TheRPGSite

Check it out: Sean K. Reynolds has responded to some of the criticism of Monte Cook Games' 20-page manifesto on "Consent in RPGs". Here's my response to his comments, and how this debate reflects the core larger debate of the Culture War.

[video=youtube_share;fUNrM46a9CA]https://youtu.be/fUNrM46a9CA [/youtube]

Well I don't disagree, even if my own comments to SKR were a lot more even-toned!]

BTW it's 13 pages not 20. Had to download it again just to check!

Personally I suspect this is all a cunning plan by Monte to build up his customer database...

I'm wondering if all the people saying "it's optional, you don't need to use it" are going to pretend to be surprised when GenCon requires every GM running a game to use something like this.

It's optional to go to GenCon, shitlord. If you don't like it, build your own game convention.

Three things.

First, you're echoing a lot here what I said about the x-card - so I have to agree. I'd like frame it a little differently though: normally the GM is responsible for running the game and keeping things on track. That means he is also responsible for balancing out any conflicting interests of participants (arachnophobia versus drow campaign). What I am seeing in the x-card (and probably also the consent form) is an attempt to err on the side of caution by giving each participant a veto right. While well-intentioned it opens up a potential new aventue for abuse. And that, in short, is why I reject this new model  and remain in favor of the GM being the final arbiter of things. And walking out if you're not liking how things are being handled by him has always been an option, I don't think anyone needs to be reminded of that. (But if the underlying intention is to give insecure people enough confidence to actually take that step of walking out, I'm fine with that message.)

So, in short, the effort to remove any insecurity over the GM being in charge of the game falls short. Instead, interests need to be balanced on a case-by-case basis. X-cards and consent forms don't do the necessary individual balancing act and therefore are failed attempts at improving the game.

Secondly, writers, filmmakers, comic book authors don't put up a lot of information what to expect from their creative works in advance either. You quickly get a sense what to expect in Game of Thrones but not much advance warning. In RPGs, it should be enough to give a quick campaign outline and maybe something like "18+ content". You have no right for more information from me just because I don't have the same clout as HBO.

Thirdly, I think you may have it a bit backwards about destroying western norms, Pundy. This isn't the goal; it's means to an end. Remember what I said about the left's Robin Hood syndrome? Muslims are the "intended" victims (as in: intended for the victim role), the poor downtrodden widows and orphans, while western conservatives are intended for the role of the Sheriff of Nottingham. That's why whatever wrong muslims do gets rationalized whereas the same thing coming from a western conservative is an act of pure evil. Indeed proof that conservatives are evil by nature.

The end goal is to feel both intellectually and ethically superior your conservative neighbor (or rather those stinking smalltown USA peasants). Destroying western civilization is just means to an end, the end being feeling a hero for saving innocent people from oppression by the evil conservatives. Or the dying planet from evil businessmen,
It's my working hypothesis that they take it to such extremes because most of them see no realistic pathway to a sense of superiority within the system.

"All of us are weird in one way or another" Especially true among those of us who genuinely partake in geek culture in one venue or the other. :D

Quote from: Melan;1105072It's optional to go to GenCon, shitlord. If you don't like it, build your own game convention.

Yes, GenCon and GaryCon are both completely optional.  Not mandatory in the slightest.  In light of the current freak culture, I have zero interest in attending.

Quote from: Melan;1105072It's optional to go to GenCon, shitlord. If you don't like it, build your own game convention.

You jest but this will be soon a necessity. To build non partisan non political conventions and to make them anti-fragile to a take over by the fun police (from either side of the political spectrum)

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105178You jest but this will be soon a necessity. To build non partisan non political conventions and to make them anti-fragile to a take over by the fun police (from either side of the political spectrum)

If I ever start a convention, I can imagine the press conference.

"What are you doing to ensure that con goers are both physically and emotionally safe?"
"Open carry is both allowed and encouraged. You can see the safety, or you can be the safety. Preferably both. Next?"

Quote from: GeekEclectic;1105286If I ever start a convention, I can imagine the press conference.

"What are you doing to ensure that con goers are both physically and emotionally safe?"
"Open carry is both allowed and encouraged. You can see the safety, or you can be the safety. Preferably both. Next?"

And their heads would explode.

Quote from: Melan;1105072It's optional to go to GenCon, shitlord. If you don't like it, build your own game convention.

You mean like Garycon, which was then also taken over by SJWs and purged of their ideological enemies?

RPGs are neither sane nor consentual, (but what truly is sane?). :mad: Hardcore old skool! They are pretty safe, tho, as Let's Pretend generally is. :o (Unless one is not sane... :eek: oh no, I think I found the paradox! /winks out into The Safe Space!)

You know every day I am agreeing with Raging Golden Eagle.  These SJWs just want to destroy everything and once they do we need to keep them out of the newly resurrected hobbies.

Hey Pundit, I had not listened to any of your podcast before, (I don't normally listen to any podcasts by anyone, they are too time consuming.) but if you turned all of your podcasts into blog posts, then I would be inclined to read them all.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. Your points about the abnormal vs the normal are very apt. Mentally ill people need to get help, not come insist that they rest of us enable their mental illness.

Everyone typically gives short shrift to mental health and that short shrift has led directly to our PC left wing world where more and more the mentally ill are in charge and making the rules. I don't remember who said it, but paraphrasing, it was something along the lines of "Never allow anyone who wants to be in a position of authority/power to be given any authority/power, because the mere fact that someone wants authority/power is proof that it is not safe for them to be given authority/power."

I posted this in the other Monte Cuck threads, but it bears repeating.

If you want more "Consent in Gaming" products and SJW bullshit in the hobby, please keep giving your money to Monte Cook and WotC.

Otherwise, vote with your dollars for RPG creators who don't shovel this shit into our hobby.
 

Quote from: Crimhthan;1105388Hey Pundit, I had not listened to any of your podcast before, (I don't normally listen to any podcasts by anyone, they are too time consuming.) but if you turned all of your podcasts into blog posts, then I would be inclined to read them all.

Agreed.  I wonder if there is a voice-to-text editor that's good enough to translate podcasts in a meaningful manner that doesn't turn them into Bad Lip Reading videos.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;1105286If I ever start a convention, I can imagine the press conference.

"What are you doing to ensure that con goers are both physically and emotionally safe?"
"Open carry is both allowed and encouraged. You can see the safety, or you can be the safety. Preferably both. Next?"

When does early registration for your Con start? :)

Quote from: hedgehobbit;1105071I'm wondering if all the people saying "it's optional, you don't need to use it" are going to pretend to be surprised when GenCon requires every GM running a game to use something like this.

Even if it's misused, that isn't an argument that it shouldn't have been available as an option. The problem of "One True Way" advocates of RPGs isn't that they're playing wrong and their way should always be opposed -- it's that they're pushing that their way is the only way.

"No one should use an X-card" is just as wrong as "Everyone should use an X-card."

We should be able to have different games with different styles of play.

Quote from: jhkim;1105623Even if it's misused, that isn't an argument that it shouldn't have been available as an option. The problem of "One True Way" advocates of RPGs isn't that they're playing wrong and their way should always be opposed -- it's that they're pushing that their way is the only way.

"No one should use an X-card" is just as wrong as "Everyone should use an X-card."

We should be able to have different games with different styles of play.

By "misused", do you mean "sucks the fun right out of the game"?

Quote from: jeff37923;1105625By "misused", do you mean "sucks the fun right out of the game"?

Must be.

Quote from: jhkim;1105623"No one should use an X-card" is just as wrong as "Everyone should use an X-card."

"No on should practice amateur therapy during a gaming session" is just as wrong as "Everyone should practice amateur therapy during a gaming session"?  No.  The first is debatable, as are almost all absolutes, but the latter is mind-numbingly stupid.  It's not quite as obviously stupid as "No one should shoot their big toe off during a gaming session" is just as wrong as "Everyone should shoot their big toe off during a gaming session," but close enough.

The best that can be said for the X-card is that in the hands of reasonable people, it probably won't cause any real damage.  Sometimes, given the right circumstances, people get away with playing in traffic, too.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1105630"No on should practice amateur therapy during a gaming session" is just as wrong as "Everyone should practice amateur therapy during a gaming session"?  No.  The first is debatable, as are almost all absolutes, but the latter is mind-numbingly stupid.  It's not quite as obviously stupid as "No one should shoot their big toe off during a gaming session" is just as wrong as "Everyone should shoot their big toe off during a gaming session," but close enough.

The best that can be said for the X-card is that in the hands of reasonable people, it probably won't cause any real damage.  Sometimes, given the right circumstances, people get away with playing in traffic, too.

I disagree with both you and the X-card advocates here.

I don't see RPGs as being particularly dangerous, regardless of whether an X-card is used or not. If an X-card is not used, it's still just a game. Maybe it can cause psychological harm, but only in the sense that *any* social situation can cause psychological harm. Potentially, people could be made uncomfortable by what's being said and/or bullied -- but that's true in any social situation, whether it's hanging out in the locker room or going out to dinner.

The same applies if an X-card is used, though. It's still just a game. From my experience of playing with it, I don't see how using it could do anything more than make people awkward.

Quote from: jhkim;1105635I disagree with both you and the X-card advocates here.

I don't see RPGs as being particularly dangerous, regardless of whether an X-card is used or not. If an X-card is not used, it's still just a game. Maybe it can cause psychological harm, but only in the sense that *any* social situation can cause psychological harm. Potentially, people could be made uncomfortable by what's being said and/or bullied -- but that's true in any social situation, whether it's hanging out in the locker room or going out to dinner.

The same applies if an X-card is used, though. It's still just a game. From my experience of playing with it, I don't see how using it could do anything more than make people awkward.

So, if RPGs are not dangerous (unlike BDSM can be) why would anyone need a safe-word to stop play?

What the proponents of the X-Card want to prevent is something that's easily prevented by talking before the game starts and deciding if it's or not for you. And this doesn't put everybody else's fun at risk by placing inordinate amounts of power into the hands of potentially unstable people.

As far as I'm concerned anyone asking for the X-Card be implemented at the table isn't a suitable person to game with. Just as if I were into BDSM anyone refusing to implement a safe-word would be someone I wouldn't want to play with.

In BDSM (contrary to what many would tell you) the power and control is always in the hands of the submissive, for good reason since it's they who would be at risk under any other circumstance. I see no circumstance in RPGs where such power needs to be placed into the hands of the players to stop the game without explanation and to veto something without explanation.

You really have such a case of arachnophobia the mere mention of spiders sends you under the covers? Well then YOU have the obligation to communicate this to the GM and if his scenario can be modified (and he's willing to) then he will modify it and problem solved well before a character was rolled.

Why eliminate this and postpone it until the game has begun? Only reason I can see is to fuck other people's fun.

Thank you but no thank you I'll stick to the M-Card instead.

An RPG is not dangerous (except in the hands of the already mentally deranged, but we can say that about any number of things in the same hands, obviously).  Amateur therapy is dangerous.  Applying it during a game session with multiple people in the room is even worse.  

Again, if it really is just a game, and no one in the room has a serious trauma--then the X-card is completely and utterly unnecessary.  Those people can vocalize objections, as needed, and probably with a lot more finesse than grabbing a card.  I dare say that they can probably make a simple objection and read the social situation just fine.  Heck, body language alone is probably enough to stop most issues.  Given a person in the room with a trauma that is being poked, the card is woefully inadequate.

No, what I suspect is usually the case is that the X-Card gives some of the participants a little thrill--like playing a horror game by candle light, or Russian Roulette with a caps pistol that doesn't even have the caps in it.  It makes them feel a bit naughty, but with no real risk.  If they'd be honest about that, I'd have no objection to the practice, though I still wouldn't think much of it.

Quote from: jhkim;1105623"No one should use an X-card" is just as wrong as "Everyone should use an X-card."

We should be able to have different games with different styles of play.

I agree 100%.

The optimal solution is freedom of choice and freedom of association for everyone to go to their own corners.

That said, its high time for fragmentation and exclusion in the hobby as - just like the larger culture - the two sides are no longer compatible to exist in the same space. It's obvious the safe space cartel want to control conventions and how gameplay occurs there.  Thus it's obvious there needs to be the Open Carry Con for us deplorable scum to dice in peace.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1105653Thus it's obvious there needs to be the Open Carry Con for us deplorable scum to dice in peace.

:eek: This would be the first RPG-related convention I would actually be interested in going to!

Quote from: Antiquation!;1105655:eek: This would be the first RPG-related convention I would actually be interested in going to!

It will be the safest too.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1105656It will be the safest too.

Definitely. It would be the first con I wouldn't feel the need to screen for perverts around my wife, that's for sure. Weird how "random" crowd gropings have never happened at any of our gun shows.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1105658Definitely. It would be the first con I wouldn't feel the need to screen for perverts around my wife, that's for sure. Weird how "random" crowd gropings have never happened at any of our gun shows.

Hmm...  It is as if they know they would get shot if they tried to groop some guy's wife, or daughter.

If having guns prevented people from being assholes we'd be living in a completely different country. Clearly having guns around doesn't prevent people from being assholes. It just gives you armed assholes. Which is no improvement at all.

I see tools as the X-Card and the Consent checklist more as methods of starting a conversation about content in RPG sessions. The conversation is important to have.

Some conventions do record content ratings for their games. I've seen it happen years ago. So it's not new. It just gives players a heads up on what they can expect in convention games. Which is an idea I can support.

I however do not support making either the X-Card or Consent tools mandatory. Because they are highly abusable by people who enter such games with bad faith in the first place. These tools enable some major potential for trolling. That just isn't acceptable in my eyes.

There is also a part of the Consent In Gaming document that I completely disagree with. And that's about taking away the ability to remove bad actors from your game group. Which, to me, is utterly unacceptable.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105638As far as I'm concerned anyone asking for the X-Card be implemented at the table isn't a suitable person to game with.

"Alright folks before we get started did anyone bring an X-Card with you?" Looks around the room, "OK, those with X-Cards can leave now so we can get the game started."

:)

It used to be that at college dorms women had a curfew whereas men did not. This was to protect women from being raped, and fathers paying for and sending their daughters to college certainly approved. A vocal minority of women then claimed they wanted "equality", that is to say they wanted the freedom to risk being raped. Granted that freedom, they now complain about the "rape culture" on campus and demand "safe spaces" and so on. It seems that women want to be protected after all.

