D&D 5E Player consent required -spoilers for new adv book

[Micah Sweet]

Considering this is a game people play for fun...

I don't see the relevance of your reply. Are you implying that in order for the game to be fun bad things can't happen to PCs? That's a very odd take to me (though par for the course for many modern players it seems).

 

[Reynard]

If one didn't know the DM (or poster on here), would a disclaimer like (without the list of possible consequences) also be expected to allow for rape, graphic torture, racist insults, etc... in game?

If no, then I guess my question is related to what @Reynard brings up a page back, where is the line? Transformations never struck me as a common issue, but if personal body horror were a big thing to lots of players, does that change anything?

The list of some possibilities seems to make a huge difference.

I think we can largely rely on cultural norms. Racism and rape are never okay. Sex and gore are things you should know ahead of time you are getting into. Violence is (sadly) pretty much ok as long as it happens to.the right targets and is cool. Beyond that, we absolutely should at least do a quick session 0 check in.

For a less problematic but more common example: drug use. Most people shrug,but for some folks who have themselves or have family members suffering from substance abuse disorders, this can be a real thing even if they are okay with extremes in sex and violence. I wouldn't hesitate to mention in a pitch that "we are getting seedy in this urban fantasy; is everyone ok with depictions of drug addiction?" If a player indicates they aren't, we start a conversation.

Being willing to take your players' real life feelings into account when running a game is not only a sign of good GMing, it is a sign of good humaning.

 

[Lanefan]

If one didn't know the DM (or poster on here), would a disclaimer like (without the list of possible consequences) also be expected to allow for rape, graphic torture, racist insults, etc... in game?

If no, then I guess my question is related to what @Reynard brings up a page back, where is the line?

Valid question. My point is that the line seems to be getting more and more restrictive all the time; this being the first time I've ever encountered permanent polymorph as being across said line where IME it's always just been a known - if bloody rare - in-character risk along with all the others. What's next?

Personally, I'm fine with graphic torture, in-game racism (as long as it stays completely in-game, Elves can say and think anything they like about Dwarves, and vice versa!), etc. but not violent sexual assault.

Some players can't even handle their character getting killed in the game - which tells me the game probably isn't suited for those people and really never has been.

 

[Charlaquin]

I actually don’t think player prior consent is necessary for what this appears to be (based on the limited text in the attached image). I wouldn't expect to have to get player prior consent to afflict their character with any other in game effect or whatever.

I do, however, believe it is necessary to get general player buy in. "This adventure has strong body horror elements that may well affect PCs. If we are going to run this, everyone has to be in for that possibility." Maybe "buy in" counts as consent.

Of course, I also think that players should feel free to raise an X card at any time. I've never seen someone do it because they were trying to avoid a consequence. I have only ever seen it used for its intended purpose of creating player safety.

I’d say “buy-in” is essentially provisional consent with incomplete information, yeah.

 

[Scribe]

I guess I'm not one such, then, as the idea of being turned into a Mind Flayer is to me about on a par with picking up lycanthropy and turning into a savage beast every full moon: I just don't equate it with "horror", somehow. That said, I would see it as a "loss" condition and do what I could in-character to get it reversed somehow.

I'd say this could be because we are desensitized to the concept of the werewolf. Its 'cool' its a subclass feature essentially (should be! I have a rough draft somewhere for a Druid..) instead of what it originally was.

We should instead see it as a loss of control, a panic ridden count down to a blackout preceded by the agony of watching our limbs twist and tear through our flesh, our face become a drooling maw, our hands savage claws, only to wake up the next morning naked, covered in blood and filth, unaware of what we have done, who we have killed.

But you know, 'can I play as a werewolf' is instead how it goes.

 

[Lanefan]

Considering this is a game people play for fun...

Yes, and a large part of the fun lies in the game's challenges; and not everyone is going to overcome every challenge (otherwise they wouldn't be legitimate challenges to start with). Further, it's also a game of luck, and sometimes bad luck rears its ugly head. The results of not overcoming every challenge, or of being unlucky, can be unpleasant.

 

[Reynard]

Some players can't even handle their character getting killed in the game - which tells me the game probably isn't suited for those people and really never has been.

You can easily play a D&D campaign where PC death isn't on the table. It isn't my preference, but it isn't hard to do. You just make a house rule that "dead" characters end up in a coma or whatever suits you needs. It isn't a new phenomenon. People have had this preference almost since the game came out. See The Elusive Shift.

 

[Charlaquin]

So, in a game that to a large degree is about player characters being serial thieves and robbers, going on regular grissly murder sprees sometimes bordering on genocide, I need to get consent from every player for including a possibility of physically transformative effects in case they are overly sensitive to it?

This is silly beyond reason, I'm very happy I don't play D&D anymore.

I imagine players who have had traumatic experiences related to bodily transformation are very happy you don’t play D&D anymore too. Everyone wins!

 

[overgeeked]

I think we can largely rely on cultural norms. Racism and rape are never okay. Sex and gore are things you should know ahead of time you are getting into. Violence is (sadly) pretty much ok as long as it happens to.the right targets and is cool. Beyond that, we absolutely should at least do a quick session 0 check in.

For a less problematic but more common example: drug use. Most people shrug,but for some folks who have themselves or have family members suffering from substance abuse disorders, this can be a real thing even if they are okay with extremes in sex and violence. I wouldn't hesitate to mention in a pitch that "we are getting seedy in this urban fantasy; is everyone ok with depictions of drug addiction?" If a player indicates they aren't, we start a conversation.

Being willing to take your players' real life feelings into account when running a game is not only a sign of good GMing, it is a sign of good humaning.

One important thing to remember is to talk about lines and veils privately with the players. Then present the group with the final list. A group of players are less likely to be open and honest about this. As we see every time the topic comes up, someone always objects and argues, etc. Someone doesn't like spiders, someone else throws up their hands...and suddenly no one's being honest about their lines and veils. Individual players should trust the referee with this information. The other players don't need to know who objected to what.

 

[Reynard]

One important thing to remember is to talk about lines and veils privately with the players. Then present the group with the final list. A group of players are less likely to be open and honest about this. As we see every time the topic comes up, someone always objects and argues, etc. Someone doesn't like spiders, someone else throws up their hands...and suddenly no one's being honest about their lines and veils. Individual players should trust the referee with this information. The other players don't need to know who objected to what.

You have mentioned lines and veils a couple times, and while I think I understand the terms from context, do you have a link to a detailed explanation of the terms?