RPG Writer Zak S Accused Of Abusive Behaviour

RPG writer Zak S (aka Zak Smith, Zak Sabbath) has been accused by multiple women of abusive behaviour in a public Facebook post by his ex-partner, and two other women.

Photo from Wikipedia​

Zak Smith appeared in the video series I Hit It With My Axe, and is known for the Playing D&D With Porn Stars blog. He has also written several RPG books, most recently for Lamentations of the Flame Princess, consulted on the D&D 5th Edition Player's Handbook, has won multiple ENnies, and recently worked for White Wolf. As yet, he hasn't made any public response to the accusations.

Since then, another ex-partner of Zak Smith, Vivka Grey, has publicly come forward with a further account of his conduct.

This isn't the first time that Zak Smith has been accused of inappropriate behaviour (language warning in that link). The Facebook post, which was posted overnight, has been shared widely on social media, and takes the form of an open letter (linked above; it makes for unpleasant reading, so please be aware of that if you choose to read it).

The industry has been reacting to the news. Amongst many others:

• DriveThruRPG has stated that it will sell no future works by Zak Smith.
• Veteran author Ken Hite has announced that he will not work with or share credits with Zak Smith again.
• The Gauntlet blog and podcast will no longer cover Zak S or his publications, or attend conventions that he is permitted at.
• WotC's Mike Mearls has noted that they have not engaged with Zak S since he worked for them as a consultant on 5E, although a previous statement from him in 2014 takes a different stance. However, D&D Beyond has now removed all the consultant credits (not just Zak S) from its online version of the book.
• UPDATE - WotC has now made a longer statement and will be removing Zak S from the credits of future printings of the Player's Handbook.
• Gen Con has tweeted a brief statement which says it has investigated, but the results are confidential. It has bene stated by various industry insiders that Zak S has, in fact, been banned from Gen Con, but the convention isn't saying so publicly.

I believe Mandy, Jennifer, Hannah, and Vivka. It must be terrifying to come forward like this. They have been put through horrible ordeals. I will not cover Zak’s work on this site, in my podcast, or elsewhere, and will not provide him with any kind of platform.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

Whether ENies are given to the creator or the work, rescinding an award because of behaviour we wish to censure is a legitimate means of ensuring better behaviour in the community.

If you want to work in this industry (or any industry, really), and hope to be recognized, respected, and awarded for your work, you better not behave in ways that are not acceptable.

This.

So very much this.

 

[Yunru]

Again, because you seem to somehow keep missing this point:

The ENnies are voted on by fans. These fans are not sampled by the awards process itself so that the voting base is demographically vetted in any way, including which of the products they've been exposed to.

It is literally a popularity contest more than it is a merit contest. Merit comes in to play with the hope that it is the reason why the products being voted on became popular in the first place.

The votes are being made by people who are voting for what they personally like best from among a selection of products that, in all likelihood for most voters, are not all possessed and have even been looked at in their entirety (or at all.)

The the Ennie is worthless anyway, and it's removal or not does nothing. (In which case sure, remove it to distance yourself, there's no integrity to keep.)

And in response to other posts: Yes, I'm a firm believer that a rapist who is a renowned artist should be remember as both a rapist and a renowned artist. There should be no censoring because of morality. People should be known for their acts, both good and bad.

 

[Gradine]

And?
None of what I've argued affects how anyone treats him one iota.
I'm not arguing against reprisals, I'm arguing against reprisals against the wrong thing (his works).

You cannot separate the man's works from his person, especially because support for his work directly supports him personally. This includes:

*Buying his work (money goes directly to Zak)
*Promoting his work (convinces others to buy his work -> see above)
*Reviewing his work (convinces others to buy his work -> see above)
*Celebrating or awarding his work (you get the picture)

Again, as much as you'd like to pretend that you can, you simply cannot separate the man from his works.

 

[Yunru]

You cannot separate the man's works from his person, especially because support for his work directly supports him personally. This includes:

*Buying his work (money goes directly to Zak)
*Promoting his work (convinces others to buy his work -> see above)
*Reviewing his work (convinces others to buy his work -> see above)
*Celebrating or awarding his work (you get the picture)

Again, as much as you'd like to pretend that you can, you simply cannot separate the man from his works.

I guess we shouldn't pay our politicians then.

 

[Gradine]

I guess we shouldn't pay our politicians then.

...what?

 

[Yunru]

...what?

What? You just said that you can't separate a person from their works, and that we shouldn't support people if they behave in a manner that doesn't agree with our morals.

Therefore we shouldn't pay politicians.

 

[Gradine]

What? You just said that you can't separate a person from their works, and that we shouldn't support people if they behave in a manner that doesn't agree with our morals.

Therefore we shouldn't pay politicians.

I very much do not support politicians who behave in a manner that doesn't agree with my morals. Do you often find yourself donating to the campaigns of politicians whose values you disagree with and whose morals and ethics you find questionable/objectionable that you think that this is somehow a counter argument?

 

[Immortal Sun]

I guess we shouldn't pay our politicians then.

Well, from a political perspective, governmental service should be a service similar to jury duty. It's generally unhealthy for society to make being a politician a "job" especially a well-paid one.

But beyond that, your argument doesn't really track.

 

[Steve Conan Trustrum]

The the Ennie is worthless anyway, and it's removal or not does nothing. (In which case sure, remove it to distance yourself, there's no integrity to keep.)

If it's removal or not does nothing, why are you so concerned about its removal?

And in response to other posts: Yes, I'm a firm believer that a rapist who is a renowned artist should be remember as both a rapist and a renowned artist. There should be no censoring because of morality. People should be known for their acts, both good and bad.

If he has his award taken away, he'll still be known. Hell, he'll even be known MORE because he'll be the guy who had his award taken away. Increased exposure for him, hurray! You should be happy for that, no?

The difference is -- and the place where you're having both a logical and a moral disconnect (for increasingly clear reasons) -- is that letting him keep the award sends a positive message about Zak's negative actions.

 

[Yunru]

I very much do not support politicians who behave in a manner that doesn't agree with my morals. Do you often find yourself donating to the campaigns of politicians whose values you disagree with and whose morals and ethics you find questionable/objectionable that you think that this is somehow a counter argument?

I often find myself without a choice as they seem to be the ones in power.

And no, it's not a counter-argument, it's an attempt to inject humour.