So-called safety rules and conflating rpgs with bdsm are all about our culture trying out this experiment where we blend the gender hierarchies. Men gaming with men, or men working together on oil rigs for that matter, don't need special safety rules or safe words. Men bully and harass each other as a natural way of weeding out useless, dependent males. It's only natural that women would find such behavior threatening. Feminists demand that men socialize according to female rules.

I've watched girls role-playing with each other and it's not something I want to be a part of any more than I want to watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb-GsRpiezk). Let them have their fun. Let us men have our own fun.

N.a.w.a.l.t.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712I've watched girls role-playing with each other and it's not something I want to be a part of any more than I want to watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb-GsRpiezk). Let them have their fun. Let us men have our own fun.

Sure, throw the baby out with the bathwater.  Normal people don't have any trouble gaming together, across genders or otherwise.  Now, if a particular game at a particular table happens to have a more selective appeal, then nothing wrong with that.  But I'll keep the baby, thanks.

Quote from: Bren;1105689If having guns prevented people from being assholes we'd be living in a completely different country.

It's not about "preventing people from being assholes," it's about letting non-assholes possess tools to dissuade and deal with assholes and most importantly be secure in their own personal and immediate safety. "We'd be living in a completely different country" is such a vague, contextless statement I'm not sure how to address that.

Quote from: Bren;1105689It just gives you armed assholes. Which is no improvement at all.

This is a nearly-irrelevant half-truth, and you miss the point entirely.

Beyond that, this is clearly off-topic so I'll not take the subject further but I'm sure people would be happy to discuss and debate the topic in Pundit's forum if anyone has the desire to.

Quote from: Crimhthan;1105699"Alright folks before we get started did anyone bring an X-Card with you?" Looks around the room, "OK, those with X-Cards can leave now so we can get the game started."

:)

Pretty much yeah.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712It used to be that at college dorms women had a curfew whereas men did not. This was to protect women from being raped, and fathers paying for and sending their daughters to college certainly approved. A vocal minority of women then claimed they wanted "equality", that is to say they wanted the freedom to risk being raped. Granted that freedom, they now complain about the "rape culture" on campus and demand "safe spaces" and so on. It seems that women want to be protected after all.

Not women, feminists demanded and got what I think was right, this was the second wave, mostly sex positive feminists. Went to war with the sex negative ones and won the battle but lost the war since those went to work in academia. Women in general have always (and probably will always) wanted to be protected, it's millions of years of evolution.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712So-called safety rules and conflating rpgs with bdsm are all about our culture trying out this experiment where we blend the gender hierarchies. Men gaming with men, or men working together on oil rigs for that matter, don't need special safety rules or safe words. Men bully and harass each other as a natural way of weeding out useless, dependent males. It's only natural that women would find such behavior threatening. Feminists demand that men socialize according to female rules.

Yeas, groups of only men or women act different than mixed ones, but for millennia now we've had also mixed groups for certain things, like proms, and such. And the etiquette for such gatherings is different for both sexes. Yes Feminists demand men act like women.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712I've watched girls role-playing with each other and it's not something I want to be a part of any more than I want to watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb-GsRpiezk). Let them have their fun. Let us men have our own fun.

As per my previous point you play with who you want, I'm not who to tell anybody otherwise but. Given the right kind of woman and the right kind of game we can have fun together. Which is that right kind? It depends it's not the same for everyone.

What I find annoying is the double standard of places like roll20, where you can have women only groups but not men only ones. And sometimes I want to play without worrying about hurting female sensibilities.

Women are already starting to push back against the SJW harpies.  Sadly, young women are still being indoctrinated en mass, but the tide is turning.  

I have two little girls, so I've seen my fair share of "Friendship is Magic".  :)

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712So-called safety rules and conflating rpgs with bdsm are all about our culture trying out this experiment where we blend the gender hierarchies. Men gaming with men, or men working together on oil rigs for that matter, don't need special safety rules or safe words. Men bully and harass each other as a natural way of weeding out useless, dependent males. It's only natural that women would find such behavior threatening. Feminists demand that men socialize according to female rules.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105744Yeas, groups of only men or women act different than mixed ones, but for millennia now we've had also mixed groups for certain things, like proms, and such. And the etiquette for such gatherings is different for both sexes. Yes Feminists demand men act like women.

Bullying and harassment among men might well be natural and around for millenia -- but that doesn't make them a good thing. Stuff like democracy, free speech, tolerance, and forgiveness may not be in our genes -- but they're positive changes in human behavior from recent times.

I don't want my male-only games to be full of bullying and harassment. That's not behaving like women, in my opinion. That's just behaving like a decent human being. If a disabled man joins our group, maybe the evolutionary instinct is to weed him out by bullying him until he breaks -- but that's not behavior I want in my game.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712I've watched girls role-playing with each other and it's not something I want to be a part of any more than I want to watch My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eb-GsRpiezk). Let them have their fun. Let us men have our own fun.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105744As per my previous point you play with who you want, I'm not who to tell anybody otherwise but. Given the right kind of woman and the right kind of game we can have fun together. Which is that right kind? It depends it's not the same for everyone.

What I find annoying is the double standard of places like roll20, where you can have women only groups but not men only ones. And sometimes I want to play without worrying about hurting female sensibilities

I don't have a problem with men-only groups, though in practice, I find that it's pretty easy to achieve. Just pitch things the right way, and women won't sign up. As far as sensibilities go, though, I think it's better to filter directly for the sensibilities rather than on the sex of the players. There are women players who are just as crude and crass as any man players I've played with; and there are man players who are sensitive and/or shy.

When I ran my all-male-PC Conan game, the two women players were just as enthusiastic as the man players -- often moreso. They definitely got into playing up the manly barbarians.

Quote from: jhkim;1105812Bullying and harassment among men might well be natural and around for millenia -- but that doesn't make them a good thing. Stuff like democracy, free speech, tolerance, and forgiveness may not be in our genes -- but they're positive changes in human behavior from recent times.

I don't want my male-only games to be full of bullying and harassment. That's not behaving like women, in my opinion. That's just behaving like a decent human being. If a disabled man joins our group, maybe the evolutionary instinct is to weed him out by bullying him until he breaks -- but that's not behavior I want in my game.

It's a good thing then that nowhere do I say anything about Bullying and harassment eh? Also you don't know or interact with many women do you? They are the worst bullies and harassers of all, remember the mean girls clique? And of all the bullied and harassed women in the world 50% were so by other women. You need to forget your WAW-MAM (Women Are Wonderful - Men Are Monsters) paradigm.

Quote from: jhkim;1105812I don't have a problem with men-only groups, though in practice, I find that it's pretty easy to achieve. Just pitch things the right way, and women won't sign up. As far as sensibilities go, though, I think it's better to filter directly for the sensibilities rather than on the sex of the players. There are women players who are just as crude and crass as any man players I've played with; and there are man players who are sensitive and/or shy.

When I ran my all-male-PC Conan game, the two women players were just as enthusiastic as the man players -- often moreso. They definitely got into playing up the manly barbarians.

And yet women in roll20 are allowed to have women only groups, while a man needs to dance around and if a woman comes he has to find a good enough reason to reject her or else. Do you see the double standard? No of course you don't.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105816It's a good thing then that nowhere do I say anything about Bullying and harassment eh? Also you don't know or interact with many women do you? They are the worst bullies and harassers of all, remember the mean girls clique? And of all the bullied and harassed women in the world 50% were so by other women. You need to forget your WAW-MAM (Women Are Wonderful - Men Are Monsters) paradigm.

GeekyBugle - CloyerBulse spoke about bullying and harassment in Post #32 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41156-News-Flash-RPGs-are-Different-From-BDSM&p=1105712&viewfull=1#post1105712). I've bolded the text in the quote below.

Quote from: Cloyer BulseSo-called safety rules and conflating rpgs with bdsm are all about our culture trying out this experiment where we blend the gender hierarchies. Men gaming with men, or men working together on oil rigs for that matter, don't need special safety rules or safe words. Men bully and harass each other as a natural way of weeding out useless, dependent males. It's only natural that women would find such behavior threatening. Feminists demand that men socialize according to female rules.

You quoted him and directly responding to him with agreement in Post #36 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41156-News-Flash-RPGs-are-Different-From-BDSM&p=1105744&viewfull=1#post1105744).

Quote from: GeekyBugleYeas, groups of only men or women act different than mixed ones, but for millennia now we've had also mixed groups for certain things, like proms, and such. And the etiquette for such gatherings is different for both sexes. Yes Feminists demand men act like women.

From this, I concluded that you agreed about his point regarding bullying and harassment.

As for your point about women, I agree. I'm saying that the push against bullying and harassment in mixed groups isn't about making men act like women. It's about calling for both men and women to act decently.

Quote from: jhkim;1105825GeekyBugle - CloyerBulse spoke about bullying and harassment in Post #32 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41156-News-Flash-RPGs-are-Different-From-BDSM&p=1105712&viewfull=1#post1105712). I've bolded the text in the quote below.



You quoted him and directly responding to him with agreement in Post #36 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41156-News-Flash-RPGs-are-Different-From-BDSM&p=1105744&viewfull=1#post1105744).



From this, I concluded that you agreed about his point regarding bullying and harassment.

As for your point about women, I agree. I'm saying that the push against bullying and harassment in mixed groups isn't about making men act like women. It's about calling for both men and women to act decently.

Well you assumed wrong. I'm agreeing that gender segregated groups act different than gender mixed ones, nothing else (like my words clearly state). And that feminists demand men act like women. If you want to have an argument about the last point open a thread in Pundie's forum, I'll gladly hit you with facts until you cry uncle.

As for quoting him, how else would you know who I'm responding to?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105826And that feminists demand men act like women.

We haven't got the ability to bully and harrass like women!

Like a Parliamentary Prorogation, who you have in your gaming group should be non-justiciable. I like mixed sex groups but I'm not going to condemn individual groups who want to be single sex. OTOH obviously there is an anti-male double standard on this, no doubt enforced mostly by men.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105826Well you assumed wrong. I'm agreeing that gender segregated groups act different than gender mixed ones, nothing else (like my words clearly state). And that feminists demand men act like women.

I'd like to know about what your opinion is on what Cloyer Bulse said.

Quote from: Cloyer BulseSo-called safety rules and conflating rpgs with bdsm are all about our culture trying out this experiment where we blend the gender hierarchies. Men gaming with men, or men working together on oil rigs for that matter, don't need special safety rules or safe words. Men bully and harass each other as a natural way of weeding out useless, dependent males. It's only natural that women would find such behavior threatening. Feminists demand that men socialize according to female rules.

Do you have any thoughts on the whole of this?

Personally, I disagree with Cloyer Bulse thoroughly. I think that blending the gender hierarchies is a functional and good part of modern society that also includes democracy, civil rights, and gender equality. I think that there should be rules to reduce bullying and harassing in male-only spaces. I disagree that feminists as a whole demand that men socialize according to female rules. Notably, the reason why "mean girl" cliques is a recognizable trope is because of feminist critiques of that behavior -- notably Rachel Wiseman's book, which the 2004 movie "Mean Girls" was based on. We should be improving behavior in all of male-only, female-only, and mixed-gender spaces -- which includes reducing harassment and bullying.

Quote from: jhkim;1105812Bullying and harassment among men might well be natural and around for millenia -- but that doesn't make them a good thing. Stuff like democracy, free speech, tolerance, and forgiveness may not be in our genes -- but they're positive changes in human behavior from recent times.

There was a study that I read that found that if boys had a physical fight then they were more likely to be better friends after the fight whereas if girls had a verbal fight then they were less likely to be friends after the fight.

Quote from: jhkim;1105841I'd like to know about what your opinion is on what Cloyer Bulse said.



Do you have any thoughts on the whole of this?

Personally, I disagree with Cloyer Bulse thoroughly. I think that blending the gender hierarchies is a functional and good part of modern society that also includes democracy, civil rights, and gender equality. I think that there should be rules to reduce bullying and harassing in male-only spaces. I disagree that feminists as a whole demand that men socialize according to female rules. Notably, the reason why "mean girl" cliques is a recognizable trope is because of feminist critiques of that behavior -- notably Rachel Wiseman's book, which the 2004 movie "Mean Girls" was based on. We should be improving behavior in all of male-only, female-only, and mixed-gender spaces -- which includes reducing harassment and bullying.

For starters I don't think there are gender hierarchies, not in the sense him and you are using the term.

I would like to know what he and you call bullying and harassment before talking on it. (because now a days buddy ribbing buddy is termed bullying by many.

Feel free to open a thread on pundie's forum so we can talk about feminists and their demands.

Mean Girls Cliques were a thing well before any feminist wrote about it, and I bet you even before the gender integration of schools women talked about it.

We should kemosabe? Yo do what you want and I'll do like wise, I don't find that my groups of friends need any major behavior adjustment, which is why they are my friends.

And before you keep talking about harassment and bullying you need to define those terms and give a few examples of what you consider falls into them. Best done in Pundies forum.

Quote from: jhkim;1105812Bullying and harassment among men might well be natural and around for millenia -- but that doesn't make them a good thing.

It's a phenomenally good thing. It toughens the weak or weeds them out. Bullying and harassment teach toughness, resilience and the drive to fight back and succeed, and swiftly identifies the weak who either learn to stand or get ostracized. Without it, we get the current generations full of weaklings.

Quote from: jhkim;1105812f a disabled man joins our group, maybe the evolutionary instinct is to weed him out by bullying him until he breaks -- but that's not behavior I want in my game.

Most disabled people either shatter or become steel. Disabled who maneuver outside their homes are usually tough hombres. There's nothing any bullying can do that compares to challenge of living 24/7/365 with a real disability (not the online wankery "disabilities").

Quote from: jhkim;1105841Do you have any thoughts on the whole of this?

Personally, I disagree with Cloyer Bulse thoroughly.

The whole tough love approach is just a paper-thin excuse for bullying. Because guess what? Bullying feels good, it makes you feel superior to the so-called useless, dependent males. And that is the actual motivation: to get a mini-rush yourself at the expense of creating misery for someone you don't give a flying fuck about.

Quote from: jhkim;1105841I think that there should be rules to reduce bullying and harassing in male-only spaces.

That doesn't work. Laws without law-enforcement are dysfunctional. And where do you get any force to enforce those rules for all those situations in which people meet (irrespective of gender)? What would be necessary is building consensus and bringing down society's weight of numbers down on bullies. The good news is this: just as bullies recognize potential 'soft' targets by sight, other people can recognize would-be bullies by sight alone.

