What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Autumnal]

All history is not created equal. This is crucial in making assessments. I hope that none of you would knowingly run a game for someone you know was abused that featured massive institutional child abuse. One of my parents has Alzheimer’s, and I can’t watch The Taking Of Deborah Logan; I don’t expect that I’ll ever be able to include Alzheimer’s in my gaming. All kinds of thing warrant some consultation in circumstances that make it easy for someone who wants or need to say no to tell you so, and not to have to make any elaborate justifications for it. This is respect for the specific people you’re gaming with and the complexities of their particular lives.

 

[Fenris-77]

All history is not created equal. This is crucial in making assessments. I hope that none of you would knowingly run a game for someone you know was abused that featured massive institutional child abuse. One of my parents has Alzheimer’s, and I can’t watch The Taking Of Deborah Logan; I don’t expect that I’ll ever be able to include Alzheimer’s in my gaming. All kinds of thing warrant some consultation in circumstances that make it easy for someone who wants or need to say no to tell you so, and not to have to make any elaborate justifications for it. This is respect for the specific people you’re gaming with and the complexities of their particular lives.

At no point did I think we were talking about abusing the experiences of specific players at our tables. I think anyone with any sense and even a modicum of empathy would agree that that's pretty awful. However, that is very different from needing to sanitize every game of every element that might possibly upset someone.

It's also true that if I had a gaming friend with a troubling history with X, whatever X is, and I wanted to run a game that featured X, I would run it, I just wouldn't invite that player to play in it. Well, actually that's not true, I would actually probably give them first crack at playing, even if I thought there's no way they would want to. Not in an insensitive way, but to treat them like an adult that can make their own decisions about things like that.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I'm generally in the no holds barred camp, as far as admitting to the existence of the full spectrum of human prejudice, cruelty and depravity; but avoidant of explicit descriptions, wary of sensationalism and titillation etc. At least in my own games.

But I'm not sure that the D&D rules are the best vehicle to address complex issues in a mature, considered way, and efforts in previous editions have largely failed. I think this absence is a feature of a system which is "a medieval-themed game environment," to paraphrase a 3E book.

Ultimately, I view an avoidance of "problematic" elements as a verisimilitude compromise similar to why don't wizards rule the world?, or how did that dragon get down here?. You can justify the compromise in-game; you can make a world where there is no compromise; or you can shrug, and get on with the game without worrying too much about it - I think each approach has its merits, depending on the audience and the tone you want.

Also, as a practical financial matter, I think RPG authors need to be sensitive to the prevailing social climate and wary of where the shifting moral lens is focused: I say that without animus as a staunch postmodernist who is generally in favor of a constant re-examination of our basic conceits.

 

[Autumnal]

@Fenris-77 - the part I, er, didn’t get to is that we don’t know all of what will strike personally. I’ve seen Black and Native American friends who knew without any doubts they slavery was part of their history develop fresh gutted feelings after doing significant genealogical research and being able to point at specific things in the modern day stolen from their family and usually then lied about. It’s not uncommon for carrefivers to become extra sensitive about stuff affecting those they’ve cared for, but others may not know that were ever in such a situation. And of course traumatic instigators can create wildly different reactions in different people, because no kidding, our minds are barrels of over-caffeinated monkeys.

So stuff that might seem obviously part of humanity’s screwed-up legacy but not painfully personal to me may be nothing like that at all to you, and I’d better check and assume as little as possible.

 

[Bagpuss]

Without literature and fiction to teach us things beyond our own time and place and comfort and culture, we can easy end up with only libraries containing nonfiction sections like the Sarajevo National Library in August 1992.

Not entirely sure what point you were trying to make with image without much context. The burning of the Sarajevo Library in 1992 was one of the worst acts of cultural genocide. Several people lost their lives trying to save books from the burning library while under sniper fire. I guess it shows how important it is preserve history, and the efforts others will go to destroy it.

 

[Teo Twawki]

Not entirely sure what point you were trying to make with image without much context.

