down in that. In one game I was running with an inexperienced young girl and her parents, one or the other kept trying to tell her what to do. I stopped that by saying, “Hold on. This is her character. Tell her what she can do and make a case for it, but I’m totally letting her decide what option to do.”

I don’t really abide one player telling another what to do. Asking for advice, sure, but not outright directing, even if they’re her parents.

 

[Nagol]

I’d clamp down in that. In one game I was running with an inexperienced young girl and her parents, one or the other kept trying to tell her what to do. I stopped that by saying, “Hold on. This is her character. Tell her what she can do and make a case for it, but I’m totally letting her decide what option to do.”

I don’t really abide one player telling another what to do. Asking for advice, sure, but not outright directing, even if they’re her parents.

I stop that in a heartbeat. The mom wasn't running the children's character: the mom was taking advantage of the characters inside the game through reliance on the fact she was the mom. So treasure splits, PC agreements, even things like camp assignments and guard shifts always went her way.

ETA
I could tell the kids could feel it was unfair, but it was what mom said so they lived with it. There was absolutely no way I was going to confront my friend's new wife over her power dynamic with her kids though.

 

[billd91]

d) Again this language of "consent" seems to be borrowed from spheres and ideas outside of gaming. I confess I'm a pretty naïve old man, but are we talking about gaming or are we talking about the S&M/bondage community in this thread? (I mean it occurs to me that this advice might actually make sense for situations where only two people were in the game.) Do we need consent language around the idea of board games? Movies? Books? Card games? Not sure really why my hobby is so different than normal human social interaction or conversation. Maybe people really are playing different games out there than I am, but a pamphlet like this just makes the hobby seem a bit skeevy to me. Is it really that skeevy and I'm just naïve and sheltered? I mean, if a GM handed this to me at the beginning of the game, I'd be like, "You know, sight unseen, just that you feel like something like this might actually come up, I don't think this table is for me." If I didn't know anything about the hobby, and one of my first experiences was this pamphlet, I think I'd be discouraging my children from being involved in so dangerous of an activity.

I think the term is spot on the money. And no, you don't need it for other types of games or all forms of entertainment, but then, in most of those you aren't building a character you're role-playing, identifying with, inhabiting - a character who's serving as your avatar in the setting or potentially LARPing.

The term may come out of other spheres but RPGs have been overlapping that sphere ever since the first time a female player ever experienced her character being raped in a D&D game. This only got heightened with the publication of Vampire in the wake of the sexy Lestat series and the implied eroticism of bloodlust.

Subject matter consent and problems with failing to heed the signals and concerns of fellow players have been with us for a long time, they just haven't been correctly labeled until fairly recently.

 

[aramis erak]

Then again my feelings overall on "the X Card and friends" are probably unpopular and definitely controversial. I don't want to get into it because I get WAY too anxious that people will misunderstand me and/or get mad at me whenever I say anything online about a sensitive topic. I used to be super opinionated--okay, I still AM super opinionated--but nowadays I try to keep my more controversial opinions to myself.
[snip]
But I don't see what this topic or MCG's product has to do with inclusivity per se?

The X-Card in particular is not really a technique I favor. Mostly, if someone is uncomfortable with something I find it more helpful to check in and take a breather so we can actually resolve things. I get its purpose, especially for public games. I want to be open enough that we can actually hash things out in a home game.

Social change in society has made expressing dissent about a variety of topics a social hazard.
I find the X-card problematic on multiple levels.

• Not the least of which is that I've known players who are narcissistic enough to use it to end scenes they are not the highlight of. (and yes, I've had players who have done similar.)
• Since the X-card as commonly promulgated is a no-questions-asked, it makes further avoidance problematic, as the group has to guess
• It encourages not dealing with your issues, just avoiding them. Fine for a one-shot, but if the player uses it more than once, they should just walk away, IMO.
• If playing in a shared space, others in the space but not at the table don't have access to the card
• If you're needing the X-Card for a non public game, how well do you really know and/or care about your players? If you need it in a public game, should it really be a public game.

I tell people who are new to my table that I prefer it kept PG-13 or under. Since all my current games are in the FLGS, and they expect PG-13.

If a player needs to take 5, and says that an issue has been triggered, fine.

As for inclusivity...

People who are uncomfortable generally don't want to continue. Consent tends to avoid unwelcome discomfort.

Some people seek out discomfort to gain catharsis, and in such cases, an X-card-like "I need a break" is good, so long as after the break either the scene continues, or an explanation for why not is given.

