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

[HammerMan]

Cop out? Really?
I am merely agreeing with you. My stance was always all or nothing. Looks like "all" won out.
If you truly believe there are that many people in the world that need protection from books, well, contact WOTC and begin the process.

nope WotC (aand maybe even TSR) long ago went with cartoon child safe ideas... yu can still USE the product to be dark, but even the seductress devil/demon succubus is kidafied (kiss to drain instead of...well you know wink) every bit of sex or nudity is scrubbed except for the most hidden innuendo. Combat is a joke... I will say charm still bugs me (still might make a thread) but really...

I do have one question for you. If WOTC resists your efforts to force them to put trigger warnings on their products, are you prepared to stop playing D&D as part of the boycott to force WOTC's hand?

has anyone even suggested in this thread or others to contact anyone or ask anyone to add anything?

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

again your example (as I showed above) is far from the cartoon like combat of D&D at least for the last 20 years (I seem to remember 2e fighters getting hit by hammers bigger then they are by giants multi times and coming out fine too but I am old my memory may be fuzzy)

I have participated in many many games where when someone gets a killing blow or rolls a Nat 20 on some monster, the DM says "you can describe your attack", at which point many (not all) players go into graphic detail explaining what happens to the monster. Or the DM will do the explanation. This was not some kind of player or DM behaviour discussed in session 0. It was something that has become a defacto standard as far as I can tell. Violence is far from "cartoonish" in the majority of games I have played in.

Further, there is some little production out there on the Intertubes that has a bunch of paid actors, particularly the DM, who seem to make a little pocket money by describing in great detail settings, to create a mood, be it a light, or very dark, situation. Every single player I have EVER encountered wants a DM that can create a mood by describing a setting in the same manner. That covers any and all terrain effects, which based on this thread can be just as terrifying as violence.

You can have a DM that says "You walk into a cave and there is a really big spider with the torso of a Drow Elf on the top", or you can have a DM that takes 20 seconds describing the lighting, and what that thing looks like, where this monster is located, the terrain, etc. I know which one 99% of the player base would choose.

To suggest that players prefer just the executive summary of a battle or the setting is just not true.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I am NOT trolling.

You should examine your argument style then.

Those that are supporting trigger warnings in this piece of Homebrew material MUST recognize that WOTC canon material is riddled with material that can trigger people in the same manner.

There is a difference between supporting someone volunteering to perform an action and hoping others follow suit and forcing someone to do so.

 

[Dire Bare]

I am not American. I'm a Finn. Is Finland part of Scandinavia? That was a trick question. Technically it isn't as it isn't on Scandinavian Peninsula*, but Nordics and Scandinavia are often used interchangeably, especially in English.

*And neither is Iceland, which is the birthplace of the Eddas.


It bizarrely sets one area of the whole apart for no sensible reason, creating an implication that it somehow doesn't belong.



If someone would write a book about "North American and Mexican geography" it would make it seem Mexico is somehow not part of North America.

I'm speaking from the perspective of an outsider, but Scandinavian culture certainly extends beyond the Scandinavian Peninsula. Whether the term Scandinavian should include Finns and Icelanders . . . . you can comment better than I. I've always assumed it did. I would imagine, however, that not all Finns and Icelanders would agree either way!

@Yaarel seems to feel lumping Scandinavians in with the rest of Europe isn't good in this context, and I'm willing to respect that position . . . . although I don't think it requires any of us to agree with the position, especially other Scandinavians on the board. I appreciate your input, especially as a Finn, even if I feel you were being a little dismissive to @Yaarel.

I wouldn't blink if a book on European mythology includes Western European cultures, Celtic cultures, Scandinavian cultures, and Eastern European cultures all in the same book, despite the distinct differences in these cultural regions and their mythology. I'm guessing most folks from those regions wouldn't mind either, but some would . . . .

 

[Dire Bare]

I am NOT trolling.

Those that are supporting trigger warnings in this piece of Homebrew material MUST recognize that WOTC canon material is riddled with material that can trigger people in the same manner.

I really want to know. How can someone, anyone at all, support trigger warnings on this Homebrew publication but NOT want the same warnings applied to WOTC published material. Why are not those people organizing some movement to have WOTC either apply the same warnings to their material or sanitize the material.

This is no different than saying "Wow, that guy scratch built a fantastic sports car that looks and operates like a Shelby Cobra. But he has to add safety belts. But of course, we don't expect Ford to make its Shelbies or any other sports car with safety belts."

You aren't trolling? Your posting style suggest otherwise, but I'll have to take you at your word.

@Sacrosanct exploring the use of warning labels on his own product does not lead to demanding that other publishers do the same. @Sacrosanct can only control their own products, even if they openly ask for feedback on the boards. Their choices do not dictate what others should do.

You keep advocating for an all or nothing approach to this, but you're alone on that stance (at least in this discussion thread).

However, I'm sure you are aware, but WotC already IS using warning labels! All of their "classic" digital products (pre-5th Edition) have a general content warning on the store page. In WotC's view, not every one of these titles necessarily has problematic content, but enough of them do that a blanket warning is appropriate (and easier than more specific warnings on specific products). On WotC's current titles, they are working hard to ensure these products don't need warning labels at all. They haven't been fully successful at that, and have gone back and edited products after publication to remove problematic elements. They've apologized publicly for their missteps, but haven't put any warning labels on the current products. How well their choices have addressed the content in their products . . . is subjective. I'm fine with how they've handled things so far, even if it isn't perfect.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

You aren't trolling? Your posting style suggest otherwise, but I'll have to take you at your word.

