D&D General Ravenloft, horror, & safety tools...

[Faolyn]

I am not these things

And yet you're coming across like that on social media.

Which goes to show you that what people are like and how they present on social media are not always the same thing. Which means it's not up to you to determine if a person is faking having a mental illness.

 

[Bedrockgames]

For the people in the back:

Safety check lists can help prevent panic attacks by avoiding topics that an individual knows causes them to have panic attacks.

Let's pretend that you have a serious fear of, I dunno, cats, to the point that you feel sick if one is in the same room as you. And your friend has a cat. A safety check list is the equivalent of your friend locking the cat in the bedroom while you hang out in the living room. It doesn't cure your ailurophobia, but it's not supposed to. It's just supposed to make you more comfortable while you're at your friends place.

What you are proposing is the equivalent of your friend letting the cat jump on your lap because putting her away would be "preventing a panic attack" and he's not a mental health professional so it's not up to him to help you out in any way.

Someone who did that would not be a very good friend. In fact, they'd be a pretty crappy person.

This is going to be my last response to you on this thread (just to be clear I like you as a poster, but I don't think this interaction is productive or good). No, this isn't the same. I have repeatedly said intentionally triggering someone's panic episode is not something anyone should do, and that none of what I am saying about safety tools should be read as an endorsement of dismissing someone's pain or mental health concerns. I've stated this over and over again. What I am saying is people have to figure this stuff out among themselves, and that it may not always be possible for a group to accommodate stuff. None of what I am saying is suggesting that the GM or other players should go the opposite direction and try to treat someone's panic disorder with exposure or something. That isn't what I am arguing. I have had serious panic attacks, I understand what is like to think you are going to die while having one. It isn't something I would ever treat in the way you are suggesting.

 

[Faolyn]

This is going to be my last response to you on this thread (just to be clear I like you as a poster, but I don't think this interaction is productive or good). No, this isn't the same. I have repeatedly said intentionally triggering someone's panic episode is not something anyone should do, and that none of what I am saying about safety tools should be read as an endorsement of dismissing someone's pain or mental health concerns. I've stated this over and over again. What I am saying is people have to figure this stuff out among themselves, and that it may not always be possible for a group to accommodate stuff. None of what I am saying is suggesting that the GM or other players should go the opposite direction and try to treat someone's panic disorder with exposure or something. That isn't what I am arguing. I have had serious panic attacks, I understand what is like to think you are going to die while having one. It isn't something I would ever treat in the way you are suggesting.

What you have stated "over and over again" is:

That safety tools are counterproductive or even dangerous because they could lead to "obsessive" behavior.

That preventing other people from having panic attacks is a mental health issue so you shouldn't go out of your way to do this.

That it's better to not include such people in your game rather change your game to accommodate them even when the accommodation is as minor as not including a specific creature or creature ability.

That some of those people are trying to weaponize emotions against you or your game, may only have a "minor" or "self-diagnosed" illness, or may just be trying to get attention.

What you intend to have said is clearly very different from what you have actually said.

 

[Faolyn]

And so, back to the actual discussion:

I think that the first GURPS Horror is probably the best guide for creating horror because it really goes into why certain things are horrific.

 

[Vaalingrade]

No, people shouldn't be weaponizing their feelings.

Accusing people at random of weaponizing their feelings is infinitely worse.

At best, you're definitely and obviously going to catch a lot of innocent people in your crossfire.

At worst, all you're actually doing is excusing being insensitive by projecting onto others.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Accusing people at random of weaponizing their feelings is infinitely worse.

At best, you're definitely and obviously going to catch a lot of innocent people in your crossfire.

At worst, all you're actually doing is excusing being insensitive by projecting onto others.

That isn’t what I am doing. Saying someone having a feeling doesn’t mean they can tell other people what to do or how to feel: these things need to be discussed and handled case by case at each table. Saying someone has a feeling so x must result is a terrible way to manage things like mental health issues, and a terrible way to manage a game. And that statement was in response to sone who said ‘so a tiger is more important than a players feelings?’. One that is hyperbolic. Two, that is a mindset that weaponizes feelings (it is good to be considerate of peoples feelings but it is bad to make them the supreme or only priority, or to treat them as infallible)

 

[Vaalingrade]

That isn’t what I am doing.

That is one billion percent what you're doing even if you're not intending to in your crusade against... treating people respectfully in terms of what you subject them to in game.

And again, you're mischaracterizing safety tools.

Just because someone isn't comfortable with aspects of the game doesn't mean the game has to change. Sometimes it just means you need to give them fair warning that say your Alien-inspire game is not going to be for them if they don't like body horror. It's about avoiding surprising people with crap that will mess with them, not about censorship or mind lasers or whatever made up thing 'weaponized feelings' are.

 

[Bedrockgames]

That is one billion percent what you're doing even if you're not intending to in your crusade against... treating people respectfully in terms of what you subject them to in game.

And again, you're mischaracterizing safety tools.

Just because someone isn't comfortable with aspects of the game doesn't mean the game has to change. Sometimes it just means you need to give them fair warning that say your Alien-inspire game is not going to be for them if they don't like body horror. It's about avoiding surprising people with crap that will mess with them, not about censorship or mind lasers or whatever made up thing 'weaponized feelings' are.

It depends on the safety tool

 

[Bedrockgames]

That is one billion percent what you're doing even if you're not intending to in your crusade against... treating people respectfully in terms of what you subject them to in game.

no it isn’t. You are projecting things onto me and missing important nuances in my points

 

[Umbran]

please read my post. This is not what I said at all. I mentioned having ptsd myself. I am coming at this from a view that safety tools do more harm than good

Yes, well, one of my players has PTSD, and likes several different forms of safety tools. They ar enot one-size-fits-all, or a panacea, but we cannot expect perfection.

Tools are, if nothing else, a structured way to start a conversation and be aware. It will not make anyone's understanding perfect, or complete, but again, perfection is not the goal.