What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Thourne]

I hope not. It sounds very interesting, but I generally can't get behind narrative systems.

And that is all good
I like all kinds of systems. I just apply different ones at different times to different scenarios.
The right system for you and your table is the one you have fun playing. Full stop

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Panic attacks are terrible. I suffered from them for years and they are something I do not wish on even my worst enemy (I think until you have experienced one it is difficult to understand how they feel). I also went years suffering from them, not realizing it was due to PTSD. That said, I do think we have to be very careful here about shaping the world or our entertainment around potential triggers. They are not easy to anticipate and they are rarely concrete (not everyone is triggered by the presence of a clear sign or topic for example, it could be the product of a chain of thoughts that are impossible to anticipate and begin with something fairly benign). I think this is something that really needs to be taken case by case. When I was suffering through this, it would have been impossible for me to expect my group to have to work around what was going on with me, so I stopped gaming for a bit, or when I did feel I could game, I played and if I started to feel a problem come on, I would politely leave (in one instance I actually left to go to the emergency room). One thing that can happen when you are experiencing this is you start imposing what is going on with you, on others.

For instance, when this first started happening to me, I couldn't deal with any dark topics on television, in movies, etc. Now I grew up loving dark and violent shows, and horror was my favorite genre, so this was pretty discomforting. I was recuperating staying with family and there was one TV. It would have been discourteous of me to expect everyone to change their viewing habits around myself. So I would leave the room if people wanted to watch something more intense. One thing I know would not have helped me though was people working too much around what triggered me because that would have made it all too easy not to address the issues and start learning to be comfortable with the things that were causing the feeling of panic. There is no one size fits all, but I think on this topic, especially in the gaming community, we think there is one clear answer to this issue and there just isn't. For me the experience has made me very wary of things like trigger warnings and safety tools in RPGs (I do think if something comes up or you have a problem in your group it needs to be handled compassionately, but I am very skeptical of the effect these tools will have-----at the very least I think they would have done more harm to me).

This is why the X-card, specifically, is so beneficial, though.

You don't have to "shape" stuff beforehand and try and anticipate every possible situation. And it's less disruptive to the game than you having to leave. It also makes people feel less bad.

I think a lot of people "skeptical" of it just don't really understand it, or are put off by what they misperceive as "woke" language or the like. I mean, you can get more detailed descriptions, but the principle is simple.

1. There's a card with an X on it on the table.

2. If you're upset by what's going on, you tap the card.

3. At this point, you can explain if you want, and most people do, but you're not required - it's usually best to indicate the topic/incident causing it at least though, if it's anything but obvious.

4. The DM works out what to do - usually with some discussion with the player who tapped it - if it's a situation, that in-fiction is occurring, maybe you skip to past it. If it's a description of something, you stop the description, and so on.

That's basically all. It's very simple and easy to use.

X-Card by John Stavropoulos

Safety Tools for Simulations and Role-Playing Games by John Stavropoulos Want to use the X-Card in your published work? You can! The X-Card is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) License. Your work may be published under any license. Simply cr...

docs.google.com

Goes into more detail (but is still short). Read the FAQ before objecting I'd suggest. I see there's also an O-card some people use, which means the opposite - i.e. "This rocks/more of this".

In your example, D&D I think normally isn't particularly "dark", but sometimes bits of adventures are randomly super-dark, and you could tap the card to sort of fast-forward through those bits or whatever. It's not likely to harm the experience for others (indeed most people feel good about it, they're helping a bud), and it prevents anyone having to leave or whatever. It's also got a much lower load on everyone involved than more complicated tools like Lines and Veils and stuff (which also can be embarrassing to the person involved in a way this typically isn't).

 

[Maxperson]

The thing is.... we aren't talking about a history book or a documentary. How is not including it as setting dressing in an imaginary elf game "covering it up"... especially when very few people are going to roleplay the realities of slavery and the effects it had on the people who experienced it as well as their descendants.

You can't have it both ways, though. If removing it from an imaginary elf game isn't "covering it up," then putting it into an imaginary elf game isn't "supporting it" or really even "including it."

In fact there is the very real possibility that because it's a milquetoast version of what real slavery entailed people come away feeling like slavery really wasn't THAT bad...

No. No rational person will come away feeling like that, and irrational people aren't going to need slavery in or out of an imaginary elf game in order to feel irrationally about slavery.

There's already a push in U.S. to very much do this in history books and this is the real disservice and dismissal of those who experienced it.

And this is a pretty large False Equivalence. Imaginary elf books are not even remotely close to being the same as history books. People look to history books to learn what the past was like. They do not do so for imaginary elf books.

 

[Raunalyn]

This doesn't really address my post. I'm not arguing that slavery be removed from Dark Sun but appealing to "our past" and learning from it as a justification doesn't really hold much water IMO.

I was specifically talking about Dark Sun in my original post.

