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

[Lanefan]

The point was that I have seen you, personally, make the argument in other threads that DMs having absolute power--them being the last word, the decider, etc., etc.--is extremely important, and the fact that some bad DMs might abuse that power is an unacceptable reason to attempt to curtail such behavior. That we should, always, give DMs maximal latitude even though that might, possibly, enable some abusive DMs, because the benefits gained by DMs being able to do whatever they like are massively more common, important, and useful than "protecting" players from bad DMs.

Because players can always vote with their feet. Nothing's forcing them to stay in a bad game.

Why is it that safety tools potentially being abused or leading to bad results is a reason to reject such things, but DMs potentially abusing their absolute power is not a reason to reject such things?

I'm not quite sure how to phrase this, so please bear with me if I mess it up:

The problem I see with the very existence of hard-coded safety tools (e.g. an X card, consent forms, etc.) is that their presence and use is likely to put participants far more on edge and-or on their guard than would otherwise be the case, and can also give outsiders or raw beginners a negative first impression of what RPGing is all about.

"Wait a minute - just what am I getting into here?" should not be a new player's first impression of the game, yet that's exactly the response being handed a consent form or told about an X card is likely to produce.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Because players can always vote with their feet. Nothing's forcing them to stay in a bad game.

Which means we've just gone back to "suck it up, buttercup," which is an unacceptable response to players having actual issues and benefitting enormously from ways to address those issues effectively.

I'm not quite sure how to phrase this, so please bear with me if I mess it up:

The problem I see with the very existence of hard-coded safety tools (e.g. an X card, consent forms, etc.) is that their presence and use is likely to put participants far more on edge and-or on their guard than would otherwise be the case, and can also give outsiders or raw beginners a negative first impression of what RPGing is all about.

Why do you use the phrase "hard-coded"?

Where does this "likely to put participants far more on edge" come from? Because I see no evidence of that. Quite the opposite. The purpose, design, and execution of these tools is very specifically to do exactly the antithesis of what you describe here. It is, very specifically, to make it easier to be comfortable, to be able to push the envelope safely. Hence, "safety tools."

Like...for real here. Do you actually know what an X-card is and how it is used?

"Wait a minute - just what am I getting into here?" should not be a new player's first impression of the game, yet that's exactly the response being handed a consent form or told about an X card is likely to produce.

Where do you get this "likely to produce" from?

Because these things are actually well-tested, and, in many cases, are in fact built on sound methodology from psychotherapy. I mentioned before that the terms are not clinical, but the concepts behind them are.

 

[Remathilis]

I do think a fair number of folks either don't play with people who have the kinds of trauma that would suggest accommodation, or don't know that they play with such people. In either case, the situation simply hasn't come up for them in real life, which makes it difficult to relate to people on the internet talking about how important it is. In this situation, no one is trying to be a jerk, and I think it would help if everyone here considered the possibility.

Society does a lot to try to ignore the impact of trauma. There are people in this world that think PTSD isn't real, or that it is a sign of weakness. Mental health is still something most average people don't understand well, and a lot of mental health problems get responded to with "well, learn to get over it". It's part of society's DNA.

What we can try to do is accept that good faith expressions of trauma are valid, and not immediately retreat to outdated concepts of toughness, masculinity and machismo as ways to cover it. Admitting you have a problem is a major step for most people. We tell men to be stoic and women to be silent. Nor is all trauma the hysterical screaming variety. Some people will bear their pain in silence because that's what society expects them to do.

Ultimately, it's why I keep calling for empathy. To put yourself in the shoes of someone who wants to be part of the group but the activity they engage in has something that makes them uncomfortable.

 

[Steampunkette]

Fun random fact: movie distributors thought the movie Coco would flop in China because many of the characters are portrayed as walking skeletons. Instead, it was a huge hit because people found its themes of what is due to our ancestors and its portrayal of family dynamics relatable.

That is SO unbearably cool! Thank you for sharing! Gonna put this in the trivia portion of my brain and enjoy it, periodically. <3

Also, what a -good- movie, am I right?

Reasonable.

We both agree here.

I can even see the argument for establishing boundaries for con, store, and league style games. It’s fair and I would describe the session and style upfront and I would make small changes if needed. I could not make large changes unless I had prepped alternate scenarios in advance.

However, if I have prepped a campaign for months and one person does not like it or invalidates a lot of work, then I am not going to run something else. I never get to be a player and it makes no sense to run something that I am not invested in. It leads to burn out and negativity.

I do not need formalized tools to codify personal interactions. I tend to be direct and honest and ask others for feedback.

I am not saying other groups should not use them. Use them if they make you comfortable. There is no one true way.

There's no one anywhere saying "Everyone needs to use these tools."

Just "These tools should exist and are useful advice for DMs and Players to resolve a conflict."

Or, in my case, "These tools are becoming more and more useful in a community that becomes more and more biased towards Virtual Tabletops to deal with issues of illness, geographic isolation, and scheduling"

We're still trying to get the community to accept that these things aren't nonsense that is somehow "Bad and Wrong" or will automatically result in bad gamers/games or immediate and thorough abuse to the point that even trying to use them just enables bad actors a new vector to be manipulative. Acceptance, even after a decade of talking about them publicly, is still highly politicized.

Else this thread wouldn't be nearly so contentious as it has been.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Some traumas are above my pay grade. All the major ones are already covered.

That woukd leave hypothetical ones eg arachnophobia. I know people in my group don't like spiders D&D ones are fine though.

Phobias have a great degree of variation, from "aversion" to "tends to throw you into a panic attack". There's no one-size-fits-all there.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I have rethought this whole session 0 x card stuff.

I don’t worry about it because I play with friends and family. One friend had a real life tragedy that I would not bring into the game.

I keep thinking: if a theme in a movie bothers you; don’t go. Don’t change the movie for everyone else…

I am fine with a voluntary rating system. “For my game, violence, captivity/slavery, evil sorcery are on the table. If anyone does not want these themes it’s ok! We are still good! Tell me back channel. Will get a headcount for the party and get stuff rolling!”

In other words safety tools for me is just a goodness of fit situation. I am not making a rated g game for anyone…

My very limited time in escapist fun needs to be pretty open to traditional fictional themes.

But if I was recruiting new players/strangers what does it hurt to have a general opt out heads up? Some People will opt out…saves time and stress later.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Mod Note:

Someone reported a post 10 pages back, a few pages before Umbran left a note. I read those 10 pages…

I haven’t seen much, if any progress. The rhetorical trenches have been dug; there is little- if any- movement in either direction. No one is being persuaded one way or the other. Given what has been posted thus far, I’m not sure there could be.

The thread is unlikely to improve or evolve, so I’m closing it.