These sorts of techniques originally came from the indie roleplaying community. Many indie games like Dogs in the Vineyard, Monsterhearts, Sorcerer and My Life With Master intentionally explore some pretty emotionally charged situations. In that context emotional safety, consent and checking in with each other is pretty important.

Agreeing to play those implies consent to the subject matter.

Some, like Sorcerer or Dogs, don't sound as emotionally menacing as Monsterhearts, or MLWM. So that consent needs to be informed consent; the onus there is on the maker of the pitch. Still, the X-card

Well the pamphlet includes references to the gaming table being a Safe Space, especially in the quotes. Personally I don't find that sort of language at all appropriate - some tables may be set up as Safe Spaces by the GM & players, but by default they are no more a Safe Space than any other form of social interaction between friends, acquaintances or strangers.

Public space should be a relatively safe space. If you're playing something contentious in public space, you need to rethink. A's rights end where B's begin is a nicety... but the sad truth is that modern westgern democracies give sufficient rights that there's an overlap zone where what normally is one's rights is infringing upon others rights. Respecting and avoiding the overlap is polite.

Yeah. Fudging dice rolls (cheating) on either side of the screen is one of my hard lines. If we do not want to accept the results then we should not be rolling.

Agreed. QFT.

If it's something I want to tap a X over, it's not something I'm likely willing to talk to pretty much anyone about. Certainly not fellow gamers at a social event. Maybe one on one with particular friends when I'm feeling extraordinarily comfortable.

If you're needing the X card more than rarely, you probably shouldn't be playing either that genre and/or with that group. And if you need it at all, you need to communicate where it went too far, or it's going to happen again.
If I find I need an X-Card, I'm likely far better off just walking away. If I need it a second time, and for the same reason, it's definitely time to go, and not look back, because either I couldn't make it clear what bugged me, or they don't respect me enough to avoid it. I'll speak up when I am uncomfortable with the subject matter.

 

[S'mon]

I think the term is spot on the money. And no, you don't need it for other types of games or all forms of entertainment, but then, in most of those you aren't building a character you're role-playing, identifying with, inhabiting - a character who's serving as your avatar in the setting or potentially LARPing.

The term may come out of other spheres but RPGs have been overlapping that sphere ever since the first time a female player ever experienced her character being raped in a D&D game. This only got heightened with the publication of Vampire in the wake of the sexy Lestat series and the implied eroticism of bloodlust.

Subject matter consent and problems with failing to heed the signals and concerns of fellow players have been with us for a long time, they just haven't been correctly labeled until fairly recently.

If you're running the kind of game where PCs are getting raped I think you should let the players know. I don't see that the consent form likely helps much - a player writes "no goldfish please" likely not thinking "oh I better write "no raping my PC". But an X card certainly seems a good idea there.

 

[S'mon]

Public space should be a relatively safe space.

Safe from what? A breach of the peace? Criminal activity? As far as I'm concerned, the pub management sets the rules on that (eg my pub says no swearing). I set some extra rules like no politics during game time, but it's to avoid disruption, not create a Safe Space.

I'm talking about how the pamphlet uses the term:

Page 10:
Your game group needs to make you feel safe. This is a step beyond just being comfortable to play the game. This is a safe space free of hassle, harassment, negativity, judgment...
-Your Best Game Ever

Well, I clearly don't run a Safe Space, because like I said upthread, if I see a player cheating, then I judge they're a cheater and view them negatively. If I see a player indulging in twisted sexual fantasies at my table, then I likely judge them as someone I don't want there. I may even 'hassle' them by telling them to leave.

 

[MGibster]

I don't think it's easy to "opt in" all the time. I ran a fantasy game and had the player characters run into a group of giant spiders. Unbeknownst to me, one of the players suffered from arachnophobia and my descriptions of the eight legged freaks was enough to make her uncomfortable. We paused the game to chat and I asked if she'd be comfortable continuing if I refrained from describing the spiders or their actions in detail and she agreed. And from that point on I never used spiders in any game she participated in which was not a problem for me. But it might have been a problem had I planned on using the Drow as my primary antagonist.

I suppose all of that might have been avoided by using Cook's RPG Consent Checklist. It does include spiders after all. But I don't think I'll ever use the opt in method. I simply ask my players if there's anything they don't want to see in a game. For example, I won't ever role play sexual assault whether it's directed at an NPC or a PC. But then I typically only ask these questions for a horror game.

 

[dragoner]

Safe from what?

Racism and sexism, is generally what the signs on public buildings mean.