And @Maxperson did a pretty good job of summing up my feelings on the matter.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

In fact there is the very real possibility that because it's a milquetoast version of what real slavery entailed people come away feeling like slavery really wasn't THAT bad... There's already a push in U.S. to very much do this in history books and this is the real disservice and dismissal of those who experienced it.

Given how many different forms of slavery or quasi-slavery have existed through human history, anyone who offended by there being what they perceive as a "milquetoast version of slavery" in a fantasy setting, on the grounds that it's "not bad enough" is being censorious and profoundly ignorant in precisely the same way as the people who want to edit the history books to make slavery seem less bad (obviously their ignorance is less harmful than the history book people, but it's same mindset).

And there are absolutely people who consider themselves educated who are in fact that ignorant and censorious. Which is sad but there we are.

I mean, indentured servitude and serfdom, are, in some people's eyes "a milquetoast version of slavery", but they've been common throughout history. If someone is offended by a fantasy setting have indentured servitude or serfdom and that person feels this is an attempt to "cheapen" chattel slavery, they are, frankly, an ignoramus at absolute best.

Now, there's a stark difference is the setting is historical, or extremely close to historical, I'd note (i.e. Deadlands close). If you have the USA and suddenly all enslaved people were all indentured servants, not slaves, that's obviously extremely messed-up. But in a full-on fantasy setting? Come on.

(Obviously if you feature chattel slavery but everyone is terribly nice about it, and you try and make it look nice, that is messed-up too, but that's not something anyone has suggested AFAIK.)

 

[Imaro]

You can't have it both ways, though. If removing it from an imaginary elf game isn't "covering it up," then putting it into an imaginary elf game isn't "supporting it" or really even "including it."

Wait...what? I haven't argued putting slavery into an rpg is "supporting" slavery... I don't think anyone has made that particular argument. I think putting slavery into an rpg is including it... taking it out is excluding it. Covering something up is hiding that it exists...

No. No rational person will come away feeling like that, and irrational people aren't going to need slavery in or out of an imaginary elf game in order to feel irrationally about slavery.

There are literallyu people who argue the holocaust never happened. That blacks/african-americans were enlightened by being enslaved (one poster in this very thread came dangerously close to inferring this). My nephew goes to a private school and when his class was asked to analyze and article about slavery, had to sit through some of his classmates explaining the "benefits" of slavery because the teacher didn't specify the assignment should be approached from an anti-slavery perspective (Yeah, who would've thought that needed to be explicitly stated but there you go).

It doesn't matter whether you consider these people "irrational" or not but I don't subscribe to the notion of... Hey he was going to find a way to shoot someone regardless of whether we provided ammo or not. that's what your statement above amounts to IMO.

And this is a pretty large False Equivalence. Imaginary elf books are not even remotely close to being the same as history books. People look to history books to learn what the past was like. They do not do so for imaginary elf books.

So then why equate them with statements like not including slavery is a disservice to those who experienced it. you can't have it both ways.

 

[Imaro]

Given how many different forms of slavery or quasi-slavery have existed through human history, anyone who offended by there being what they perceive as a "milquetoast version of slavery" in a fantasy setting, on the grounds that it's "not bad enough" is being censorious and profoundly ignorant in precisely the same way as the people who want to edit the history books to make slavery seem less bad (obviously their ignorance is less harmful than the history book people, but it's same mindset).

We are talking to the most modern incarnations if we are actually talking about those who could be offended on the basis of having experienced it or living through it's immediate consequences...

And there are absolutely people who consider themselves educated who are in fact that ignorant and censorious. Which is sad but there we are.

I mean, indentured servitude and serfdom, are, in some people's eyes "a milquetoast version of slavery", but they've been common throughout history. If someone is offended by a fantasy setting have indentured servitude or serfdom and that person feels this is an attempt to "cheapen" chattel slavery, they are, frankly, an ignoramus at absolute best.

No, Lol... there is a page long discourse in this very thread about the differences. Please don't mix what I am talking about with something that did historically exist and some people are claiming was something else. I'm not making that argument so it doesn't really apply to what I am talking to.

Now, there's a stark difference is the setting is historical, or extremely close to historical, I'd note (i.e. Deadlands close). If you have the USA and suddenly all enslaved people were all indentured servants, not slaves, that's obviously extremely messed-up. But in a full-on fantasy setting? Come on.

So removing slavery from Dark Sun is dismissive to those who were enslaved, but it's a fantasy world so it shouldn't be dismissive to those who have been enslaved if it was removed... right? Or am I getting this wrong?

So there's a difference in a historical setting, which I find interesting since most major historical settings (though admittedly there are a few that touch on it in a more in depth manner) do find a way to only pay lip service to, remove or leave out slavery, discrimination, etc.... Deadlands, Call of Cthulhu, Kerberos Club, and so on. I wonder why that is.