But then again here's the rub: who defines what bullying is? As we can see on twitter, it lends itself to abuse - you just postulate that you've been bullied and bring down the twitter mob on people who didn't actually bully you, just have a different political outlook. While they conveniently overlook your own, actual bullying.

Bottom line: bullying will not go away because human beings have a need to feel superior to other people, to varying degrees.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1105908It's a phenomenally good thing. It toughens the weak or weeds them out. Bullying and harassment teach toughness, resilience and the drive to fight back and succeed, and swiftly identifies the weak who either learn to stand or get ostracized. Without it, we get the current generations full of weaklings.

You're not entirely wrong, just mostly.

So, when you (NOT refering to you personally here) go out on a date and I break into your home, stealing all your stuff - that's not theft/burglary. It's me teaching you to be smarter in protecting your worldly possessions instead; I'm just weeding out the dumbfucks here. Let them eat cake.

On the other hand, and this is why I think you're only mostly wrong here, there is value in desensitization. The crucial part that woke people get wrong is that life itself doesn't give a damn about safe spaces. You can shout, scream and make a fuss all you want - life will still take away people you care about from you. And more.

Twitter mobs are useless in dealing with the human predicament.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1105940The whole tough love approach is just a paper-thin excuse for bullying.

Not in the slightest.

Tough love and bullying aren't even in the same universe.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1105940So, when you (NOT refering to you personally here) go out on a date and I break into your home, stealing all your stuff - that's not theft/burglary. It's me teaching you to be smarter in protecting your worldly possessions instead; I'm just weeding out the dumbfucks here. Let them eat cake.

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

We didn't curb theft and burglarly with hugs, crayons and talking about feelings. We curbed break-ins by giving guns and cars to cops to patrol neighborhoods with the power to murder people for stealing. We buy and train guard dogs with sharp teeth to fuck up anybody who enters the house when we're out on a date. We invented security cameras to help ensure that thieves would be caught and punished by being thrown in prison hellpits for years of their lives.

AKA, we used "bullying" and "harassment" to curb burglars.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1105940On the other hand, and this is why I think you're only mostly wrong here, there is value in desensitization. The crucial part that woke people get wrong is that life itself doesn't give a damn about safe spaces. You can shout, scream and make a fuss all you want - life will still take away people you care about from you. And more.

Exactly. Life is unfair and always will be.

Tough love is teaching future generations how to navigate this unfair life. And the male human animal especially need "bullying" and "harassment" to harden enough to navigate the world. We're upright beasts, not elves.

There's no love whatsoever in telling a bullied child to retreat to safe space. If you care about that child, you send that kid back into the fray with the knowledge they alone choose their emotional response to other people's words and with your permission to bash bullies in the nuts.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1105864And before you keep talking about harassment and bullying you need to define those terms and give a few examples of what you consider falls into them. Best done in Pundies forum.

OK, sounds good. Pundit just approved the thread, it's here:

https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41178-Gendered-behavior-bullying-and-feminism

I agree with GeekyBugle that the non-RPG-related talk about bullying is best discussed over there.

Quote from: Crimhthan;1105388Hey Pundit, I had not listened to any of your podcast before, (I don't normally listen to any podcasts by anyone, they are too time consuming.) but if you turned all of your podcasts into blog posts, then I would be inclined to read them all.

I had a blog for nearly 15 years, I still have it though I no longer post there daily. People stopped wanting to read blogs. They want video now. Its easier to hear someone talking while you do other stuff than to have to sit down and read.

People who want to talk about topics related to bullying, or gender, or BDSM that is NOT related to the RPG hobby, don't do it here. This is a thread only to talk about the context of the RPG hobby.

Quote from: Bren;1105689If having guns prevented people from being assholes we'd be living in a completely different country. Clearly having guns around doesn't prevent people from being assholes. It just gives you armed assholes. Which is no improvement at all.

An asshole is an asshole regardless of being armed or not. Nor doesn't prevent people from being assholes.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1105712It used to be that at college dorms women ... Let us men have our own fun.

Oh Jesus where to begin.

1) Your shitposting misogyny is terrible. It's way too obvious. I'm guessing you're a SJW agitator trying to prove that no one here on the RPGsite would disagree with you. Let me help with that...
2) You're recounting of why curfews no longer apply only to men is not only a complete fabrication, but drowning in 10' of hyperbole.
3) I love your 50+ year old philosophy on "men" activities vs. "women" activities. It's cute how you still believe all that shit your dumbass grandpa told you.

Nine posts on theRPGsite of male dominance, male roles, male frolicking, male exclusive... lol. You are hilariously bad at this. Also, your beliefs are reprehensible. But I'm sure all the women who've denied you or left you already told you that. (that, for the sleeping masses in the cheap seats is where I explicitly disagree with you. On theRPGsite of all places.)

-------------- back to RPG land! --------------------

I know personally that if someone pulled out an x-card and embarrassed me and then tossed a heaping portion of melodrama on top; completely derailing the game, the evening and possibly the entire group - I would be offended. I would be horrified frankly. I appreciate where these people's hearts are at. They don't want people to be harmed. But the X-card goes way too far. So does the idea that I have to screw 5 people at my table so 1 person can be safe. Adults generally don't have these problems.

This consent PDF is still filled with pretentious nonsense BUT if it helps people have a fucking adult conversation before they game, I'm of the feeling it would be well worth the price. (:-P). I like Monte Cook and Shanna Germaine. I don't believe they have some "agenda" here other than to capitalize on all the hand-wringing over-reaction to the boogey-man pervert who is running the Hentai up in their COZ-vention.

Fundamentally, there is no good reason to jump into a game without discussing any subject matter issues you may have. none. I shouldn't have to guess what your secret land mines are. I shouldn't stumble across your severe arachnophobia during a game. I'm not your fucking therapist. I'm just some shmo GM trying to run a fun game and have fun with other gamers. I'm not qualified to diagnose you, or help you through emotional trauma nor should you ever trust me to. Just like I don't show up naked to the game because I can't find shirts to wrap around my chub, you shouldn't show up with your shit unhandled.

Handle your shit. Then make time for fun.

Quote from: trechriron;1106162Oh Jesus where to begin.

1) Your shitposting misogyny is terrible. It's way too obvious. I'm guessing you're a SJW agitator trying to prove that no one here on the RPGsite would disagree with you. Let me help with that...
2) You're recounting of why curfews no longer apply only to men is not only a complete fabrication, but drowning in 10' of hyperbole.
3) I love your 50+ year old philosophy on "men" activities vs. "women" activities. It's cute how you still believe all that shit your dumbass grandpa told you.

Nine posts on theRPGsite of male dominance, male roles, male frolicking, male exclusive... lol. You are hilariously bad at this. Also, your beliefs are reprehensible. But I'm sure all the women who've denied you or left you already told you that. (that, for the sleeping masses in the cheap seats is where I explicitly disagree with you. On theRPGsite of all places.)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3869[/ATTACH]

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1105164Secondly, writers, filmmakers, comic book authors don't put up a lot of information what to expect from their creative works in advance either. You quickly get a sense what to expect in Game of Thrones but not much advance warning. In RPGs, it should be enough to give a quick campaign outline and maybe something like "18+ content". You have no right for more information from me just because I don't have the same clout as HBO.

100% this, and this approach has worked perfectly well for rpgs for decades. Nothing more is necessary or desirable.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1105692I see tools as the X-Card and the Consent checklist more as methods of starting a conversation about content in RPG sessions. The conversation is important to have.

No, it's fucking not.  

First, there is no problem with "consent" in gaming.  Gaming is an inherently consenting activity.  No one is kidnapping anyone and forcing them to roll dice against their will.  No one is keeping anyone at a table if they decide they're not having fun.  This is a fake, bullshit, made-up problem.  So why are we talking about it?  Because the people insisting we "need to have a conversation about consent in gaming" have an agenda.  That agenda isn't helping all the poor victims of non-consensual gaming, because there aren't any such victims.  

Look, I'm sure you mean well.  I'm sure most of the people who are "concerned" about this and just want to be "nice people" and "allies" or whatever mean well, but you being "useful idiots".  

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiotIn political jargon, a useful idiot is a derogatory term for a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the cause's goals, and who is cynically used by the cause's leaders. The term was originally used during the Cold War to describe non-communists regarded as susceptible to communist propaganda and manipulation

This is an explicitly political agenda.  It's about control.  It's partially about control of the game itself, but more than that its about control of GAMING.  More than a language control mechanism, it's a sorting mechanism. Like the Party's "2+2=5" from 1984, adherence to the "consent doctrine" - that RPGs are unsafe spaces full of evil bad-think guys and poor victims that need protection, signals that you are on the "good side", either as a partisan or at least as a bystander.  If, on the other hand, you reject it or horror of horrors, actively resist, this means you are one of the "bad people" and should be UN-personed.  No more conventions for you.  No more big-name internet forums.  No more open tables.  Soon,  if all goes according to plan, no more big-shop digital publication.   You should go hide in your basement, with the other troglodytes.   This is the natural outgrowth of "the personal is political".  There is no escape from the ideological.  There is no such thing as "harmless fun".  "Fun" must be analyzed and the participants sorted into "victim" and "oppressor".  

But there is some reason to hope.  Just like attempting to use media manipulation against video-gamers in the digital age is a bad strategy, telling RPG players over the age of 30 that they need to go back to their basements and live in some kind of underground society is fucking hilarious. Please, please, don't throw me in that briar patch, Brer Fox!

Quote from: Brendan;1106786No, it's fucking not.  

First, there is no problem with "consent" in gaming.  Gaming is an inherently consenting activity.  No one is kidnapping anyone and forcing them to roll dice against their will.  No one is keeping anyone at a table if they decide they're not having fun.  This is a fake, bullshit, made-up problem.  So why are we talking about it?  Because the people insisting we "need to have a conversation about consent in gaming" have an agenda.  That agenda isn't helping all the poor victims of non-consensual gaming, because there aren't any such victims.  

Look, I'm sure you mean well.  I'm sure most of the people who are "concerned" about this and just want to be "nice people" and "allies" or whatever mean well, but you being "useful idiots".  



This is an explicitly political agenda.  It's about control.  It's partially about control of the game itself, but more than that its about control of GAMING.  More than a language control mechanism, it's a sorting mechanism. Like the Party's "2+2=5" from 1984, adherence to the "consent doctrine" - that RPGs are unsafe spaces full of evil bad-think guys and poor victims that need protection, signals that you are on the "good side", either as a partisan or at least as a bystander.  If, on the other hand, you reject it or horror of horrors, actively resist, this means you are one of the "bad people" and should be UN-personed.  No more conventions for you.  No more big-name internet forums.  No more open tables.  Soon,  if all goes according to plan, no more big-shop digital publication.   You should go hide in your basement, with the other troglodytes.   This is the natural outgrowth of "the personal is political".  There is no escape from the ideological.  There is no such thing as "harmless fun".  "Fun" must be analyzed and the participants sorted into "victim" and "oppressor".  

But there is some reason to hope.  Just like attempting to use media manipulation against video-gamers in the digital age is a bad strategy, telling RPG players over the age of 30 that they need to go back to their basements and live in some kind of underground society is fucking hilarious. Please, please, don't throw me in that briar patch, Brer Fox!

Greetings!

EXCELLENT, BRENDAN!!!!!

Your analysis is razor-sharp, and perfect. I often seek to explain to people--gamers, like us--what the SJW's agenda is--as well as the jibbering Socialist's like AOC and Bernie amongst others in the political arena--is all about, and where their ideological fountain comes from. It all goes back to Alinsky's Rules For Radicals and Communism. It's all about infiltrating society, at every level, in every area, causing strife and dissension, brainwashing everyone with Communist propaganda, creating "problems" that they conveniently have the right solution to, and eventually overthrowing society to become a Communist/Globalist State. Within Communist and Socialist manuals and documents, they explain exactly how they go about accomplishing all of these goals, and what the purposes of each such endeavor is for, and each such area of focus contributes to their larger agenda.

And yet, we have so many people within our society--and fellow gamers within our hobby--that insist that the SJW's just have innocent motives, and an innocent difference in opinion on how to approach things.

There is nothing innocent about it, brother!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1106817And yet, we have so many people within our society--and fellow gamers within our hobby--that insist that the SJW's just have innocent motives, and an innocent difference in opinion on how to approach things.

There is nothing innocent about it, brother!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Thanks Shark!  My grandfather escaped the USSR.  I don't want my kids to have to learn the lessons of communism the hard way.

Quote from: Darrin KelleyI see tools as the X-Card and the Consent checklist more as methods of starting a conversation about content in RPG sessions. The conversation is important to have.

Quote from: Brendan;1106786This is a fake, bullshit, made-up problem.  So why are we talking about it?  Because the people insisting we "need to have a conversation about consent in gaming" have an agenda.  That agenda isn't helping all the poor victims of non-consensual gaming, because there aren't any such victims.

Quote from: SHARK;1106817It's all about infiltrating society, at every level, in every area, causing strife and dissension, brainwashing everyone with Communist propaganda, creating "problems" that they conveniently have the right solution to, and eventually overthrowing society to become a Communist/Globalist State. Within Communist and Socialist manuals and documents, they explain exactly how they go about accomplishing all of these goals, and what the purposes of each such endeavor is for, and each such area of focus contributes to their larger agenda.

OK, as I've mentioned earlier, I don't see the X-card as being necessary. I agree with Brendan that RPGs don't have a consent problem.

That said, I really don't think that gamers advocating the X-card are secretly trying to overthrow society to become a Communist/Globalist State. That seems like a far more ridiculous accusation than the opposing claims.

I game with a lot of people who advocate for the X-card. For example, I'm going to Big Bad Con in two weeks, which has "Safety Tools" listed with each of the events. I play games using the X-card all the time. I am absolutely certain that none of these people are planning this supposed overthrow.

Quote from: jhkim;1106846OK, as I've mentioned earlier, I don't see the X-card as being necessary. I agree with Brendan that RPGs don't have a consent problem.

That said, I really don't think that gamers advocating the X-card are secretly trying to overthrow society to become a Communist/Globalist State.

