Consent in Gaming - Free Guidebook

[macd21]

I have certainly said nothing that suggests I'm in favor of anyone being forced to do anything. In the case of the unfortunate friend who is invited to go to a seafood restaurant, if he is allergic to seafood, it may be incumbent on him to politely decline citing his seafood allergy as the reason. Of course, the potential host will probably express disappointment, and be forced to make some sort of apology with respect to the fact that they had already planned an evening at a seafood restaurant, and will make some sort of suggestion that they be invited along the next time they are going out to somewhere other than the seafood restaurant, and this is an uncomfortable situation for everyone.

But the point is that the person is neither forced to eat seafood, nor is the group forced to change their already well made plans. No one is forced to do anything.

Nor does the consent document force anyone to change ‘already made plans.’ It’s a tool for establishing what you will or won’t include at the table. And that once established, you don’t include things that you agreed to exclude from the game.

If a new player wants to join, but it turns out their deathly phobic to something that features heavily in the game, then you explain that to them and they can opt out. The document doesn’t insist you change that, it just means that you establish he’s phobic before you start playing with him.

 

[macd21]

So, yes. One person can veto something over the objections of all the other players.

Of course. Everyone at the table should have that power.

 

[Umbran]

Reading the last few pages of this, it is not at all clear that anyone is getting anything out of this other than aggravation. It looks like ideological lines are drawn, and will not move further.

That means it is probably time for this thread to close. Expect that to happen in the near future.

 

[Aldarc]

I think that it quite telling that a number of the analogies and discussions about the "individual" in question seems to have preclude them from "the group" at the outset. They were not part of the group from the beginning. They weren't part of the prior discussion. They are being treated as alien to the natural wishes of the group. That they are being represented as the outsider who imposes on the group.

 

[macd21]

I think that it quite telling that a number of the analogies and discussions about the "individual" in question seems to have preclude them from "the group" at the outset. They were not part of the group from the beginning. They weren't part of the prior discussion. They are being treated as alien to the natural wishes of the group. That they are being represented as the outsider who imposes on the group.

Good point. And that’s what I find bizarre about all this. If one of my friends asks me not to include something in one of my games, I won’t include it. I’m not going to debate it with him, I’m not going to ask why. I want my friend to have fun at the table too.

 

[Wolfpack48]

So, yes. One person can veto something over the objections of all the other players.

Macd is saying this but I don’t believe the doc does. The doc says the person has a right to their boundaries can stand up for them, and have a respectful conversation with the GM about whether or not the issue can be accommodated.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Good point. And that’s what I find bizarre about all this. If one of my friends asks me not to include something in one of my games, I won’t include it. I’m not going to debate it with him, I’m not going to ask why. I want my friend to have fun at the table too.

That’s assuming you are all friends. A con or a friend of a friend is a different situation and should be taken into account as well. Still no need to explain your phobia, but still everyone should be respectful of that request even if might not be able to be accommodated.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Good point. And that’s what I find bizarre about all this. If one of my friends asks me not to include something in one of my games, I won’t include it. I’m not going to debate it with him, I’m not going to ask why. I want my friend to have fun at the table too.

I think the dynamic is totally different depending on gaming with friends or random people. Most are far more likely to accommodate those they know. Especially if the request is going to mean removing elements that most enjoy in the game.

 

[seankreynolds]

Edit: Never mind, I caught up to this point and Umbran had already said what I wanted to say.

 

[Wolfpack48]

Edit: Never mind, I caught up to this point and Umbran had already said what I wanted to say.

I’m not trying to convince, only clarify, both for myself and others. It’s a good conversation, actually, even with a bit of frustration. It’s also why I appreciate the doc, because it’s a good subject to discuss.