Have You Used The X Card Or Seen It Used In Person?

[Jfdlsjfd]

I honestly don't understand why you would conflate the two, unless you are explicitly minimizing the important of actual safety at the table.

They are both presented as safety tools. They both try to find a way for people reacting badly to a scene to no longer be exposed to it. They seek the same end. They are naturally conflated. The difference I see between them is that one is telegraphing "I have a problem with topic X" -- something people might be ill at ease saying, especially to complete strangers -- while the other is trying to telegraph nothing meaningful at all, lowering the "entry barrier".

I think the latter approach might help improve adoption.

 

[Umbran]

It is already a long list, and long enough that AL struggles to retain GMs. Why not remove something if that thing isn't positively affecting the experience?

Because not having it when you do need it is kind of a miserable experience for someone at your table?

Remember, the X-Card is an emergency tool. It is a fire extinguisher, an EpiPen, a car insurance policy. You should not be seeing it invoked frequently. But, that one time, it may help prevent a pretty catastrophic failure.

In the end, obviously, it is your table, and your choice.

 

[Reynard]

They are both presented as safety tools. They both try to find a way for people reacting badly to a scene to no longer be exposed to it. They seek the same end. They are naturally conflated. The difference I see between them is that one is telegraphing "I have a problem with topic X" -- something people might be ill at ease saying, especially to complete strangers -- while the other is trying to telegraph nothing meaningful at all, lowering the "entry barrier".

I think the latter approach might help improve adoption.

I see what you are saying, but they are different orders. If a player does not like the adventure, that is not the same thing as having their PTSD triggered. In the former case, the player can decide to leave or try to change the party's stance in play, or even just ask the GM for a different adventure. In the latter case, the player can pull the X card to tell everyone "That is a problem for me" and not have to explain their traumas.

Again, they aren't the same thing at all.

 

[Umbran]

In the case of open door policy, that's the same tool.

"Feel free to leave if you have a reason," is not the same as, "If you are having a problem, I have a tool to work with you on it."

Not that there's a problem with having an open door policy, too. But they aren't the same, in that they accomplish different things.

No, the X Card is not perfect. Some folks may not be comfortable invoking it. And if you otherwise present yourself as someone who is not actually sympathetic or kind about people's problems, then no, they won't want to invoke it either.

But, "It is not perfect" is not an argument to not use it. It is just an argument that you should know its limitations.

 

[Old Fezziwig]

But, to be honest, unless the players were being made psychologically unsafe by the module, that wasn't within the modern intent of the tool. Being "miffed" at a poorly written module isn't the intended use case.

I agree. I'd personally rather it was used than not used -- like, uptake is important, and we can work out the kinks later. But I feel a little uncomfortable with using it to stop play of a bad but otherwise benign module -- it seems like an expression of power, especially if the reason it's invoked is spoken about explicitly. It no longer seems like it's about keeping folks safe.

 

[Umbran]

They are both presented as safety tools. They both try to find a way for people reacting badly to a scene to no longer be exposed to it. They seek the same end.

No, they do not.

An open door policy gives players a way to disengage form the game entirely, for as long as they wish.
The X Card gives players a way to get past the specific issue and otherwise stay engaged with the game.

So, not the same end. And not mutually exclusive, either - an Open Door and an X-card together don't conflict at all.

And, in fact, they cover slightly different uses. If a player is having embarrassing digestive issues, say, an X Card doesn't help them, but an Open Door will.

 

[Reynard]

I agree. I'd personally rather it was used than not used -- like, uptake is important, and we can work out the kinks later. But I feel a little uncomfortable with using it to stop play of a bad but otherwise benign module -- it seems like an expression of power, especially if the reason it's invoked is spoken about explicitly. It no longer seems like it's about keeping folks safe.

