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

[HammerMan]

Then at this point, I repeat what I said. Every single source of D&D canon has multiple creatures/ situations that WILL trigger someone. Based on that, every single source of D&D canon needs a warning label.

nope... even look at your example above... no D&D source book would write that... they would have the monster, and let the DM write that if they want... but then the DM knows the players.

The basic books are pretty dry really, by modern sensibilities the violence's is cartoony (no blood unless the DM adds it, you can be hit in the face by a giant club 4 times and not even be winded) there is little to no sex and no nudity or even hint of either really at all...

 

[Sacrosanct]

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).

Wait wait wait. There can't be two of us who are super good looking in the same thread. There's a law somewhere....

But in all seriousness, you hit on the intent pretty well. This isn't about me deciding what I'm going to put in the book and what not. Well, yes, I do have the ultimate decision, it's more about listening to others who aren't like me, who suffer different challenges than me. A whole lot can be accomplished if people were willing to listen more. When I did Chromatic Dungeons a few months back, someone mentioned how the parchment background was hard to read, because they had gotten older. Which prompted another person to say how they had visual impairments. Now, I wear glasses myself, and it has been getting worse as I get older, but they brought about a perspective I hadn't thought of before. so I got rid of the parchment background, and released an RTF version of the book as well that was super easy to read and navigate.

Which is why I created this thread. And why I appreciate so much of the feedback. There have already been things brought up that I wasn't aware of. Know better, be better, right? No one is ever going to agree 100%, but you can still get the general feeling. Based on that feedback, I've decided to make some changes on how to present the monsters. For example, while I can totally see the "coolness" of including a paragraph on each monster entry describing the lore it was pulled from, it may be better to be generalized and instead simply point the reader to a resource they can look up on their own if they want to find out more.

 

[Yaarel]

@Sacrosanct

I appreciate accurate descriptions of difficult content. For example, in a movie, it can list: profanity, nudity, sex, graphic violence, etcetera. Sex is fine, profanity is hopefully artistically intentional, but I avoid gory violence, especially if based on a true story.

For me a vague warning is unhelpful.

Maybe the end of each monster statblock has a section to list one-word descriptors for difficult content. Define each descriptor at the beginning along with the general nonendorsement warning for folklore era assumptions.

Heterocentrism and gender stereotypes are among the most pervasive problems in the lore of various cultures.

I am glad the Norwegian lore tends to be slightly more egalitarian, so where there is a sexually seductive female hulder, there is also a male one.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

nope... even look at your example above... no D&D source book would write that... they would have the monster, and let the DM write that if they want... but then the DM knows the players.

The basic books are pretty dry really, by modern sensibilities the violence's is cartoony (no blood unless the DM adds it, you can be hit in the face by a giant club 4 times and not even be winded) there is little to no sex and no nudity or even hint of either really at all...

If I show the picture of an Ankheg to a group of 100 people on the street (OK, maybe a 1000, maybe 10000), someone is going to lose it. Someone will be triggered. I can go through just about any source of canon and find pictures and descriptions that based on the levels of trigger discussions in this thread will indeed set someone off.

So as far as I am concerned, it is trigger warning all canon sources, or trigger warning nothing. I simply cannot fathom people with serious phobias would play a game as dark and inherently violent as D&D in the first place. It was DESIGNED to delve into the nasty things that go bump in the night.

 

[HammerMan]

ou and a friend are hunting a deer down a game trail.
Suddenly, the ground at your feet erupts with giant insect head, half-ant, half preying mantis, pushing through, knocking you both off your feet. .
From its mouth, a stream of acid spurts forth, hitting your friend full in the face.
He dies screaming.
You are not that lucky.
Before you can escape, its mandibles clamp down on your ankle, almost severing your foot.
It drags you back under the earth, into its lair of tunnels.
Finally, you reach a chamber, but you have no idea what the size is, as there is no light.
You feel a sharp sting in your abdomen, then nothing else, realizing you are paralyzed.
You lose track of time, drifting in and out of consciousness.
Then you begin to get feeling back, though you still cannot move.
You sense movement in your abdomen.
That movement quickly becomes discomfort, then agony.
The Ankheg's eggs have hatched, and the larvae are eating their way out of you.

For those of you that don't want to click this spoiler, it is a SUPER graphic HYPER realism fight with an Ankheg gone wrong...

but isn't the exact same fight as likely (some would say more likely with 5e CR to level numbers) to be.... You walk through the forest, you roll initiative (maybe with surprise maybe without) it attacks rolls damage (acid) but you take it and will feel no worse and no game mechanic clicks in even though you just got hit by acid. you hit back... this goes back and forth until one bag of HP (yours or its) goes down... most likely it's... then you loot it and move on.