 

[Thourne]

Wait...what? I haven't argued putting slavery into an rpg is "supporting" slavery... I don't think anyone has made that particular argument. I think putting slavery into an rpg is including it... taking it out is excluding it. Covering something up is hiding that it exists...

Quite fortunately, I am happy to say I do not believe anyone involved in this thread has been in support of slavery.
Most have even gone out of their way to clearly state such.
I imagine the thread would be entirely something else if that were not the case.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Quite fortunately, I am happy to say I do not believe anyone involved in this thread has been in support of slavery.
Most have even gone out of their way to clearly state such.
I imagine the thread would be entirely something else if that were not the case.

You pretty much have to go out of your way when you're talking about this stuff. Otherwise, people seem to assume the worst. That's the world we live in.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

We are talking to the most modern incarnations if we are actually talking about those who could be offended on the basis of having experienced it or living through it's immediate consequences...

When do you think indentured servitude and serfdom ended, exactly?

So removing slavery from Dark Sun is dismissive to those who were enslaved (but it's a fantasy world so so it shouldn't be dismissive to those who have been enslaved if it was removed... right? Or am I getting this wrong?

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to be confusing what I'm saying with a totally different poster. Bizarre.

I'm saying replacing the chattel slavery of older Dark Sun, with, say, indentured servitude or serfdom would not be a problem. Your "milquetoast version of slavery" stuff seems to suggest it would be. Or is that not what you mean?

So there's a difference in a historical setting, which I find interesting since most major historical settings (though admittedly there are a few that touch on it) do find a way to only pay lip service to, remove or leave out slavery, discrimination, etc.... Deadlands, Call of Cthulhu, Kerberos Club, and so on. I wonder why that is.

This is a weird thing to say, frankly.

CoC's earliest setting is the 1890s, and in my experience most people play 1930s. I don't think either tries to act like slavery never happened, but your language is so vague here's it's impossible to understand what exactly you're concerned about.

Deadlands I have to admit I don't remember what it does, but I thought it was post-Civil War. It's been nearly 20 years since I last played it. I was under the impression it didn't pretend slavery didn't happen, but just said "Yo, being racist towards non-white PCs makes the game worse, not better" (which did of course offend a few idiots who were looking to do a racism and have it excused by the setting). But I'm not a Deadlands lore buff so I may be missing something.

I've literally never heard of Kerberos Club so the idea that it's a "major historical setting" seems completely bizarre.

Personally I am extremely skeptical of historical settings in the 1800s largely because they downplay virtually all social ills, not just slavery. There was an absolute nightmare array of crap going on in that era particularly, especially to anyone who wasn't a rich, white, male and straight (in that order of importance), and yeah I do think it is messed-up when we have all these games which are allegedly set in "the real world + magic" in the 1800s but suddenly it's all just a pretty backdrop and nothing actually-horrible is going on and so on.

It's one of the grossest things about Steampunk generally - it's obsessed with 1800s stuff, but despite the "punk", ignores the incredible social ills of the period in favour of rich wankers having jolly adventures.

As a result I just don't play games set in that period anymore.

 

[Thourne]

When do you think indentured servitude and serfdom ended, exactly?

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to be confusing what I'm saying with a totally different poster. Bizarre.

I'm saying replacing the chattel slavery of older Dark Sun, with, say, indentured servitude or serfdom would not be a problem. Your "milquetoast version of slavery" stuff seems to suggest it would be. Or is that not what you mean?

This is a weird thing to say, frankly.

CoC's earliest setting is the 1890s, and in my experience most people play 1930s. I don't think either tries to act like slavery never happened, but your language is so vague here's it's impossible to understand what exactly you're concerned about.

Deadlands I have to admit I don't remember what it does, but I thought it was post-Civil War. It's been nearly 20 years since I last played it. I was under the impression it didn't pretend slavery didn't happen, but just said "Yo, being racist towards non-white PCs makes the game worse, not better". But I'm not a Deadlands lore buff so I may be missing something.

I've literally never heard of Kerberos Club so the idea that it's a "major historical setting" seems completely bizarre.

Personally I am extremely skeptical of historical settings in the 1800s largely because they downplay virtually all social ills, not just slavery. There was an absolute nightmare array of naughty word going on in that era particularly, especially to anyone who wasn't a rich, white, male and straight, and yeah I do think it is naughty word-up when we have all these games which are allegedly set in "the real world + magic" in the 1800s but suddenly it's all just a pretty backdrop and nothing actually-horrible is going on and so on.

It's one of the grossest things about Steampunk generally - it's obsessed with 1800s stuff, but despite the "punk", ignores the incredible social ills of the period in favour of rich wankers having jolly adventures.

As a result I just don't play games set in that period anymore.

On CoC we play mostly gaslight and 20s but yah most do play 30s or modern.

