D&D General [+] Ravenloft, horror, & safety tools...

[jayoungr]

The reference to the Golden Rule is a big red flag, actually. Those of us don't work in Equity, Inclusion, Trauma-Informed anything really, even something as seemingly benign as TTRPGs, have come to understand the shortcomings of the Golden Rule. [...] We tend to use instead the "Platinum Rule" which states "Treat people the way they want to be treated."

I actually don't think there's a major difference between the two. How would I want to be treated? Well, I'd want to have my concerns and preferences listened to and respected, even if they're not shared by the other person. You can get there by either route.

 

[tetrasodium]

I agree. I'd rather it be handle pre-game as much as possible. But things will inevitably come up in game that need to be handled. I think using both is a good idea. Instead of the X-card there's another in-game safety tool, script change. It includes things like pause, rewind, fast forward, etc to facilitate discussion and to skip passed problematic things in game. Though I'm not sure it's any more useful for someone who's hyper-non-confrontational.

Tools are good, but they shouldn't be the first last & only safety measure of responsibly keeping everyone safe. Even the most gregarious extroverted karen can feel reluctant to slam on the breaks in the moment when friends & people they consider peers are having fun. Using a "karen" as an example isn't a slight on anyone, it just show that it's a problem even confrontational people can encounter. When people are told that a problem mostly only affects a group of people they don't consider themselves a member they will resist admitting they are the exception.

The rest of the group needs to make up for those kinds of blind spots & weaknesses in tools. Someone who might feel uncomfortable needs to cooperate in letting them do that. People being checked on have a responsibility to pull back from their character enough to be clear when someone is checking on them. There are probably other good ways of doing it, but this is one regularly employed in other communities where consent is important.

 

[Gradine]

I actually don't think there's a major difference between the two. How would I want to be treated? Well, I'd want to have my concerns and preferences listened to and respected, even if they're not shared by the other person. You can get there by either route.

I mean sure, but the Golden Rule can be used to excuse a lot of really bad behavior. Stuff like "I don't mind be called [slur], so I should be able to call other people [slur]." It can, as I mentioned lead to people's motivations and honesty being questioned. "It wouldn't bother me, so you shouldn't be so sensitive." Stuff like that.

 

[MGibster]

I mean sure, but the Golden Rule can be used to excuse a lot of really bad behavior. Stuff like "I don't mind be called [slur], so I should be able to call other people [slur]." It can, as I mentioned lead to people's motivations and honesty being questioned. "It wouldn't bother me, so you shouldn't be so sensitive." Stuff like that.

As with all social interactions, whether we're talking about the Golden or the Platinum rule, there's always a chance for misunderstandings. But any rule or general guideline for behavior will fall apart with the introduction of individuals who do not make a good faith effort to follow its spirit. The etiquette that most of us use to extend an open hand to our fellow human beings can be twisted into a fist to pummel others. If you follow the Golden Rule with good faith you'll do just fine. You might stumble from time-to-time but overall you'll do well.

 

[jayoungr]

I mean sure, but the Golden Rule can be used to excuse a lot of really bad behavior. Stuff like "I don't mind be called [slur], so I should be able to call other people [slur]." It can, as I mentioned lead to people's motivations and honesty being questioned. "It wouldn't bother me, so you shouldn't be so sensitive." Stuff like that.

I feel like that's a fundamental and possibly willful misunderstanding/misapplication of the Golden Rule--on the part of people who would say that, not on yours. It's focusing too much on the narrow specifics and not enough on the actual underlying principle.

 

[Eltab]

I mean sure, but the Golden Rule can be used to excuse a lot of really bad behavior. Stuff like "I don't mind be called [slur], so I should be able to call other people [slur]." It can, as I mentioned lead to people's motivations and honesty being questioned. "It wouldn't bother me, so you shouldn't be so sensitive." Stuff like that.

That might be called The Iron Pyrite* Rule.
I cannot off the top of my head think of any moral / ethical teaching that would consider the example to be within the letter or the spirit of the Golden Rule's principle.

* fool's gold

 

[dave2008]

After seven years of 5E I'm longing to have something even minorly negative happen to a character of mine.

Goodness, you must have a gentle DM. I consider myself pretty soft, but I smack the PCs around at least every other session or so.

 

[dave2008]

I've never needed anything like this, but then again I have been gaming with my group for 30+ years!

 

[overgeeked]

I've never needed anything like this, but then again I have been gaming with my group for 30+ years!

One of the groups I've played with the longest, around 37 years now, is the one that makes me want safety tools the most. Due to familiarity people assume they know what other people like and don't like, what their lines and veils are. Assuming that you know the people at your table that well can lead to a lot of problems. Much better to actually have the conversation.

 

[dave2008]

Much better to actually have the conversation.

That is my point, we have been having the conversation for 30+ years. What is interesting is those lines and veils change over time too. It is not a conversation you can have once and then forget about. Mostly notably for me, my perspective on some of these changed after I had children.