 

[Sacrosanct]

@Sacrosanct

I appreciate accurate descriptions of difficult content. For example, in a movie, it can list: profanity, nudity, sex, graphic violence, etcetera. Sex is fine, profanity is hopefully artistically intentional, but I avoid gory violence, especially if based on a true story.

For me a vague warning is unhelpful.

Maybe the end of each monster statblock has a section to list one-word descriptors for difficult content. Define each descriptor at the beginning along with the general nonendorsement warning for folklore social assumptions.

Heterocentrism and gender stereotypes are among the most pervasive problems in the lore of various cultures.

I am glad the Norwegian lore tends to be slightly more egalitarian, so where there is a sexually seductive female hulder, there is also a male one.

Quite frankly, I was surprised at just how bad the story of Sigurd was, for such a celebrated "hero".

like his part in the rape of Brunhild. yikes.

 

[HammerMan]

If I show the picture of an Ankheg to a group of 100 people on the street (OK, maybe a 1000, maybe 10000), someone is going to lose it. Someone will be triggered. I can go through just about any source of canon and find pictures and descriptions that based on the levels of trigger discussions in this thread will indeed set someone off.

what picture... the 5e one? I bet you get less then 1% (and as such needing to goto the 1,000+) to react.

So as far as I am concerned, it is trigger warning all canon sources, or trigger warning nothing.

why? why can't we just have it on the worst things?

I simply cannot fathom people with serious phobias would play a game as dark and inherently violent as D&D in the first place. It was DESIGNED to delve into the nasty things that go bump in the night.

I'm sorry but that doesn't describe D&D to me at all... not even in 1995 when I was an emo little punk who thought everything was dark and evil or it was for babies...

D&D doesn't delve into nasty things as a rule... you may use it to, but again it is all cartoon violence.

My fighter got hit by a giant claw for 45 damage... then a fire breath bathed the whole party for 30 fire damage (that the rogue took none somehow cause he teleported for a second I guess) and then the rogue slipped a small knife into the dragon and did more damage then 3 rounds of the barbarian hitting it with his great axe... then we were all fine... nothing lasted.

later that night in real time (2 days later in game) we come across 10 orcs with longbows, and they suprise us... they all fire in the surprise round and hit (2 attacks per orc, 20 arrows but split between 4 targets ) 5 arrows hit the barbarian, 5 arrows hit the fighter 5 arrows hit the rogue 5 arrows hit the wizard... the wizard is really hurt, those hits did almost half his HP... non surprise round the wizard goes first and fireballs the orcs... they all die. You can somehow recover those ten wooden bows with strings from that fire blast that killed them... and yeah the wizard needs some healing (sit for an hour and spend some HD or Drink some potions) but even if you don't rest or heal you can keep walking like nothing happened.



edit: I forgot the best one... back in 3e when the knight was a new class a woman on this form talked about her character taking off her armor and weapons and jumping into an active volcano taking 20d6 fire damage over and over again to get something from inside the lava... climbing out still taking the damage (I think for 3 rounds) and sighing that she was going to need a drink and some healing... because she was ALMOST to single digit hp.

Tom and Jerry hit each other with frying pans... no permanent damage, your fighter gets hit 100 times over 8 levels and the same thing.

 

[S'mon]

But what harm could possibly be caused by avoiding certain material at a gaming table?

I'm talking about the trigger warnings, which focus the reader's attention on their past trauma.

 

[Yaarel]

Quite frankly, I was surprised at just how bad the story of Sigurd was, for such a celebrated "hero".

like his part in the rape of Brunhild. yikes.

For me, one of the worst examples of that was in a saga. At war, a warrior killed the father and brothers of a woman, and then forced her to swear a marriage oath becoming his wife. Later she killed the husband avenging the death of her family. What makes the story awful is the narrative point of view assumes that she is the villain because she violated her oath, breaking her word.

But keep in mind the different eras. Sigurdr is early medieval, the saga above is late medieval, and the seductive hulder is modern 1800s.

 

[S'mon]

For me, one of the worst examples of that was in a saga. At war, a warrior killed the father and brothers of a woman, and then forced her to swear a marriage oath becoming his wife. Later she killed the husband avenging the death of her family. What makes the story awful is the narrative point of view assumes that she is the villain because she violated her oath, breaking her word.

Bit like in A Game of Thrones with the Lazareen priestess & Khal Drogo. The way it's presented, she is shown more as a traitorous murderer than as a hero.