Thanks, but you'll notice that my point is more nuanced than that.  As I said, the advocates for the X-card are, for the most part, just "useful idiots."  They think they're just being "accommodating" and "nice".   That said, I'm sure there are some that think they're "fighting white colonization" by "reclaiming imaginative spaces" or some shit like that.

Quote from: Brendan;1106847Thanks, but you'll notice that my point is more nuanced than that.  As I said, the advocates for the X-card are, for the most part, just "useful idiots."  They think they're just being "accommodating" and "nice".   That said, I'm sure there are some that think they're "fighting white colonization" by "reclaiming imaginative spaces" or some shit like that.

Hi, Brendan. My comment about overthrow was directed as SHARK's post, not at your post directly. I agree that your point is more nuanced. I can reply to yours separately.

Quote from: jhkim;1106851Hi, Brendan. My comment about overthrow was directed as SHARK's post, not at your post directly. I agree that your point is more nuanced. I can reply to yours separately.

No worries.  Thanks for the clarification.

Greetings!

Indeed. See Brendan's "Useful Idiots" memo for added clarity. I suppose there are different "levels" of brainwashing and stupidity, certainly. Your garden-variety mushy Liberal isn't necessarily a card-carrying member of ANTIFA, and doesn't specifically embrace a plan to "Overthrow our society."

You want "Nuance?" Fuck nuance. Whether the millions of Liberal sheep comprehend it or not, the psyop techniques, the social infiltration, the rewriting of language, inventing language, establishing new social organizations and socialized social expectations and norms, is all an aspect of the larger goals of Globalist/Communist activists within our society to become change agents.

And, we see the same tentacles of such social change and Communist brainwashing influencing even the RPG Hobby. Spinachcat has talked about in considerable detail of the various SJW "victories" affecting our hobby in recent years. Pundit's own commentary and videos showcase many of the effects, policies, and attitudes that spring from the Globalist/Communist agenda. These are facts. Naysay it if you like, but such an approach reveals anyone that chooses to do so as being naive and deluded.

Jhkim is far too educated and well-read to deny the force and implication of such facts. Jhkim, I think you are being purposely contrarian towards me. You know or you should know exactly what I'm talking about. I hope my explanation here makes things clearer and more "Nuanced" for you!:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The X-Card is open to a gigantic amount of abuse. Game group breaking levels of it. And that's why I disagree with anyone who wants to make it mandatory.

I understand the motivations behind it being positive. But it doesn't account for those who are acting in bad faith. That's the flaw. And I believe it is a fatal one.

Quote from: jhkim;1106846For example, I'm going to Big Bad Con in two weeks, which has "Safety Tools" listed with each of the events.

Wow..the X-card isn't even the dumbest one on that list!
https://www.bigbadcon.com/safety-mechanisms/

What an utter shitshow. The Bay Area's safest safe space for "gaming"!
https://www.bigbadcon.com/events/categories/rpg/

Quote from: Spinachcat;1106920Wow..the X-card isn't even the dumbest one on that list!
https://www.bigbadcon.com/safety-mechanisms/

What an utter shitshow. The Bay Area's safest safe space for "gaming"!
https://www.bigbadcon.com/events/categories/rpg/

I've got their script change right here!

I'm running a couple games at that con. It's my first so I kind of just figured "safety tools" are a thing at conventions, at least here on the West coast. As GM they wanted me to select one for my games, so I just went with "open door".

Quote from: Spinachcat;1106920Wow..the X-card isn't even the dumbest one on that list!
https://www.bigbadcon.com/safety-mechanisms/

At least they don't make them mandatory or even imply that they should be. If they just want to offer optional tools, that's hardly an issue. Hell, I think almost every GM here would be all for "The Door Is Open" for those players that need to step out.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1106949At least they don't make them mandatory or even imply that they should be. If they just want to offer optional tools, that's hardly an issue. Hell, I think almost every GM here would be all for "The Door Is Open" for those players that need to step out.

you were saying?

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1106947I'm running a couple games at that con. It's my first so I kind of just figured "safety tools" are a thing at conventions, at least here on the West coast. As GM they wanted me to select one for my games, so I just went with "open door".

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1106947I'm running a couple games at that con. It's my first so I kind of just figured "safety tools" are a thing at conventions, at least here on the West coast. As GM they wanted me to select one for my games, so I just went with "open door".

Welcome to theRPGsite, Trinculoisdead!

I hope to see you there. My name is John Kim - I'm running 1001 Nights and Bluebeard's Bride on Friday, and a Star Wars larp on Sunday. I find it's a very well-run convention in general. Big Bad Con is much more prominent about these "safety tools" than the other local Bay Area cons (that's DunDraCon in February, KublaCon in May, and Pacificon in September) -- but it's not uncommon to find them used by GMs at the other cons.

Looking back at my event registration, I ended up selecting more of those than I thought - maybe because of the push you mention when submitting events. In practice, I haven't found it's a big deal either way.

Quote from: jhkim;1106846I game with a lot of people who advocate for the X-card. For example, I'm going to Big Bad Con in two weeks, which has "Safety Tools" listed with each of the events. I play games using the X-card all the time. I am absolutely certain that none of these people are planning this supposed overthrow.

Nice, me too. Any games you're particularly looking forward to? I got into Terry Olson's DCC game. He's running his new adventure, should be pretty epic.

Edit: posted simultaneously. I'm not in those games, and they're full up of course by now. Good luck and have fun though!

Has anyone ever used a safety item thing in a game you were in? I just can't imagine it ever coming up, but then I'm used to playing at friends' houses in a relaxed situation. This convention will be a little different I imagine.

I'm running a couple Dungeon Crawl Classics funnels. Hopefully all the character deaths don't trigger anyone lol.

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1106966Nice, me too. Any games you're particularly looking forward to? I got into Terry Olson's DCC game. He's running his new adventure, should be pretty epic.

Cool. I'm trying out Starfinder for the first time there, and a Burn-Notice-inspired story game called Blowback - I'm looking forward to both of those. I also do larps -- I'm looking forward to a Fallout larp run by two friends of mine, and a Jane-Austen-based larp run by the author.

The DCC game looks cool, though I'm wary of having 8 players in a tabletop game.

He knows what he's doing, so I think it'll be okay. DCC is pretty "big-crowd-of-doomed-peasants", so at least the system lends itself to bigger groups. I saw that Jane Austen LARP, fun stuff!

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1106955you were saying?

OK, well if you have to use one, then the open door bit is little more than acknowledging that the players are not prisoners at the table. If they need to get up and leave the GM needs to be OK with that. Has this ever not been the case?

Quote from: jhkim;1106846That said, I really don't think that gamers advocating the X-card are secretly trying to overthrow society to become a Communist/Globalist State. That seems like a far more ridiculous accusation than the opposing claims.

They seem to have given up on economic Communism. They still want a Globalist world-State. :p

Quote from: HappyDaze;1106981OK, well if you have to use one, then the open door bit is little more than acknowledging that the players are not prisoners at the table. If they need to get up and leave the GM needs to be OK with that. Has this ever not been the case?

I guess Open Door could be abused if the player keeps leaving & returning, disrupting GM's ability to run game. It certainly seems like the Safest policy, though. :)

Quote from: SHARK;1106871Greetings!

You want "Nuance?" Fuck nuance.

God bless the Marines.  Shark is my new spirit animal.  :D

Quote from: SHARK;1106871Jhkim is far too educated and well-read to deny the force and implication of such facts. Jhkim, I think you are being purposely contrarian towards me. You know or you should know exactly what I'm talking about.

Honestly, I think Jhkim is just like that.  I don't know what he does for a living (something science-y?), but in tech land (where I pay my bills) this need for rhetorical precision is a "thing" for some people; to the point that they seem to entirely miss the "gist" of what someone is trying to say and get bogged down in arguing the details.  It's frustrating sometimes and I don't know how to solve it, but I THINK jhkim is trying to argue in good faith.

Quote from: S'mon;1106990I guess Open Door could be abused if the player keeps leaving & returning, disrupting GM's ability to run game. It certainly seems like the Safest policy, though. :)

There will always be people that abuse anything, but consider how disruptive such a player might be if they don't excuse themselves from the table before making/taking calls or shitting out that greasy meal they had before the game. Overall, open door seems reasonable when dealing with reasonable people. Another plus might be that the players that want other safety options so they can abuse them might just pass over your game if the only one you're using is open door. I think that would be a win.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1106981OK, well if you have to use one, then the open door bit is little more than acknowledging that the players are not prisoners at the table. If they need to get up and leave the GM needs to be OK with that. Has this ever not been the case?

So, if we have always had the right to get up and fuck off, why does a convention need to include several "safety tools" and make it mandatory to choose one?

It's the slow boil, you can't boil a frog alive unless you rise the water temperature little by little over a long period of time. The next step is to either make 2 "safety tools" mandatory or to remove the Open Door one, because nazis.

Mark my words in a short while (2 years tops) you'll see conventions forcing GMs to use the X-Card or some other snowflake "safety tool" if they wish to use the Open Door one, some will even remove the OD altogether.

It's about changing the culture of the hobby and kicking out those who refuse to bend the knee to their cult's dogma.

I'll say it again, we need the most dangerous convention to be a thing. A convention made anti-fragile against entryism by the cultists. Probably more than one, small affairs nothing too big.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107046It's the slow boil, you can't boil a frog alive unless you rise the water temperature little by little over a long period of time.

You could if the pot had a locking lid so the frog couldn't jump out. Perhaps that's why open door is important.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1107047You could if the pot had a locking lid so the frog couldn't jump out. Perhaps that's why open door is important.

Why would you quote mine that specific part? You said:

QuoteOriginally Posted by HappyDaze View Post
OK, well if you have to use one, then the open door bit is little more than acknowledging that the players are not prisoners at the table. If they need to get up and leave the GM needs to be OK with that. Has this ever not been the case?

To which I replied:

QuoteSo, if we have always had the right to get up and fuck off, why does a convention need to include several "safety tools" and make it mandatory to choose one?

It's the slow boil, you can't boil a frog alive unless you rise the water temperature little by little over a long period of time. The next step is to either make 2 "safety tools" mandatory or to remove the Open Door one, because nazis.

Mark my words in a short while (2 years tops) you'll see conventions forcing GMs to use the X-Card or some other snowflake "safety tool" if they wish to use the Open Door one, some will even remove the OD altogether.

It's about changing the culture of the hobby and kicking out those who refuse to bend the knee to their cult's dogma.

I'll say it again, we need the most dangerous convention to be a thing. A convention made anti-fragile against entryism by the cultists. Probably more than one, small affairs nothing too big.

Funny how context matters eh?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107051Funny how context matters eh?

Perhaps because it doesn't really matter all that much to me. I simply don't take these things as seriously as you would demand, and I'm not sorry about it. My life doesn't need more pointless outrage, but if yours does, then by all means keep tilting at windmills.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1107066Perhaps because it doesn't really matter all that much to me. I simply don't take these things as seriously as you would demand, and I'm not sorry about it. My life doesn't need more pointless outrage, but if yours does, then by all means keep tilting at windmills.

Nice to know you're happy quote mining to win an argument. how very honest of you.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107070Nice to know you're happy quote mining to win an argument. how very honest of you.

There was no argument, and there was no winner. That's the honest truth of it.

To Trinculo -

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1106966Has anyone ever used a safety item thing in a game you were in? I just can't imagine it ever coming up, but then I'm used to playing at friends' houses in a relaxed situation. This convention will be a little different I imagine.

Actually, I haven't seen an official "safety tool" used in a convention game I'm in, despite playing in two dozen or more games that used them. The one time I've seen one used was actually in a home game run by a friend, but that was pretty perfunctory. A player was in a mood of sorts, and she was talking about hitting some enemies in the genitals in explicit terms, and the GM touched the X-card and said to step it back. It seemed reasonable to me to ask the player to tone it down -- but it also was something that would be easy to do without the card.

The principle is supposedly that it is psychologically easier to bring up issues if the card is there, and thus some players feel reassured by it.

In my wider convention experience, I have seen players get angry and have an issue with the game they're in. They're extremely rare, though, and I just haven't happened to have seen it in games with safety tools. That could easily be coincidence, but at least they don't seem more common. So it doesn't seem like a big issue either way.

To Brendan -

Quote from: SHARKJhkim is far too educated and well-read to deny the force and implication of such facts. Jhkim, I think you are being purposely contrarian towards me. You know or you should know exactly what I'm talking about.

Quote from: Brendan;1107042Honestly, I think Jhkim is just like that.  I don't know what he does for a living (something science-y?), but in tech land (where I pay my bills) this need for rhetorical precision is a "thing" for some people; to the point that they seem to entirely miss the "gist" of what someone is trying to say and get bogged down in arguing the details.  It's frustrating sometimes and I don't know how to solve it, but I THINK jhkim is trying to argue in good faith.

Maybe I have some internal contrarian bias, but this isn't just a nitpick. I'm genuinely against the spirit of SHARK's overall point. I thought the talk about agitators working towards communist overthrow is fucked up, just as much as leftist complaints about Trump working with white supremacists towards a new rise of fascism. I consider it paranoid partisan bullshit, which I'm opposed to not just because I'm on the liberal side, but would be opposing even if I was on that side.

Quote from: Brendan;1106786First, there is no problem with "consent" in gaming.  Gaming is an inherently consenting activity.  No one is kidnapping anyone and forcing them to roll dice against their will.  No one is keeping anyone at a table if they decide they're not having fun.  This is a fake, bullshit, made-up problem.

(To Darrin Kelley)

Quote from: Brendan;1106786I'm sure you mean well. I'm sure most of the people who are "concerned" about this and just want to be "nice people" and "allies" or whatever mean well, but you being "useful idiots".

This is an explicitly political agenda.  It's about control.  It's partially about control of the game itself, but more than that its about control of GAMING.  More than a language control mechanism, it's a sorting mechanism. Like the Party's "2+2=5" from 1984, adherence to the "consent doctrine" - that RPGs are unsafe spaces full of evil bad-think guys and poor victims that need protection, signals that you are on the "good side", either as a partisan or at least as a bystander. If, on the other hand, you reject it or horror of horrors, actively resist, this means you are one of the "bad people" and should be UN-personed.

I'm in agreement about the first part. Where I disagree is about dismissing what people actually think because they're "useful idiots" - and that what matters is the subversive agenda that is supposedly behind them.

I think people should be judged on what they say, rather than on "dog whistle" claims that when they say X they really mean Y, so judge them on Y.