Just trying to imagine how this would go in actual play:

GM: And the old man gives you a map to find the Old McGuffin at Plot Keep.
Player pulls X card: Can we not do that?
GM: Ok, sure. So, how about, "You find a map to Plot Keep..."
Player: Not that either.
GM: Oh. Alright. Uh... You are traveling between towns when you see Plot Keep on a hill.
Player: Nope.
GM: Okay, you have to tell me what the problem is.
Player: No I don't. It's an X card.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Have you used it? Have you had it used in a game you were running or playing? If so, what were the circumstances (be kind to the people involved, please, and don't out anyone for their preferences, please). I am honestly curious what it looks like "in the wild" rather than simply as a theoretical thing in a book.

I have used them and seen their use by others. Or at least an identical analog (we've tended to say 'I'm calling X card' instead of having a physical card).

As I've been rather public about, I once had my head nearly caved in in a mugging. Likewise, many of my main gaming group are veterans, some of whom have seen violent conflict )or the aftermath thereof). Others have experienced sexual violence. We each have a different threshold for realistic violence, sometimes one that changes day to day. Having a way of saying 'no I am not going to be involved with that right now' without explanation or judgment allows games that otherwise would not happen to be playable in general.

Plus some other cases with phobias, too graphic descriptions of body horror, or people forgetting that children or people unused to the group dynamic were present.

They are both presented as safety tools. They both try to find a way for people reacting badly to a scene to no longer be exposed to it. They seek the same end. They are naturally conflated. The difference I see between them is that one is telegraphing "I have a problem with topic X" -- something people might be ill at ease saying, especially to complete strangers -- while the other is trying to telegraph nothing meaningful at all, lowering the "entry barrier".

I think the latter approach might help improve adoption.

They are seeking the same end. I think the issue people are taking with it is that it is like pulling the fire alarm to clear a building so you can sweep the floors -- the goal is to clear the building so you've accomplished your goals, but it's using an emergency tool for a 'trivial' purpose. Most instances of using an emergency system are use cases where people are unlikely not to use them when needed, and/or not places where having them used trivially is deemed appropriate. Also I think there is a fear that the trivial use of these tools might give fuel to the fire of those that already treat them as a trivial endeavor/addition to gaming (the 'pat oneself on the back for growing up before bike helmets' response, as it were). If you are right, and using the emergency tool for a trivial purpose actually makes people use it in an emergency, that would be a good thing. I'm not convinced we've been presented with that case here, though.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

And, in fact, they cover slightly different uses. If a player is having embarrassing digestive issues, say, an X Card doesn't help them, but an Open Door will.

Sure, but the open door policy has the benefit of allowing one to use it without broadcasting that they have a problem to complete strangers. You might be heavily distressed, but the people you're playing with might as well think that you've digestive issue, or your boss just sent you a text demanding that you call back immediately. They have no way to know which is which. It's an accessible tool.

The X-card as you present it has a greater entry cost: if you tell people it's for emergency use only, and exclusively if you've real trouble and not just something more benign, it becomes a less accessible tool. Many people would shy from using it. Or use it when they really can't stand your description of a spider slowly digesting Bob, when they should have used it at the first mention of spider. And there is no drawback to present it as a mundane, accessible tool (players will generally be more interested to play the adventure than X-carding everything to sour the game, I hope).

But if it's working well at your table, that's what important.

 

[The Firebird]

Because not having it when you do need it is kind of a miserable experience for someone at your table?

Remember, the X-Card is an emergency tool. It is a fire extinguisher, an EpiPen, a car insurance policy. You should not be seeing it invoked frequently. But, that one time, it may help prevent a pretty catastrophic failure.

I get the idea, but the same thing can happen in any conversation...at the bbq mentioned earlier, at the bar, at dinner. Or when sitting in a movie theater, for example. I've had more uncomfortable experiences at these events than at the gaming table...

Again my point is not that an X card will never be useful. Just that, across decades of gaming, I have not encountered enough situations to justify including it when I GM. And as I said, I keep my games pretty light...I'm not giving detailed descriptions of spiders or people burning or what have you. If I ran things differently, then it may have more of a benefit.