The context is all right there. All that is left from dismissing literature that is disliked or uncomfortable is the ashes of a former library.
It's a bit like the difference between Orwell's vision of dystopia and Huxley's... Orwell showed us his fear of a culture where reading was not allowed by the ruling hegemony. Huxley showed us his fear of a citizenry who didn't want to read. Which one are we actually closer to in this regard?

The burning of the Sarajevo Library in 1992 was one of the worst acts of cultural genocide. Several people lost their lives trying to save books from the burning library while under sniper fire. I guess it shows how important it is preserve history, and the efforts others will go to destroy it.

I know. I was there.
Preserving history as it was is essential to learning from it.
And then for many people, quite often, to ignore those lessons.

 

[Teo Twawki]

I'm generally in the no holds barred camp, as far as admitting to the existence of the full spectrum of human prejudice, cruelty and depravity; but avoidant of explicit descriptions, wary of sensationalism and titillation etc. At least in my own games.

To some degree or another, this is among the best methods of dealing with such matters.

In our long-running T2k game, noting the existence of certain camps where some militant group hold people en masse is plenty for the suggestion of what happens in such camps. We world-weathered players all understand the context. The suggestive inclusion in the game is a stark reminder to the characters the risks of the world in which they walk. And the stakes of independent survival. To detail it, to speak of the reality of what happens in such a camp, makes it lose its purpose in the fictional game. Unspeakable horror. And, in the horror story genre, seeing the monster is often the end of being afraid of it.

But to not include mention of places like that--in such a fictional setting as a game like T2k--would be a disservice to the authenticity of what can be taught and learned from it. Personally, if a game (or book or movie or song or artwork or spoken story) cannot potentially teach me something, I have little use for it in my life.

 

[John R Davis]

I guess gaming is a good way to explore these difficult subjects. For the most part you would hope the party would rail against the difficult thing. In a sensitive way if possible. Unfortunately, as often, their will be a minority that ruins it.
If you want to play a differently coloured samurai, Mohican, pirate, Victorian gentry then that's ok. It is likely you got to that point through an unpleasant route.
These topics need to be discussed and " play" is often a safe and interactive way to do this
There are lots indie games that confront these issues

 

[Lanefan]

Do you scrub your world of slavery and other historical crimes?

Generally no, with the exception of forced sexual assault.

If so, how do you encourage heroism?

I don't. The players can play what they want to play; and if they play heroes that's fine, and if they play not-heroes that's fine too.

If not, what do you do to mitigate the real potential discomfort such subjects can cause? Do you make different decisions based on the specific game or setting?

These days I only run one game and setting, and it is what it is. My hope and expectation, somewhat harsh though it may be, is that people will leave their hangups, egos, bad days at the office, etc. at the door when they arrive at the session, and spend the time relaxing and enjoying the game absent all those real-life downers, while recognizing that in the end, it's all in fun.

Do you run historical games, and if so do you "soften" history to make it palatable?

I run what I run, based somewhat on faux-history (or pop-culture versions of history - Herc-Xena for the win!) mashups, warts and all. I don't try for historical accuracy, but I don't paint things over either. Hang around long enough and at some point or other in my game you're pretty much certain to encounter slavery, colonialism, genocide, torture, mind control, racism, various other -isms, and any number of other things seen as unpleasant in the real world; and it's up to the players-as-characters to decide whether to fight these things, or join in, or just walk away.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Do you scrub your world of slavery and other historical crimes? If so, how do you encourage heroism? If not, what do you do to mitigate the real potential discomfort such subjects can cause? Do you make different decisions based on the specific game or setting? Do you run historical games, and if so do you "soften" history to make it palatable?

No. In fact, I‘ve based some elements of certain campaigns on RW events.

What I don’t do (to the best of my ability) is rely on negative stereotypes, whitewashed narratives, and the like. If I’m borrowing from RW bigoted propaganda, it’s made clear that this is a tool of bad NPCs.

And believe me, my record on this NOT perfect. I’ve messed up in the past, and I’ll probably do so in the future. When I get called out for doing it wrong, I listen.