I can believe there are some people with an explicit political agenda who are encouraging RPG safety tools as a strategy for control. But regardless of their existence, that doesn't mean it's OK to dismiss what someone actually says. There is an objective reality outside of what radical partisans think. If someone thinks that the conversation over safety tool topics is important, then opposition should show that it is not important - not just say "Well, communists think it's important."

Quote from: jhkim;1107115To Brendan -

I can believe there are some people with an explicit political agenda who are encouraging RPG safety tools as a strategy for control. But regardless of their existence, that doesn't mean it's OK to dismiss what someone actually says.

Actually it is.  That's my point.  The right attitude here is dismissal.  It's a bullshit solution to a made up problem and I don't have to take it seriously, because it isn't serious.  The only reason it exists is for control.  

"Useful idiots" by definition don't think they're being used.  That's what makes them "useful" to the movement that spawned them.  I'm sure that burns, but we can all be played. We're human.  I've been played before.  It sucks.  I can be sympathetic to this without buying into the narrative that is using them.

We might not see eye to eye here, but think about it this way.  Let's say someone tells you that you need to give them your car because of the impending Martian invasion.  Do you:

A) Hand over your car keys.

B) Seriously consider the merits of their argument and whether or not you should hand over your car keys.

C) Decline, perhaps politely at first but firmly if necessary, and walk away.

Obviously you choose C.  You don't seriously entertain B, because the frame around the issue is delusional.  

This is how we feel about the consent check-list, X-card, nonsense.  You may see it differently, but perhaps you can understand why we don't feel obligated to choose option B.

Quote from: Brendan;1107120We might not see eye to eye here, but think about it this way.  Let's say someone tells you that you need to give them your car because of the impending Martian invasion.  Do you:

A) Hand over your car keys.

B) Seriously consider the merits of their argument and whether or not you should hand over your car keys.

C) Decline, perhaps politely at first but firmly if necessary, and walk away.

Obviously you choose C.  You don't seriously entertain B, because the frame around the issue is delusional.

This is how we feel about the consent check-list, X-card, nonsense.  You may see it differently, but perhaps you can understand why we don't feel obligated to choose option B.

Actually, the case I'm going on here is:

Someone tells me that I need to stop playing RPG convention games like I do at Big Bad Con because it's helping communists overthrow the government.

On the face of it, I think that this is idiotic, but I'm trying to discuss it rationally. These are fucking games. Even if I disagree with someone about how they should be played, I think associating them with communist overthrow of the government is absurd.

Quote from: jhkim;1107128Actually, the case I'm going on here is:

Someone tells me that I need to stop playing RPG convention games like I do at Big Bad Con because it's helping communists overthrow the government.

On the face of it, I think that this is idiotic, but I'm trying to discuss it rationally. These are fucking games. Even if I disagree with someone about how they should be played, I think associating them with communist overthrow of the government is absurd.

Who told YOU that you needed to stop playing convention games? Citation needed.

Quote from: blackstone;1106095An asshole is an asshole regardless of being armed or not. Nor doesn't prevent people from being assholes.

This is not on topic. Don't post in this thread again.

Quote from: jhkim;1107115(To Darrin Kelley)

I'm in agreement about the first part. Where I disagree is about dismissing what people actually think because they're "useful idiots" - and that what matters is the subversive agenda that is supposedly behind them.

I think people should be judged on what they say, rather than on "dog whistle" claims that when they say X they really mean Y, so judge them on Y.

I can believe there are some people with an explicit political agenda who are encouraging RPG safety tools as a strategy for control. But regardless of their existence, that doesn't mean it's OK to dismiss what someone actually says. There is an objective reality outside of what radical partisans think. If someone thinks that the conversation over safety tool topics is important, then opposition should show that it is not important - not just say "Well, communists think it's important."

I'm not sure why you addressed this to me. I am definitely not for pushing these tools into people's faces. Or for making them a requirement for convention games.

A GM at every convention I have been at is already required at sign-up to declare content ratings for their games. So that convention attendees can easily determine if that game is for them or not. Nothing really additional is needed. In my opinion.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1107136I'm not sure why you addressed this to me. I am definitely not for pushing these tools into people's faces. Or for making them a requirement for convention games.

Sorry, Darrin. I wasn't addressing you - I was clarifying who Brendan was replying to in the quote. The quote addresses a "you", and I wanted to clarify whom his post was addressed to.

Quote from: jhkim;1107140Sorry, Darrin. I wasn't addressing you - I was clarifying who Brendan was replying to in the quote. The quote addresses a "you", and I wanted to clarify whom his post was addressed to.

It's all cool. No harm, no foul.

Quote from: Brendan;1106786No, it's fucking not.

Your experience is not my experience.

I had some good teachers when I started into RPGs. One's that sat me down and gave me a nice long talk about acceptable content to counter any edgelord notions I might have had. I was told to be sensitive about extreme subjects and to be prepared in advance for the most extreme ones.

This isn't political to me. I view it in the purview of showing basic human empathy.

There are no fucking rapes in my games. No chopping people up into chum and throwing those pieces to the sharks. No sexualized torture.

There are boundaries set by the group in session zero. Ones expected to be followed by every participant. Including the GM. And that's it.

You are being as bad as those you criticize. By forcing this to be a political issue. When it is anything but.

Greetings!

Well, for the deluded folks living in Rainbow Barney Land, review various commentary by Melan, GeekyBugle, Spinachcat, and Brendan, as well as myself. For additional enlightenment, listen to Pundit's videos and pay the fuck attention. Additional explanation of Alinsky's Rules For Radicals, and exposition, from S'mon.

SJW's are most certainly fucking Communists, Socialist, and Globalists. They are often explicitly aligned with the goals of such, and even when they are not, they are in denial and deluded about how their own philosophies and goals are in sync with the same methods, goals and philosophy of Globalist/Communists. Hence, "Useful Idiots" at best, and sympathizers and fellow travelers at worst.

Game all you want with such people. Live in Rainbow Barney Land all you want. However, to deny the connections and conscious as well as unconscious sympathies to the Globalist/Communist agenda is simply deluded and blind--or entirely disingenuous.

I have articulated and defended this assessment, and there's not a damned thing that is "Absurd" about it. My assessment is based on facts, evidence, and observing the correlations between the various elements and known goals and philosophies.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Here's my "session zero".

I tend to go for a PG-13 tone in most of my games. If I think I'm going to go somewhere past that, I'll give the group a heads up.
If anyone has a problem with something, they can bring it up. It might be non-negotiable. Say slavery in Dark Sun. I feel it's important for the tone of the setting.

If someone needs an X-Card or a checklist... well good on them, but I don't do X-Cards or checklists. Talk to me like a frikkin adult.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1107155Here's my "session zero".

I tend to go for a PG-13 tone in most of my games. If I think I'm going to go somewhere past that, I'll give the group a heads up.
If anyone has a problem with something, they can bring it up. It might be non-negotiable. Say slavery in Dark Sun. I feel it's important for the tone of the setting.

If someone needs an X-Card or a checklist... well good on them, but I don't do X-Cards or checklists. Talk to me like a frikkin adult.

That sounds good, and I do much the same when I GM a game. I do believe that the uses of the safety tools suggested for cons hinge on the fact that there is no session zero for such games coupled with playing with people that are unfamiliar with one another, and that using the safety tools in home games would be very weird (at least for me).

What is also needed beyond session 0 is also a healthy dose of common sense both as a player and a DM.

Sexual assault or sexualized. Who the hell do some of you rpg with. Someone character being torn apart occasionally  fans if they do it by being stupid. Charging a monster or group on low HP the character is torn to shreds.

As for X-cards I don't  like them. Not the concept of it the implementation  which I find highly disruptive. Both sides players and DMs share responsibility on choosing the rightvgame to join and the rightvwayvto run it. Suffering from Aracnophobia then as a plsyerbone has no damn business joining a campaign centered around fighting Spiders and possibly Lolth. Yes the DM can change an encounter or Two, an entire campaign due to a refusal  to find another table reeks if entitlement.

Players and DM of staff that want and not want to see st Session 0 and the DM does the complete  opposite.  Yeah it may be your table and campaign  your  our still a dick, if a player takes a swing at you I may just take extra long and pulling him off you.

Session zero is key and will always be can important  part of any games I play or run.

Quote from: jhkim;1107128Actually, the case I'm going on here is:

Someone tells me that I need to stop playing RPG convention games like I do at Big Bad Con because it's helping communists overthrow the government.

On the face of it, I think that this is idiotic, but I'm trying to discuss it rationally. These are fucking games. Even if I disagree with someone about how they should be played, I think associating them with communist overthrow of the government is absurd.

As GeekyBugle pointed out in so many words, this is a straw-man.  No one has advanced any such argument.  Actually, it's more than a straw-man. You're re-framing the entire terms of the debate, flipping the sides around to make it appear that the aggressors are actually on the defensive and vice versa.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1107151Your experience is not my experience.

I had some good teachers when I started into RPGs. One's that sat me down and gave me a nice long talk about acceptable content to counter any edgelord notions I might have had. I was told to be sensitive about extreme subjects and to be prepared in advance for the most extreme ones.

This isn't political to me. I view it in the purview of showing basic human empathy.

There are no fucking rapes in my games. No chopping people up into chum and throwing those pieces to the sharks. No sexualized torture.

There are boundaries set by the group in session zero. Ones expected to be followed by every participant. Including the GM. And that's it.

You are being as bad as those you criticize. By forcing this to be a political issue. When it is anything but.

You're confusing two separate things:

1) Basic human empathy and setting an appropriate game tone for your group.

2) Demanding that human social interaction be governed by formal systems like "X-cards", "Consent check-lists", etc

This is, of course, intentional.  It's a classic Motte & Bailey approach.  They trot out the "X-Card" and the "Consent check-list" and when anyone objects they retreat to, "Hey, this isn't political.  It's just about - like, being a nice person.  What are you, some kind of RAPY EDGE LORD?!?!"  

You think this ISN'T political?  Oh, you sweet summer child...

Quote from: jhkimActually, the case I'm going on here is:

Someone tells me that I need to stop playing RPG convention games like I do at Big Bad Con because it's helping communists overthrow the government.

On the face of it, I think that this is idiotic, but I'm trying to discuss it rationally. These are fucking games. Even if I disagree with someone about how they should be played, I think associating them with communist overthrow of the government is absurd.

Not really. They are trying to rewrite the fundamental narratives of our culture by infiltrating our stories and games. Examples are the vandalization of Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek, and many others, all of which have been usurped by radicals to push their political agenda. I try to be neutral, but these are, or were, my favorite movies and TV shows I'm talking about. Back in the day, the Sun Makers (an episode of Doctor Who) was edited to remove overtly political content so as not to alienate half of the audience. Whatever happened to that kind of practical common sense? Anyone that would intentionally ruin a lucrative franchise to send a political message is either a total idiot or a malevolent ideologue. When it keeps happening over and over again, one has to assume the latter.

I can no longer sit down to watch a movie or TV show or play a game without wondering if I'm about to have radical ideologues vomit forth their hatred and ruin whatever it is that I'm trying to enjoy.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley...There are no fucking rapes in my games. No chopping people up into chum and throwing those pieces to the sharks. No sexualized torture.

There are boundaries set by the group in session zero. Ones expected to be followed by every participant. Including the GM. And that's it...

In the current political climate, this could easily be interpreted to indicate hostility toward "toxic masculinity", or hatred towards men, more so because of the swearing. Especially given that it is sufficient to use previously established norms, namely the rating system by the MPAA (G, PG, PG-13, R, NC17). Like, "this is a family-friendly game, so let's keep it G-rated." Everyone understands what that means.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1107238In the current political climate, this could easily be interpreted to indicate hostility toward "toxic masculinity", or hatred towards men, more so because of the swearing. Especially given that it is sufficient to use previously established norms, namely the rating system by the MPAA (G, PG, PG-13, R, NC17). Like, "this is a family-friendly game, so let's keep it G-rated." Everyone understands what that means.

I don't care what the current political climate is! I don't want politics at my game table!

I have been able to play fine with a group of people that has wildly different political beliefs. But none of us bring it to the game table. We leave that garbage at the door and focus on having fun with the game. Our escape from the real world for just one day.

Quote from: jhkimSomeone tells me that I need to stop playing RPG convention games like I do at Big Bad Con because it's helping communists overthrow the government.

Quote from: Brendan;1107224As GeekyBugle pointed out in so many words, this is a straw-man.  No one has advanced any such argument.  Actually, it's more than a straw-man. You're re-framing the entire terms of the debate, flipping the sides around to make it appear that the aggressors are actually on the defensive and vice versa.

We are framing the debate differently.

I'm saying that people should be able to play however they want to play. That playing with the X-card is OK, and that playing without the X-card is OK. I don't use it in most of my games, but I don't have a problem with others using it, and if I'm playing in a game that uses it, I'm fine.

You're framing it that anyone using an X-card is inherently an aggressor. i.e. If some hippy liberals play with an X-card in their game, they're the aggressor invading your space. I don't agree with that framing. It's possible for either side to be aggressors -- i.e. "all games must use the X-card" or "no games should use the X-card". Both of those are One-True-Wayism.

If someone was sitting down to my table for the first time and said, "I saw something online about using a survey to see what other players and the DM were expecting from the game, especially around pushing people's comfort boundaries around violence and sexuality, and I was thinking that might be a good idea," I would probably agree.

These are things that we do discuss, and I don't have a problem with having an established framework.  I haven't had one before, so I'm fine with using the casual discussion as we have always done, but I can see the benefit of making it less casual and more explicit.  There are probably some things that I consider SO INOFFENSIVE, that I can't imagine how ANYONE could find it offensive - that doesn't mean that I can't try to show consideration to that person.  

Taken in another direction, I like using spiders and giant-creepy-crawlies as antagonists.  There are some people that really do bug out.  It's worth talking about whether that's the appropriate level of 'real life discomfort' that players want when they're in a dungeon or if I can replace those types of monsters with something that doesn't prey on the player's personal phobias.

I take from a different stance. I want to be surprised. I want to enjoy the game for what the setting is promising. What I don't want is some person who is so sensitive that even normal modes of in-game assumptions can't be engaged because of their apparent crippling sensitivities which I have no vested interested in entertaining purely for their sake, exist outside of the game.

What I find odd is the common proclamation from SJW's about being atheists yet they performatively demand that others engage in their puritanical virtue-signalling rituals like the X-card.