Deadlands was post war and basically tried to pave over the bad stuff, but was called out and corrected.

Kerberos Club was, by memory, Victorian Supers.

I hope that helps

On the Victorian, honestly I think people get lost in the architecture, clothing and analog tech and don't even bother learning anything.

 

[Thourne]

Honestly I have one huge issue with the Victorian period, that isn't much talked about. Also, likely just a personal pet peeve .
It comes down to the combination of photograhpy and cheap print coming togther to show an image of the world. That has lead to most of the "it is the way we always did things" set in most peoples minds to actually be nothing more than the way some people started doing them in that period.

 

[Maxperson]

Wait...what? I haven't argued putting slavery into an rpg is "supporting" slavery... I don't think anyone has made that particular argument. I think putting slavery into an rpg is including it... taking it out is excluding it. Covering something up is hiding that it exists...

The argument has been made in this thread.

There are literallyu people who argue the holocaust never happened. That blacks/african-americans were enlightened by being enslaved (one poster in this very thread came dangerously close to inferring this). My nephew goes to a private school and when his class was asked to analyze and article about slavery, had to sit through some of his classmates explaining the "benefits" of slavery because the teacher didn't specify the assignment should be approached from an anti-slavery perspective (Yeah, who would've thought that needed to be explicitly stated but there you go).

It doesn't matter whether you consider these people "irrational" or not but I don't subscribe to the notion of... Hey he was going to find a way to shoot someone regardless of whether we provided ammo or not. that's what your statement above amounts to IMO.

Yes. All of that is true. It doesn't come from RPGs, though. Inclusion of slavery in an RPG doesn't encourage, support or make light of real slavery. It's not going to cause people to think that real world slavery "wasn't that bad."

So then why equate them with statements like not including slavery is a disservice to those who experienced it. you can't have it both ways.

I don't. I have never argued here or in any other thread that not including it is a disservice to those whose ancestors experienced it. As you mentioned, this is an imaginary elf game. Imaginary slavery in an imaginary elf game isn't in any way about real world slavery.

 

[Thourne]

I don't. I have never argued here or in any other thread that not including it is a disservice to those whose ancestors experienced it. As you mentioned, this is an imaginary elf game. Imaginary slavery in an imaginary elf game isn't in any way about real world slavery.

Just want to point out that neither have I.
I expressed what I believe another poster meant up thread but it was not my assertion.
Just to clarify.

 

[Maxperson]

Quite fortunately, I am happy to say I do not believe anyone involved in this thread has been in support of slavery.
Most have even gone out of their way to clearly state such.
I imagine the thread would be entirely something else if that were not the case.

No. No one has supported slavery, but someone did argue that putting slavery into the Dark Sun setting would be WotC supporting it.

 

[Thourne]

No. No one has supported slavery, but someone did argue that putting slavery into the Dark Sun setting would be WotC supporting it.

Missed that one.

 

[Maxperson]

Missed that one.

They might not have meant it like that, but the comment was along the lines of, "WotC doesn't want to support slavery by putting it into Dark Sun." And it was said a few times.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It's not going to cause people to think that real world slavery "wasn't that bad."

I think there are situations in which it could, but there are also ways to counteract that.

Specifically if you had a system which was clearly chattel slavery - i.e. people owned for life, their children born into slavery, etc. - but which was spun positively, and where the setting bore similarities to the real world, that would definitely help some people to think RL slavery "wasn't that bad", esp. as teaching about RL slavery in places like the US is further degraded by creepy laws and so on.

So I think care needs to be taken with chattel slavery as a significant setting element. I don't think you can just slap it in and not think about it. If you do include it, I think it's worth including some kind of sidebar about why and noting that how it operates in your setting is not necessarily indicative of real-world stuff - esp. as it's likely some players/readers will be children.

 

[Thourne]

They might not have meant it like that, but the comment was along the lines of, "WotC doesn't want to support slavery by putting it into Dark Sun." And it was said a few times.

Ah ok, I thought they mean support the inclusion, but I believe I know what you are referencing now.

 

[Thourne]

I think there are situations in which it could, but there are also ways to counteract that.

Specifically if you had a system which was clearly chattel slavery - i.e. people owned for life, their children born into slavery, etc. - but which was spun really positively, and where the setting bore similarities to the real world, that would definitely help some people to think RL slavery "wasn't that bad", esp. as teaching about RL slavery in places like the US is further degraded by creepy laws and so on.

So I think care needs to be taken with chattel slavery as a significant setting element. I don't think you can just slap it in and not think about it. If you do include it, I think it's worth including some kind of sidebar about why and noting that how it operates in your setting is not necessarily indicative of real-world stuff - esp. as it's likely some players/readers will be children.

Text is tricky for tone. Bad editing can make it even worse and with printed texts you just can't respond with appropriate agility.
I very much get what you mean.