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

[Jfdlsjfd]

It does raise (what I think is) an interesting question:

Has someone's use of the X Card ever resulted in that person not being a part of the group going forward? Not in a punishment way (that would be not nice) but in a "they just don't fit" way?

I am curious if anyone has ever had that experience.

I think it's an acceptable outcome. If you've arachnophobia, and the campaign is Against the Spider Worshipping Driders of Lolth, and you didn't realize it because it wasn't presented explicitely as such, there are only two option: either the GM rewrites the whole campaign (Against the Fly-Worshipper werefly of Baal?) or you just skip that game. The X-card is to allow a way to express discomfort on the spot with something happening in game. It doesn't dictate how you deal with it afterwards.

Also, if you're going to X-card (or just say "hey, this is silly/stupid/gross" the old-fashioned way) when every other character in the group proceeds to rape the dead bodies of your opponents, you might just want to... not play with them? I wouldn't.

 

[Umbran]

The X card is a hard stop for a partular part of a game, but the discussion I heard was that it encourages people to push right up to the line, when they might otherwise normally not do it. The charitable way of thinking about it would be "if someone doesn't like this, they'll say no." What the argument I heard was, it moves the burden to the person who's offended, rather than just starting by assuming common social norms. And a lot of people I know who have issues with a particular play style are very passive about it and won't say anything.

No safety tool actually prevents people from acting in bad faith.

In the experiences I mentioned above, and in discussions I've had - the X-card really isn't to hold the line on basic civility. The general expectations of the table should still be laid out before play, and folks should be expected to not press the envelope on those.

The X-card is for specific moments that press particular buttons that should not otherwise be expected to be there. It is to handle surprises, and does not replace a good discussion before play begins.

If I say the game is supposed to be PG, I'm enforcing that PG rating whether or not anyone hits the X-card.

 

[zakael19]

No safety tool actually prevents people from acting in bad faith.

Meguey Baker has an excellent blog entry noting that we should really call them “communication tools” and not safety tools. These techniques and tools don’t make you safe, they just give explicit mechanisms to structure the discussion and deal with unexpected reactions in a way the table agrees to adhere to up front:

They are communication tools, they are only as effective as the people who use them in good faith with a shared understanding of how they work, and they will not, cannot, make a situation “safe” merely by being present. Please call things like Lines & Veils and the Consent Flower and Temp Check and Traffic Light communication tools, and pick the one that fits your table. (Anecdotally, I have an actual trauma response to the X-card, as to me, it is a reminder of being barred from acknowledging or talking about real and serious problems. I understand that was not the designer’s intent; trauma responses are not always logical.)

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

Meguey Baker has an excellent blog entry noting that we should really call them “communication tools” and not safety tools. These techniques and tools don’t make you safe, they just give explicit mechanisms to structure the discussion and deal with unexpected reactions in a way the table agrees to adhere to up front:

It reminds of BDSM "safety word" to stop at once what is happening when verbal communication is not possible.

 

[Umbran]

Meguey Baker has an excellent blog entry noting that we should really call them “communication tools” and not safety tools.

I see the argument, but the telephone and SMS messages are also "communication tools" - this language lacks specificity.

The tools do not generate safety, but they can enable communication that can help make you safer. So, I'm good with the name we currently use.

 

[zakael19]

I see the argument, but the telephone and SMS messages are also "communication tools" - this language lacks specificity.

The tools do not generate safety, but they can enable communication that can help make you safer. So, I'm good with the name we currently use.

I’ll absolutely concur that if you run into people who object to their concept or usage you’re probably safer not playing with them .

 

[Simon The Hunter]

Any games I played pre-2000's never had any official safety tools, it was all just assumed that certain subjects were taboo, and the one time I had two PCs (some school friends, we were 16 at the time) who decided they wanted to go on a spree in a village of women, well I shut down the scenario pretty quickly. I remember them being annoyed and didn't play D&D with them much after that.

More recent games I've played have always included the usual session 0 stuff, which now has terms like CATS and Veils and Lines attributed to them (we didn't have terms for them, but we had them). It's only been in the last few years that I've heard the term X Card and seen it being suggested as a tool. I think it's a great idea, especially for those occasions where someone might have something trigger them unexpectedly, like losing someone close to them IRL and having a scene replicate that too close for them.