Why is the presumption that if the X-card isn't in effect then the game *must* have troubling content? If that is not the assumption, then why does the X-card exist?

Edit: But again - it is only in the last few years that I've had to have these kinds of discussions. I don't run at conventions any longer (partially for these reasons) and when it comes to my group in particular - I would weed such people out in the interview process, for their own sake as well as mine since I run games for mature, mentally healthy adults.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1107243If someone was sitting down to my table for the first time and said, "I saw something online about using a survey to see what other players and the DM were expecting from the game, especially around pushing people's comfort boundaries around violence and sexuality, and I was thinking that might be a good idea," I would probably agree.

These are things that we do discuss, and I don't have a problem with having an established framework.  I haven't had one before, so I'm fine with using the casual discussion as we have always done, but I can see the benefit of making it less casual and more explicit.  There are probably some things that I consider SO INOFFENSIVE, that I can't imagine how ANYONE could find it offensive - that doesn't mean that I can't try to show consideration to that person.  

Taken in another direction, I like using spiders and giant-creepy-crawlies as antagonists.  There are some people that really do bug out.  It's worth talking about whether that's the appropriate level of 'real life discomfort' that players want when they're in a dungeon or if I can replace those types of monsters with something that doesn't prey on the player's personal phobias.

In all seriousness, I did have a player that had some sort of aversion to bare feet. She got squicked out by seeing bare feet. We had another player that played a halfling and often described his character's feet as a point of pride (in another game he had a dwarf and did the same kind of thing with the character's beard). He would discuss massaging his feet after a day's march, warming them at the fire (and the cheese-like odor that wafted off of them), combing his foot hairs in the morning, and more. We didn't realize that this bothered the other player at first, but once she spoke up, all it took was a brief conversation and he dialed it way back.

So yeah, you never know just what is going to bother some people.

Quote from: jhkimThese are fucking games. Even if I disagree with someone about how they should be played, I think associating them with communist overthrow of the government is absurd.

Quote from: Cloyer Bulse;1107238Not really. They are trying to rewrite the fundamental narratives of our culture by infiltrating our stories and games. Examples are the vandalization of Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek, and many others, all of which have been usurped by radicals to push their political agenda. I try to be neutral, but these are, or were, my favorite movies and TV shows I'm talking about. Back in the day, the Sun Makers (an episode of Doctor Who) was edited to remove overtly political content so as not to alienate half of the audience. Whatever happened to that kind of practical common sense? Anyone that would intentionally ruin a lucrative franchise to send a political message is either a total idiot or a malevolent ideologue.

Games can contain ideology - but they're not mind control. I don't think tabletop RPGs are brainwashing anyone -- certainly less so than television and movies. If conservative people want to play conservative games, that's not inherently backing a conservative overthrow of legitimate government. Likewise if liberal people want to play liberal games, that's not inherently backing a liberal overthrow of legitimate government.

Regarding your examples, Star Trek in particular has *always* been political and ideological. Indeed, it was more politically/ideologically charged back in the 1960s when it started compared to recent handling of the franchise. I would say that if anything, it's vandalism to *remove* political/ideological messages from Star Trek. Though really, I think it's silly to complain that the owner of a franchise is "vandalizing" it. More broadly, I disapprove of reducing all creative works to so that they're not offensive to anyone. It's fine for some works to alienate liberal audiences, and it's fine for some works to alienate conservative audiences.

Quote from: jhkim;1107241We are framing the debate differently.

I'm saying that people should be able to play however they want to play. That playing with the X-card is OK, and that playing without the X-card is OK. I don't use it in most of my games, but I don't have a problem with others using it, and if I'm playing in a game that uses it, I'm fine.

You're framing it that anyone using an X-card is inherently an aggressor. i.e. If some hippy liberals play with an X-card in their game, they're the aggressor invading your space. I don't agree with that framing. It's possible for either side to be aggressors -- i.e. "all games must use the X-card" or "no games should use the X-card". Both of those are One-True-Wayism.

Except the discussion is about the implementation of such "safety tools" in cons, in an obligatory form, Who do you think is behind this?

Can you see the difference between this and some "hippy liberals" (SJWs are not liberals, they are puritanical, authoritarian cultists) using the x-card in their games?

No of course you don't.

Quote from: jhkim;1107248Games can contain ideology - but they're not mind control. I don't think tabletop RPGs are brainwashing anyone -- certainly less so than television and movies. If conservative people want to play conservative games, that's not inherently backing a conservative overthrow of legitimate government. Likewise if liberal people want to play liberal games, that's not inherently backing a liberal overthrow of legitimate government.

So do you think that X-Cards do not have a correlative effect on people that do not want to be told how to speak/think in direct interference of the kind of game they're trying to run?

It may not rise to the level of "mind-control" - but in terms of irritation it probably runs fantastically high. High enough that some people don't want to have to run their games like that as an overt mechanic. And you're also conflating externalities with in-game conceits.

What IS a "conservative" game? The criteria you're using sounds weird. Are you saying a game set during the War of Independence would construe as a "conservative game" - I'm not clear what you're insinuating with that odd phrase as an example. I don't know what a "liberal game" is either.

There's just... "the game". And the setting's conceits are exemplified by the GM. And the players are in - or not.  I dunno where the "conservative" or "liberal" stuff happens.

Quote from: jhkim;1107248Regarding your examples, Star Trek in particular has *always* been political and ideological. Indeed, it was more politically/ideologically charged back in the 1960s when it started compared to recent handling of the franchise. I would say that if anything, it's vandalism to *remove* political/ideological messages from Star Trek. Though really, I think it's silly to complain that the owner of a franchise is "vandalizing" it. More broadly, I disapprove of reducing all creative works to so that they're not offensive to anyone. It's fine for some works to alienate liberal audiences, and it's fine for some works to alienate conservative audiences.

But today's Star Trek is antithetical to the conceits of older forms of Star Trek. Older Star Trek valued egalitarian and meritocratic ideals *after* having genocidal nuclear wars... because of people practicing dumb shit that you see in modern Star Trek (and more so in modern left politics - Eco-terrorists, Bullshit purity Voting blocs) whose leftist authoritarian groups dropped nukes and carried out genocide on those hotbeds of diveristy - Richamond Indiana. Which then led to the Eugenics wars... and later, those same leftists that survived used their stupid cultural relativism to blame the Vulcans for *not* stopping the dumb humans from killing themselves. How convenient.

Leftists today would *never* have the Prime Directive for that exact reason.

Greetings!

You know what? Fuck the "X-Card." X-Cards are for weak fucking pussies. Politically, X-Cards are yet just another mechanism of social control pushed by whiny bitch SJW's. I have zero interest in playing with mentally fragile, fucked up people.

It's ok to hack people to death with swords, or have someone gulped down and devoured by a dragon, or roasted alive by a wizard's fireball....but spiders, or bare feet, or the Fighter getting his groove on and fucking the cute tavern girl is "EEEWWWW! That stuff is Squicky!"

Give me a fucking break. Real life doesn't give a fuck about your little pet phobia's and emotion-driven Angst-fest, and an immersive fantasy game isn't going to cater to your stupid ass, either. I certainly am not going to. My table has war, death, slavery, horrifying diseases, grinding poverty and despair, and people everywhere getting crushed by evil tyrants and monsters. Those people that are timid, weak, and fucked in the head with whatever can just stay in Happy Rainbow Barney Land. As many have said already, the large majority of these emotionally fragile basket-cases really need to be in therapy with a counselor, and not playing violent fantasy role-playing games where at any moment, they can be "Triggered" into some emotional siezure.

X-Cards again, are just another mechanism of social control pushed by the SJW bitches to normalize and force everyone else that is normal and healthy to coddle the emotional basket-cases and fucked up social misfits of one stripe or another. Instead of the game being focused on as a game by normal, healthy adults, everyone needs to clutch their nuts and walk on eggshells while catering to the emotional tampons and pearl-clutching misfits. I don't fucking think so. X-Cards should be rejected and denounced at every turn, wherever some SJW moron REEEE's and screeches to have them used!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

What ISN'T X-card worthy by the nebulous standards of the rando at a given table?

I mean having a "safe word" in BDSM is because you're actually *doing* something that directly affects someone. How in the hell does this correlate to gaming at a table that doesn't end with "Maybe you don't realize this is make-believe and if that's too hardcore for you - you should not be playing these kinds of games?"

Quote from: jhkim;1107241We are framing the debate differently.

I'm saying that people should be able to play however they want to play.

Then we are in fundamental agreement and have nothing to argue about.  

Quote from: jhkim;1107241If some hippy liberals play with an X-card in their game, they're the aggressor invading your space.

No, that's ridiculous.  You're either not following what's going on around you because of some mental disability like autism, being intentionally disingenuous to try and win the argument, or suffering from some kind of massive cognitive dissonance that requires you scramble all the signals and actors so that this situation lines up with some kind of preconceived left/right bias.   I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume its the later.

Quote from: Brendan;1107275No, that's ridiculous.  You're either not following what's going on around you because of some mental disability like autism, being intentionally disingenuous to try and win the argument, or suffering from some kind of massive cognitive dissonance that requires you scramble all the signals and actors so that this situation lines up with some kind of preconceived left/right bias.   I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume its the later.

LOL Brendan... you have *no idea*.

Brace yourself.

Quote from: GIMME SOME SUGAR;1106199[ATTACH=CONFIG]3869[/ATTACH]

The use of images in this context is on the very edge of the line. Consider this a no-consequence warning to dial it back.

Quote from: Brendan;1107275Then we are in fundamental agreement and have nothing to argue about.  



No, that's ridiculous.  You're either not following what's going on around you because of some mental disability like autism, being intentionally disingenuous to try and win the argument, or suffering from some kind of massive cognitive dissonance that requires you scramble all the signals and actors so that this situation lines up with some kind of preconceived left/right bias.   I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume its the later.

Aspie here (diagnosed by doctors not self-diagnosed mind you), it's not because of autism.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107285Aspie here (diagnosed by doctors not self-diagnosed mind you), it's not because of autism.

Oh it's definitely not Aspergers... that's whittling down the options to the obvious.

Quote from: jhkimI'm saying that people should be able to play however they want to play.

Quote from: Brendan;1107275Then we are in fundamental agreement and have nothing to argue about.

Brendan, I'm going to quote from the last two posts here on the thread. My claim is that these are not representing the idea that people can choose to play with the X-card or not, and both are fine.

Quote from: tenbones;1107274What ISN'T X-card worthy by the nebulous standards of the rando at a given table?

I mean having a "safe word" in BDSM is because you're actually *doing* something that directly affects someone. How in the hell does this correlate to gaming at a table that doesn't end with "Maybe you don't realize this is make-believe and if that's too hardcore for you - you should not be playing these kinds of games?"

Quote from: SHARK;1107273You know what? Fuck the "X-Card." X-Cards are for weak fucking pussies. Politically, X-Cards are yet just another mechanism of social control pushed by whiny bitch SJW's. I have zero interest in playing with mentally fragile, fucked up people.

I disagree with both of these. It's not something I generally use, but I've played a bunch of games with people who use the X-card, and the games have been fine. I have no problem with them.

Quote from: tenbones;1107279LOL Brendan... you have *no idea*.

Brace yourself.

*snort* Uh oh.  

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107285Aspie here (diagnosed by doctors not self-diagnosed mind you), it's not because of autism.

Fair enough.

Quote from: jhkim;1107288I disagree with both of these. It's not something I generally use, but I've played a bunch of games with people who use the X-card, and the games have been fine. I have no problem with them.

Okay.  So would you also agree that its perfectly okay for a GM/DM to decline to allow X-Cards, or consent checklists; and that making this choice isn't a sign of wanting to abuse others?

Quote from: Brendan;1107293Okay.  So would you also agree that its perfectly okay for a GM/DM to decline to allow X-Cards, or consent checklists; and that making this choice isn't a sign of wanting to abuse others?

Yes, absolutely.

Quote from: jhkim;1107295Yes, absolutely.

I'm glad to hear it.

Quote from: jhkim;1107241You're framing it that anyone using an X-card is inherently an aggressor. i.e. If some hippy liberals play with an X-card in their game, they're the aggressor invading your space. I don't agree with that framing. It's possible for either side to be aggressors -- i.e. "all games must use the X-card" or "no games should use the X-card". Both of those are One-True-Wayism.

I am not sure you're reading the context of it all correctly. If some 80s gamers were playing RPGs in which they'd unironically glorify the dictatorship of the proletariate, they wouldn't have been gamers invading my space either, that much is true. However, their doing so would have been part of a broader movement that aggressively sought to push their values onto me and everyone around me. The socialists in the Warsaw Pact back then sought to push their mistaken ideology into any creative endeavour (don't think RPGs were a thing in the East back then though). So, in that sense, it would have been part of a wider push, especially as they talk about it with others and propagate their style of gaming.

Is this an apt analogy though? Well, that depends on if
a) we have highly ideological leftists again, pursuing a certain vision of a better world, that seek to permeate all walks of life (which, btw, would be a fairly totalitarian attitude towards the rest of society) with their new ideology
and
b) the x-card is part of that effort, whether consciously so or not.

Well, you be the judge. I have made no final call with regards to that but in the face of German history in the second part of the 20th century, my suspicions have been raised.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107359I am not sure you're reading the context of it all correctly.

I think that you're failing to account for a player's agenda versus a character's agenda.  

I'm not a Communist.  I'm also not an Elf.  Either one can be fun to play on a Sunday afternoon.  

Trying to establish what character ACTIONS are uncomfortable for some players is a completely reasonable thing that every single GM worth their salt has been dealing with for a long time.  Recognizing that there are things that don't make you personally uncomfortable that might reasonably make other people uncomfortable is important, and not everyone has a firm grasp on that.  

This may not be the best way, but it's not automatically a bad way.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107359If some 80s gamers were playing RPGs in which they'd unironically glorify the dictatorship of the proletariate, they wouldn't have been gamers invading my space either, that much is true. However, their doing so would have been part of a broader movement that aggressively sought to push their values onto me and everyone around me. The socialists in the Warsaw Pact back then sought to push their mistaken ideology into any creative endeavour (don't think RPGs were a thing in the East back then though). So, in that sense, it would have been part of a wider push, especially as they talk about it with others and propagate their style of gaming.

