D&D General Of Consent, Session 0 and Hard Decisions.

[GrimCo]

The two bolded bits conflict when one's means of unwinding and relaxing in a game is to act like an irresponsible kid, rather than like the responsible adult one is expected to be the rest of the time.

But they aren't. Act like an adult means - if you have problem with something, say it. Talk to fellow player, talk to dm. If someone says or does something that upsets you, voice it out. People aren't mind readers. I have low tolerance for passive aggressive behavior and drama. This is hobby, we all gathered to have some fun. So play nice with other people. If your fun is ruining someone else fun, we can sit, discuss, and resolve issue. Sometimes good honest talk is all that's needed. Sometimes, you kick someone. Sometimes, you call it quit and disband gaming group.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But they aren't. Act like an adult means - if you have problem with something, say it. Talk to fellow player, talk to dm. If someone says or does something that upsets you, voice it out. People aren't mind readers. I have low tolerance for passive aggressive behavior and drama. This is hobby, we all gathered to have some fun. So play nice with other people. If your fun is ruining someone else fun, we can sit, discuss, and resolve issue. Sometimes good honest talk is all that's needed. Sometimes, you kick someone. Sometimes, you call it quit and disband gaming group.

As @Zardnaar mentions, this level of openness is not socially acceptable in some cultures (add British to NZ). You need to provide socially acceptable channels for people to communicate through, not expect them to voice something out loud in a way they have been taught is not socially acceptable.

 

[FrogReaver]

True, and this is a flaw with the session zero approach. It’s why some people might prefer a form or card based approach. If it’s an in-person game, simply paying attention to reactions is probably enough if the players are sufficiently emotionally literate, but I find a channel for in private communication between individual players an the DM very helpful.

I use a card based system for my on line game. No one has ever used it - but they feel safer knowing it exists.

The most important thing is that individual members feel the others care about their emotional wellbeing.

If they won’t speak in session 0 what makes you think they’d ever speak with cards in the heat of the moment.

 

[Remathilis]

It's basically why I choose places with diverse menus.

I don't like seafood but like curry. I'm not going to book a curry place to dine at.

But in the quote I posted, the other five people in your group wanted curry and you don't. Buy your own rules, you are being told to go home and eat a Swanson's Lonely meal, because the other five have agreed.

 

[FrogReaver]

My take.

Not everything is for everyone.

Some people have greater tolerances for changing things up to accommodate.

Not accommodating is not being a jerk.

 

[TiQuinn]

I’m just gonna say this thread has some of the worst analogies I’ve ever read. The Greek Philosopher Analogous is turning in his grave as we speak.

 

[Alzrius]

But they aren't. Act like an adult means - if you have problem with something, say it. Talk to fellow player, talk to dm. If someone says or does something that upsets you, voice it out.

A close friend of mine told me the other day about some books she's been reading about communication styles that people have. Apparently, two of the most common types are (if I remember the terms correctly) "speaking" and "signalling."

In the scenario where a person is trying to get a jar from the top shelf, only to find that it's out of reach, a "speaking" person will turn to someone taller than them and ask "can you help me get this?"

A "signalling" person, however, won't make such a direct appeal. Instead, they'll make their struggle obvious by standing on tiptoes, groaning with effort, making repeated attempts, etc., all within someone else's line of sight. It's their way of indicating that they need help without actually saying that they need help.

According to what I was told, people who use this latter form of communication don't see it as any sort of personal fault or something that they need to change. To them, signalling is more preferable to speaking out (I'm not clear on why; if I recall correctly, it can range from shyness to preferring to be circumspect). If other people don't correctly interpret their signals, it's often taken to be the non-understanding person's fault, because how could they misread something so obvious?

I bring this up simply because the issue of not speaking up when something you don't like happens isn't necessarily a case of "not being an adult." Different people have different personality types, and some people are simply more inclined to be less verbal in how they broadcast their emotions. It's true that people aren't mind-readers, but that cuts the other way in terms of having awareness about how people are reacting to what's going on.

Of course, tabletop RPGs have long had a (justifiable) reputation for attracting people with poor communication skills and/or trouble reading non-verbal cues, so in all honesty this seems like the hobby that's most ripe for that kind of misunderstanding anyway.

I'm personally not a fan of "safety tools" in RPGs, as I think it presumes that playing those games inherently carries a risk of being "unsafe," but at the same time I think there needs to be a more nuanced approach to people being uncomfortable with something than "it's your problem, you deal with it" (which I'm saying in general, rather than attributing that sentiment to you personally).

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If they won’t speak in session 0 what makes you think they’d ever speak with cards in the heat of the moment.

Even if they don’t, they know the group is at least trying to create a safe environment. Being a jerk is not trying. Trying unsuccessfully is always going to happen sometimes, but “it may not work” is not a valid excuse not to try.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And making an ideological stance about -refusing- to play or run games with safety tools is a political position... sooo...

What does that choice have to do with the government?

 

[Micah Sweet]

"Litmus Test"

I like that. Knowing when people are going to be corrosive to you is apparently a "Bad Thing" for some folks.

That said: I didn't assign a moral value to whether or not having an ideological stance over safety tools was a good or bad thing. I only acknowledge that it is, in fact, political.

Like literally -everything else- in the world.

I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of saying "No politics!" and then making a political statement in the same post.

If we've reached the point where everything is political, how do we in fact define politics?