@Sacrosanct exploring the use of warning labels on his own product does not lead to demanding that other publishers do the same. @Sacrosanct can only control their own products, even if they openly ask for feedback on the boards. Their choices do not dictate what others should do.

You keep advocating for an all or nothing approach to this, but you're alone on that stance (at least in this discussion thread).

However, I'm sure you are aware, but WotC already IS using warning labels! All of their "classic" digital products (pre-5th Edition) have a general content warning on the store page. In WotC's view, not every one of these titles necessarily has problematic content, but enough of them do that a blanket warning is appropriate (and easier than more specific warnings on specific products). On WotC's current titles, they are working hard to ensure these products don't need warning labels at all. They haven't been fully successful at that, and have gone back and edited products after publication to remove problematic elements. They've apologized publicly for their missteps, but haven't put any warning labels on the current products. How well their choices have addressed the content in their products . . . is subjective. I'm fine with how they've handled things so far, even if it isn't perfect.

I have not bought a WOTC product since my hard copy XGTE. I have never purchased a digital product from them. But the gaming cafe I patronize has a complete set of hard copies, which I read, and use, at my leisure. So, no, I have no idea they have warning labels on anything.

And now you are saying they are indeed sanitizing all 5e material to avoid such warning labels. I look forward to the new and improved PHB without the Darkness spell, Hold Person, Sickening Radiance, Scrying, Forcecage, etc etc etc, as well as the removal of scary monsters from D&D, let alone violence, or anything else that may trigger a person, whether it is one in 10, or one in 10,000.

 

[jmartkdr2]

And I can dig that. I don't imagine a Mexican wants people lumping their culture in with that of the United States. I think it might be common for Americans to lump all Europeans together for a variety of reasons, but partially because we're a nation of immigrants. I'll pretty much draw on any European legends, history, folklore, etc., etc. for game inspiration without a second thought but I can see how that might be frustrating to some people.

It's probably best in this case to be more precise and just point out where in Europe you're drawing from, since there really isn't any "European folklore" that applies to all of Europe (a truism for every continent) - "I'm drawing mostly from Germanic, Celtic, and Scandinavian sources" is probably a better sentence to use. (assuming it's accurate)

Put another way: If you said you were inspired by "Asian and Chinese mythology", that would read badly. "Chinese and other Asian" might work, I suppose, but if you didn't include at least a little from places like the South Asia or the Middle East you might be misrepresenting yourself.

(Also: don't just say African mythology. That's just as inaccurate.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

And now you are saying they are indeed sanitizing all 5e material to avoid such warning labels. I look forward to the new and improved PHB without the Darkness spell, Hold Person, Sickening Radiance, Scrying, Forcecage, etc etc etc, as well as the removal of scary monsters from D&D, let alone violence, or anything else that may trigger a person, whether it is one in 10, or one in 10,000.

No one is saying these things. Where are you getting this?

Please stop.

 

[HammerMan]

I have participated in many many games where when someone gets a killing blow or rolls a Nat 20 on some monster, the DM says "you can describe your attack", at which point many (not all) players go into graphic detail explaining what happens to the monster. Or the DM will do the explanation. This was not some kind of player or DM behaviour discussed in session 0. It was something that has become a defacto standard as far as I can tell. Violence is far from "cartoonish" in the majority of games I have played in.

Further, there is some little production out there on the Intertubes that has a bunch of paid actors, particularly the DM, who seem to make a little pocket money by describing in great detail settings, to create a mood, be it a light, or very dark, situation. Every single player I have EVER encountered wants a DM that can create a mood by describing a setting in the same manner. That covers any and all terrain effects, which based on this thread can be just as terrifying as violence.

You can have a DM that says "You walk into a cave and there is a really big spider with the torso of a Drow Elf on the top", or you can have a DM that takes 20 seconds describing the lighting, and what that thing looks like, where this monster is located, the terrain, etc. I know which one 99% of the player base would choose.

To suggest that players prefer just the executive summary of a battle or the setting is just not true.

notice everything I talk about is in the books, what YOU are talking about is how a DM uses it...

I have seen (and played and DMed) plenty of games where that level of gritty realistic and over the top gore is normal...but that is what we do with it...

Legos don't need a warning... the fact that I CAN make a nude woman out of one and a nude man out of another (alot of bricks) and then do luied things with them is nothing to do with if legos are kid friendly.

I would LOVE to hear your thoughts on someone getting hit by 25 arrows, and still being at half (or more) hp and able to walk, swim, run, cast, swing sword, dance, intimadate, seduce at 100% efficency fits "not cartoon physics"

I can even house rule a death spiral where as you loose HP you get more and more injuries (I even have in 3e) but that is again not on WotC.

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's probably best in this case to be more precise and just point out where in Europe you're drawing from, since there really isn't any "European folklore" that applies to all of Europe (a truism for every continent) - "I'm drawing mostly from Germanic, Celtic, and Scandinavian sources" is probably a better sentence to use. (assuming it's accurate)

Put another way: If you said you were inspired by "Asian and Chinese mythology", that would read badly. "Chinese and other Asian" might work, I suppose, but if you didn't include at least a little from places like the South Asia or the Middle East you might be misrepresenting yourself.

(Also: don't just say African mythology. That's just as inaccurate.)

So far I've revised that section to read:

To narrow scope, keep this book a manageable size, and to avoid potential cultural appropriation, only the myths, folklore, and fables specific to several European regions will be included. This book will not include mythology from east or west Asia, Africa, Mesoamerica, the Mediterranean, Central or South America, or other regions.