Yes, I agree that this is the issue. There are some people who believe that they should police other people's RPG playing, and if their RPGs have themes in support of the wrong politics, then action should be taken to shut down those RPGs. I don't go in for this school of thought, for two reasons:

1) I don't believe that playing RPGs is an effective tool for political change. They may have some impact, but they are less effective than traditional political activity. Thus, my games will passively reflect my beliefs and values, but when I want to make political change in the world, I do it by donating to organizations, going to meetings, and talking about politics rather than anything in how I play RPGs.

2) Even if RPGs were effective, I think it's better to campaign positively rather than negatively. i.e. Rather than railing about how bad RPGs with wrongthink in them are, I think it would be ultimately more effective to demonstrate how cool and fun RPGs with goodthink in them can be.

Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107359Is this an apt analogy though? Well, that depends on if
a) we have highly ideological leftists again, pursuing a certain vision of a better world, that seek to permeate all walks of life (which, btw, would be a fairly totalitarian attitude towards the rest of society) with their new ideology
and
b) the x-card is part of that effort, whether consciously so or not.

Particularly if it's not a conscious part of that effort, I question whether attacking use of the X-card is an effective tool against the leftist forces. To take a parallel from my side, I have friends who will spend time attacking the unconscious racism they perceive in different RPGs. I consider this often not just ineffective, but often even counter-productive. Telling someone that they are racist puts them on the defensive, and likely makes them more resistant to the message.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1107284The use of images in this context is on the very edge of the line. Consider this a no-consequence warning to dial it back.

My speech-to-text app malfunctioned that day. Now I have to make a thumbs down on one of your Youtube videos. I will downvote the latest video on How to Work as an RPG Writer, because you talk alot about other stuff in that video, and because you know Varg Vikernes would eat you for breakfast.

The downside isn't that assholes might abuse X cards. The downside is:

A) The emphasis on safety, transgression, and anxiety make it seem as though playing RPGs is some kind of dubious activity run by skeevy weirdos.

B) It rolls out the welcome mat to handwringing scolds who get their sense of self-worth from policing the behaviour of others.

And all to address a 'problem' that's largely fabricated by those same scolds.

Quote from: jhkim;1107429Particularly if it's not a conscious part of that effort, I question whether attacking use of the X-card is an effective tool against the leftist forces. To take a parallel from my side, I have friends who will spend time attacking the unconscious racism they perceive in different RPGs. I consider this often not just ineffective, but often even counter-productive. Telling someone that they are racist puts them on the defensive, and likely makes them more resistant to the message.

Attacking? Who is attacking anything or anyone?

Criticizing on the other hand yes, we've been very critical of this and other similar "safety tools". As for the "unconscious" {insert buzzword here}. It's nothing more than mind reading, whoever uses that is pretending to know what the accused feels/thinks about X.

Session Zero is the solution for the nuggets of trhruth behind the push for control by the puritanical, holier than thou scolds (thanks Haffrung!), paired with the ages old just walk away.

Not all games are for me, nor should they be. For instance some games by Grim Jim or Venger aren't for me. And it's a good thing that those games exist for the people who like those types of games.

Also not al sessions/campaigns are for me, for instance those with a pletora of very special snowflake races for the player to choose from. And it's a good thing those who enjoy it can play like that.

A session of say D6D could also not be for me if it is too similar to those games from Venger and Grim I was talking about. And as a player I have the power to choose not to play or stop playing, but beyond session zero I as a player shouldn't have the power to stop everything with no explanation and make the GM change stuff just because I'm triggered. It's not a psychological session and your therapist will tell you to confront your phobias/triggers not to avoid them.

So, even granting that there are people so traumatized the mere mention of [insert whatever here] sends them in a loop and so utterly stupid as to not warn the GM beforehand, why should they have the power to affect everybody else's fun and make the GM change shit?

Notice the word POWER, if you ask nicely and explain yourself I will accommodate you most of the time. But, if were playing a game called Z-Nation and you come to me (after we started the game) with the tale of you having problems with Zombies because one ate your homework once.... Well snowflake just walk away, nobody is chaining you to the table.

Quote from: jhkim;1107288I disagree with both of these. It's not something I generally use, but I've played a bunch of games with people who use the X-card, and the games have been fine. I have no problem with them.

I suspect you GM a very different kind of game than I do, though.

Quote from: tenbones;1107500I suspect you GM a very different kind of game than I do, though.

Greetings!

Hey Tenbones! I thought I heard Jhkim say before that he has only rarely seen the X-card ever used, then he says that he has played "a bunch of games with people who use the X-card..." Am I remembering it wrong, brother?:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Haffrung;1107436The downside isn't that assholes might abuse X cards. The downside is:

A) The emphasis on safety, transgression, and anxiety make it seem as though playing RPGs is some kind of dubious activity run by skeevy weirdos.

B) It rolls out the welcome mat to handwringing scolds who get their sense of self-worth from policing the behaviour of others.

And all to address a 'problem' that's largely fabricated by those same scolds.

This needs to be printed on the back covers of RPG books.

Quote from: SHARK;1107504Hey Tenbones! I thought I heard Jhkim say before that he has only rarely seen the X-card ever used, then he says that he has played "a bunch of games with people who use the X-card..." Am I remembering it wrong, brother?:D

I said I played a bunch of games where the X-card mechanic was in place. However, there was only one instance when anyone actually invoked the X-card, and that use was pretty perfunctory. So in nearly all the games, the GM puts out the X-card at the start of play, but it's like a fire extinguisher -- there for emergencies but not normally used.

More specifically -- I've played in at least a dozen convention games that have used the X-card, plus a half-dozen sessions of a home FATE game with a particular friend GMing. And I've used it twice as GM, when running the game Bluebeard's Bride at conventions - because in that game the X-card is written into the rules, so it's an expected part of play. The one time I did see it used was when it was invoked by the GM, when a player was in a weird mood and she was describing attacking some enemies in the genitals. The GM touched the card and asked her to back it up. That seems like a token use of it, since the GM could say that anyway, but technically it's a use.

When GMing Bluebeard's Bride, it's a pretty relentless horror game. In my two games so far, I've had one PC death, and a whole lot of pain and torture inflicted on the PCs. It's one of the darkest horror games I've GMed. So I find it really weird for you to say that these games are "Happy Barney Land". Yes, a player could have vetoed some of the pain and torture, but they didn't because they came to play a horror game and enjoyed it.

Any shared space will eventually become completely beholden to the most aggressive faction; this usually works best if the aggression isn't very strong; merely persistent, but never relenting as steps of change are secured until a critical mass is reached.  All that must be done is to keep the other side discussing your actions amongst themselves in lieu of any actions of their own.  The discussion can be entirely disapproving, so long as it remains an abstract response to your concrete iteration.

Unless conventions know for sure that they'll lose support before they're asked to adopt checklists on a DM-choice basis, they'll surely rationalize it as an acceptable compromise.  And it will remain DM-choice for a time.

Quote from: trechriron;1107508This needs to be printed on the back covers of RPG books.

Maybe.

I seem to remember arguing against your advocation of playing in RPG character rape in public. Some stuff is for public consumption and some is for private consumption, and Session Zero coupled with Common Sense is the best way to handle all of the above.

Quote from: jeff37923;1107529Some stuff is for public consumption and some is for private consumption, and Session Zero coupled with Common Sense is the best way to handle all of the above.

Dammit, Jeff.

You need to stop with those completely unrealistic expectations that everyone actually talk among themselves to come up with reasonable parameters...
We're gamers!  We aren't allowed to have a social skill set above that of a 5-year-old.

Quote from: jeff37923;1107529Maybe.

I seem to remember arguing against your advocation of playing in RPG character rape in public. Some stuff is for public consumption and some is for private consumption, and Session Zero coupled with Common Sense is the best way to handle all of the above.

Completely agree and seconded. Both Players and DMs should be implementing Session Zero. Even with that a campaign involving mature themes such as sexual assault (I honestly think that should  never ever be included) is the responsibility on the DM part to mention it from the start. It is also the player responsibility  to make sure it is a campaign worth joining. With all due respect if he is told the campaign includes such distasteful elements and one is extremely bothered by them don't  join the damn game. Unfortunately modern life both in and outside of gaming it's  all about evading and ignoring ones personal responsibility.

I'd suggest a venn diagram of:

* RPG sessions that include disturbing or offensive material
* RPG tables where the players don't know each other well enough to be candid and comfortable talking about this stuff

...would have a vanishingly small amount of overlap.

Quote from: jhkim;1107510I said I played a bunch of games where the X-card mechanic was in place. However, there was only one instance when anyone actually invoked the X-card, and that use was pretty perfunctory. So in nearly all the games, the GM puts out the X-card at the start of play, but it's like a fire extinguisher -- there for emergencies but not normally used.

More specifically -- I've played in at least a dozen convention games that have used the X-card, plus a half-dozen sessions of a home FATE game with a particular friend GMing. And I've used it twice as GM, when running the game Bluebeard's Bride at conventions - because in that game the X-card is written into the rules, so it's an expected part of play. The one time I did see it used was when it was invoked by the GM, when a player was in a weird mood and she was describing attacking some enemies in the genitals. The GM touched the card and asked her to back it up. That seems like a token use of it, since the GM could say that anyway, but technically it's a use.

When GMing Bluebeard's Bride, it's a pretty relentless horror game. In my two games so far, I've had one PC death, and a whole lot of pain and torture inflicted on the PCs. It's one of the darkest horror games I've GMed. So I find it really weird for you to say that these games are "Happy Barney Land". Yes, a player could have vetoed some of the pain and torture, but they didn't because they came to play a horror game and enjoyed it.

So...

If a player did then play the X-card during your Bluebeard's Bride game would you have acquiesced to their desires to not play your darkest of horror games because that individual didn't like it? Despite as you clearly show, everyone else did - would you have bent the knee?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1107046It's the slow boil, you can't boil a frog alive unless you rise the water temperature little by little over a long period of time.

That actually doesn't work with frogs. They jump out long before they would ever boil. I suspect people do too, but this version of the slippery slope fallacy has been trotted out a lot in the last 10 years or so.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1107415Trying to establish what character ACTIONS are uncomfortable for some players is a completely reasonable thing that every single GM worth their salt has been dealing with for a long time.  Recognizing that there are things that don't make you personally uncomfortable that might reasonably make other people uncomfortable is important, and not everyone has a firm grasp on that.  

This may not be the best way, but it's not automatically a bad way.

Thanks for posting. This sort of non hysterical response has become increasingly rare lately.

Quote from: Bren;1107615That actually doesn't work with frogs. They jump out long before they would ever boil. I suspect people do too, but this version of the slippery slope fallacy has been trotted out a lot in the last 10 years or so.

Thanks for posting. This sort of non hysterical response has become increasingly rare lately.

The slippery slope fallacy I used to mock Christians about?

How many times the left has proven them right?

Let me explain it in gaming terms:

You introduce "safety tools" as a mandatory array in conventions, including the one most gamers would be okey with (open doors). Once this is the new normal you either remove Open Doors or make it so the GM HAS to use two "safety tools", and so on.

Go ahead and call it a slippery slope fallacy, I hope time proves you right and not me. It would be refreshing, but I fear I will be proven right once again, like with the open borders shit in Europe, the "refugees", the calls for not being offensive in atheists forums. Comic books, etc. Time and again my predictions turn out to be true, to my chagrin.

Quote from: Haffrung;1107600I'd suggest a venn diagram of:

* RPG sessions that include disturbing or offensive material
* RPG tables where the players don't know each other well enough to be candid and comfortable talking about this stuff

...would have a vanishingly small amount of overlap.

Convention horror games would often be in this set of overlap. Though, really, many convention games could have something that's disturbing to someone.

Quote from: tenbones;1107607If a player did then play the X-card during your Bluebeard's Bride game would you have acquiesced to their desires to not play your darkest of horror games because that individual didn't like it? Despite as you clearly show, everyone else did - would you have bent the knee?

Yes, I would. Particularly in a convention game, doing otherwise would be violating the agreed contract, which would suck IMO. If I had bad experiences with the X-card, then in future Bluebeard's Bride events that I run, I might change the rules -- but that's hypothetical. In that hypothetical, I'd make those house rules clear at the start of the game, and would at least mention in the description that there are variant rules in play.

For what it's worth, my second game of GMing Bluebeard's Bride was toned down from what I would otherwise do because of one player. Besides having the X-card in the rules, we also talked about lines at the start, and one player said she a harder line about sexual violence than the others. She seemed young, and I found out later that she was 17. In retrospect, I should have asked everyone's age since the game was supposed to be 18+, but she could easily have been 18 and felt the same way. So we agreed to keep things less extreme.

Hm, I don't know about playing a game about sexual violence with a minor. That's not really an appropriate thing.  


The only case I can think of when I was... not disturbed but annoyed and put-off by something in a game, was when I had some players who used torture on some captured monsters. On top of it being kind of distasteful, the whole thing was also just boring. It was early on in my GMing, and I think I could make that kind of scenario more interesting now, but I still am not interested in games with player characters who do that sort of thing. If it came up again with a new group I would just stop the game and tell them how I felt, and that they would have to try something else. I suppose that's a kind of un-spoken "x-card", minus the uncomfortable passive-aggressiveness of interrupting another player by reaching for a piece of paper with an X on it.

Easy solution at any table mandating an x-card: if someone touches the card, touch the card and x-card their x-card! I mean, they can't ask you why you used the x-card, so theoretically this would be valid, no? Then again, that could invite cascading x-cards. Sort of like poker, but without the game and everyone loses.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1107762Easy solution at any table mandating an x-card: if someone touches the card, touch the card and x-card their x-card! I mean, they can't ask you why you used the x-card, so theoretically this would be valid, no? Then again, that could invite cascading x-cards. Sort of like poker, but without the game and everyone loses.

Whether the x-card is a good option or not, I'll never advocate deliberately being a dick to others at the table just because you want to prove your point. As you say, everyone loses.

Quote from: jeff37923;1107529Maybe.

I seem to remember arguing against your advocation of playing in RPG character rape in public. Some stuff is for public consumption and some is for private consumption, and Session Zero coupled with Common Sense is the best way to handle all of the above.

Negative Ghost Rider. You have remembered wrong. I have always advocated such things are best left OUT of public games. I only advocate that consenting adults should be able to produce and play what they want. There should be no censorship of a Hentai game, or restriction of sales. I could be convinced to run such a game privately at a convention for an "after dark" style offering for interested parties. I would never consider running it in a normal time-slot of unsuspecting strangers. There are way too many mainstream games and one would have to be a clueless pervert to do such a thing. I may be a pervert but I have at least one clue.

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1107753Hm, I don't know about playing a game about sexual violence with a minor. That's not really an appropriate thing.

Yup, which one of the reasons I'm glad we discussed lines and agreed not to include such in that game. (Though again, in retrospect, I should have asked player's ages.)

Side note: Bluebeard's Bride is mostly about being attacked and/or driven insane by the tortured ghosts of Bluebeard's past brides. It's creepy haunted-house shit with a bunch of psychological trauma. So when I say I'm avoiding sexual violence in the game, I'm thinking of things like visions from a ghost of her past abuse. On the other hand, a ghost might just have been murdered rather than been subject to sexual violence. Hence, we discuss about lines, and have process for dealing with stuff getting too creepy to be fun.

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1107753The only case I can think of when I was... not disturbed but annoyed and put-off by something in a game, was when I had some players who used torture on some captured monsters. On top of it being kind of distasteful, the whole thing was also just boring. It was early on in my GMing, and I think I could make that kind of scenario more interesting now, but I still am not interested in games with player characters who do that sort of thing. If it came up again with a new group I would just stop the game and tell them how I felt, and that they would have to try something else. I suppose that's a kind of un-spoken "x-card", minus the uncomfortable passive-aggressiveness of interrupting another player by reaching for a piece of paper with an X on it.

The one time I've seen the X-card invoked was very similar to what you describe. I didn't feel like the use was passive-aggressive. That said, I'm not an advocate that the X-card is the best way to deal with these issues. I don't use it personally. I just don't find from my experience that it's as terrible as people here are making it out to be.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1107765Whether the x-card is a good option or not, I'll never advocate deliberately being a dick to others at the table just because you want to prove your point. As you say, everyone loses.

My post was more in jest than anything, I agree generally with the tenet "don't be a dick". Given the choice I would simply walk away from a table utilizing an x-card, probably accompanied by an eye-roll.

Quote from: Trinculoisdead;1107753Hm, I don't know about playing a game about sexual violence with a minor. That's not really an appropriate thing.

I won't even allow that in the character backgrounds submitted to me when I'm GMing. I have very few hard limits. And that is definitely one of them.

Quote from: Antiquation!;1108031My post was more in jest than anything, I agree generally with the tenet "don't be a dick". Given the choice I would simply walk away from a table utilizing an x-card, probably accompanied by an eye-roll.

I would probably give it a try before walking away. The card may never be tapped, or you might find that the group only uses it in a way that doesn't bother you. In either case you may have found a good game that you would have missed by preemptively walking away. If you give it a try and then it bugs you, then walking away makes sense.

As for rolling your eyes, just remember it doesn't count unless it lands on the table!

Quote from: HappyDaze;1108052I would probably give it a try before walking away. The card may never be tapped, or you might find that the group only uses it in a way that doesn't bother you. In either case you may have found a good game that you would have missed by preemptively walking away. If you give it a try and then it bugs you, then walking away makes sense.

If I found myself looking for a table at a convention (admittedly highly unlikely, but as a hypothetical), sure, I'd probably give it a shot. For what would be intended as an extended at-home campaign though, I wouldn't be interested in risking the time investiture. Stable long-term gaming is already a big enough investment of time and energy for me, I wouldn't be interested in adding 'safety tools' as another looming potential point of failure (in terms of my personal enjoyment and willingness to endure a game). Though, it may be something of a moot point in that I can't envision the type of personality that would want or require an ever-present x-card being the type that I would much enjoy gaming with anyway.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1108052As for rolling your eyes, just remember it doesn't count unless it lands on the table!

Just so long as it's my eyes and not my entire head!

The use of X-cards (and declaring your pronouns) mandatory to run Zweihander games at GenCon 2020.  How long before it is mandatory to run anything at Gen Con.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4195[/ATTACH]

Whole thing smells like an attempt to force normal people to abandon the hobby leaving only another circus jerk of freaklings behind so they can then gaze around and declare "ah, inclusiveness, equality, so powerful, so brave, so stunning, i'm doing my part, look at me am I not on the right side of history, yup it feels great to be so inclusive, I feel included, hey jim don't you feel included too? oh shit jim left in disgust earlier...ah well, he was anti-inclusive anyway, it's so much better to see his former table playing fursona characters coming to terms with ever increasing anal circumference than the same old white europeans colonizing goblins of color to increase their hordes of gold, like, how can you even own gold anyway, you didn't smelt that its not yours...oh shit save vs anal circumference increase guys this dragon is hung brah!"

Quote from: Gagarth;1123738The use of X-cards (and declaring your pronouns) mandatory to run Zweihander games at GenCon 2020.  How long before it is mandatory to run anything at Gen Con.

Christ, even on his sign-up forms Daniel can't resist trying to 'get his name out'.

Considering it's Not!WarhammerFantasy you'd expect the average person who actively uses X-Cards to be flashing it just about every turn.

I question how "Warhammery" it can get at a Convention where X-cards might be played purely for status-value.

They should just make a game add-on for Cards Against Humanity - called X-Card and call it an RPG... and get it over with.

Well that is the problem. As I've been pointing out for a long time now. These SJW cultists and the storygamer cultists treat RPGs exactly like a sex fetish and set out to infiltrate and co-opt just like certain sex fetish groups do to other groups. And storygamers and Forge cultists were spearheading this well ahead of the current moral outrage brigade.

Quote from: Slipshot762;1123760Whole thing smells like an attempt to force normal people to abandon the hobby leaving only another circus jerk of freaklings

Exactly why our hobby needs to become EXCLUSIVE and UNWELCOMING to the circus jerk of freaklings.

Quote from: tenbones;1123843I question how "Warhammery" it can get at a Convention where X-cards might be played purely for status-value.

I haven't read Zweihander, but Warhammer is pretty much built on "nasty, brutish and short" life in a crapsack world of grotesques (with a big dose of black humour to lighten it, something the woke types are especially sensitive to). That doesn't work in combination with wokeness. It is an unstable combination that yields only tepid, lukewarm games.

Did I read the image correctly and that you're agreeing to always use the X-Card even if you're not at the convention?

And to clarify the X card isn't about not being a jerk - it's a very clear set of rules. A player at any time can tap it and the GM instantly has to guess at what they're doing that's upsetting that person, but they can't ask, and then stop doing it, potentially having to rewrite a planned scenario on the fly. I'm not saying it's good or bad, but it's not just "don't be a jerk".

Not sure where Zweihander is going in general. I actually love the product but their most recent touted release was a Cat People race, which seems like a pretty aggressive turn towards D&D 5e sensibilities.

Maybe we're thinking about this all wrong.  Maybe we should stop resisting the inevitable and get on the "right side" of history guys.  Time to stop whining and get with the program.  Gaming needs to be inclusive of EVERYONE'S feeling, regardless of their gender, beliefs, neuro-diversity OR social position.   I suggest we whole-heartedly adopt the  X card as a valuable tool in creating group consensus and a more inclusive gaming experience, BUT we can't leave out the GM can we?  That wouldn't be very inclusive.  

What we need therefore is a Z CARD.  The Z card is the sole possession of the GM/DM/Ref/Storyteller [sic].  It overrules all other cards, A through Y inclusive.  The Z card has text on it which states "My game, my rules."  Whenever a particularly insensitive deplorable player throws down a silly piece of paper with an "X" drawn on it, or tries to cite rules to argue with the GM, or is just being a whiny little bitch, the GM is encouraged to show him/her/zir the Z card.  It is polite to tell them to "Read Z-card" or if there is any concern they may be visually impaired to hold it up to their face while saying loudly (because they also may be hearing impaired) "SEE Z-CARD!"  The Z-card can be laminated, mounted on a metal structure, or engraved on a wooden surface, for reuse.  If the GM feels sufficiently threatened by multiple non-compling players, he/she/zir may then create a safe space by liberally swinging the Z-Card as needed.

Failure to heed Z-Card is grounds for immediate ejection from the game.

Quote from: PencilBoy99;1123934Did I read the image correctly and that you're agreeing to always use the X-Card even if you're not at the convention?

Yes always with every game you ever play. Of course this includes Stud Poker. :rolleyes:

Quote from: Gagarth;1123738The use of X-cards (and declaring your pronouns) mandatory to run Zweihander games at GenCon 2020.  How long before it is mandatory to run anything at Gen Con.

That's just for Organized Play, which I assume means these dudes will be sponsoring you, in a sense. Nothing stopping you from going the normal volunteer route to run all the Zweihander you want away from their overly sensitive clutches. Or heading over to Games on Demand or other open gaming areas to do similarly in a less structured environment. Unless they don't have those anymore, which I suppose is possible. It has been over a decade since the one time I went(Dragon Con is just so much closer and more affordable for me.)

Quote from: SHARK;1107504Greetings!

Hey Tenbones! I thought I heard Jhkim say before that he has only rarely seen the X-card ever used, then he says that he has played "a bunch of games with people who use the X-card..." Am I remembering it wrong, brother?:D

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I read it to mean that the card was available but never used.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;1123973I read it to mean that the card was available but never used.

Yup. I replied with more detail in Post #131 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41156-News-Flash-RPGs-are-Different-From-BDSM&p=1107510&viewfull=1#post1107510).

Well conventions are different than my weekly normal table sessions. *

And the proliferation of silly infantile things like X-cards, and the people that require them, and the presumption that adults can't act like adults in public, absurd. Why would I want to spend my effort and time with people that arbitrarily get to decide what kind of content can exist in my game I'm more vested into? Seems silly at best. To me - if you need an X-card for anything, 1) you probably shouldn't be consuming RPG's. 2) you should work on your issues 3) find people specifically that want to play your game you want to run and spend less time playing with those that don't.

#3 is probably your best bet.

I hold myself to those same standards, because I'm a grown up and I can walk away from a game that's subjectively a waste of my time. It's *easy*.


* Differences being: I run games for adults. I don't allow children. I don't allow bystanders. I have adult content and adult situations designed for mature players that aren't infantile in their views of the world.**

** relatively.

Quote from: Brendan;1123951Maybe we're thinking about this all wrong.  Maybe we should stop resisting the inevitable and get on the "right side" of history guys.  Time to stop whining and get with the program.  Gaming needs to be inclusive of EVERYONE'S feeling, regardless of their gender, beliefs, neuro-diversity OR social position.   I suggest we whole-heartedly adopt the  X card as a valuable tool in creating group consensus and a more inclusive gaming experience, BUT we can't leave out the GM can we?  That wouldn't be very inclusive.  

What we need therefore is a Z CARD.  The Z card is the sole possession of the GM/DM/Ref/Storyteller [sic].  It overrules all other cards, A through Y inclusive.  The Z card has text on it which states "My game, my rules."  Whenever a particularly insensitive deplorable player throws down a silly piece of paper with an "X" drawn on it, or tries to cite rules to argue with the GM, or is just being a whiny little bitch, the GM is encouraged to show him/her/zir the Z card.  It is polite to tell them to "Read Z-card" or if there is any concern they may be visually impaired to hold it up to their face while saying loudly (because they also may be hearing impaired) "SEE Z-CARD!"  The Z-card can be laminated, mounted on a metal structure, or engraved on a wooden surface, for reuse.  If the GM feels sufficiently threatened by multiple non-compling players, he/she/zir may then create a safe space by liberally swinging the Z-Card as needed.

Failure to heed Z-Card is grounds for immediate ejection from the game.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter, even if your advocated course will ultimately lead to a "Card Race" that will make edition warring and Monty Haul games pale in comparison.  Behold the power of The Woke RPG 2.1, with a fully operational P38 Space Modulator Card!

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1124026... fully operational *** P38 Space Modulator Card!

*** Atomic!!

Twelve-Cylinder, High-Speed/Low-Drag, Heat-Seeking, Roguelite, Quantum, Dark-Matter, Deep-Diving, Big Data, Biometric, Free-Range, Gluten-free Atomic P38 Space Modulator Card

If I start wearing a Viking Hat at con games, I'm pretty confident nobody is going to mention the X card.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1124180If I start wearing a Viking Hat at con games, I'm pretty confident nobody is going to mention the X card.

At least wear some pants as well. :p

Quote from: tenbones;1124101Twelve-Cylinder, High-Speed/Low-Drag, Heat-Seeking, Roguelite, Quantum, Dark-Matter, Deep-Diving, Big Data, Biometric, Free-Range, Gluten-free Atomic P38 Space Modulator Card

America!! FUCK YEAH~!!!

Quote from: Spinachcat;1124180If I start wearing a Viking Hat at con games, I'm pretty confident nobody is going to mention the X card.

Quote from: Shasarak;1124187At least wear some pants as well. :p

Actually, skipping the pants might also help...

Quote from: trechriron;1124192Actually, skipping the pants might also help...

That would get him the XXX-Card...

Quote from: Gagarth;1123738The use of X-cards (and declaring your pronouns) mandatory to run Zweihander games at GenCon 2020.  How long before it is mandatory to run anything at Gen Con.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4195[/ATTACH]

The fact that the guy who copied WHFRP 1e is drinking of the deep kool-ade is, to me, hilarious since the Warhammer World is a brutal, ugly place where the only sense of "justice" is available to those with a sword or the coin to buy one, the value on human life is virtually nil, and your character has an equal chance of dying from typhus after stepping on a nail stuck through a rusty plank as they walk along the streets of Bogenhaven as they do fighting for a "noble cause".

Quote from: EOTB;1107513Any shared space will eventually become completely beholden to the most aggressive faction; this usually works best if the aggression isn't very strong; merely persistent, but never relenting as steps of change are secured until a critical mass is reached.  All that must be done is to keep the other side discussing your actions amongst themselves in lieu of any actions of their own.  The discussion can be entirely disapproving, so long as it remains an abstract response to your concrete iteration.

Unless conventions know for sure that they'll lose support before they're asked to adopt checklists on a DM-choice basis, they'll surely rationalize it as an acceptable compromise.  And it will remain DM-choice for a time.

Dammit man I came here to say the same thing in a far more meandering and wordy fashion and you scooped me :D

Quote from: Spinachcat;1124180If I start wearing a Viking Hat at con games, I'm pretty confident nobody is going to mention the X card.

Someone might point out that no one ever wore a hat like that.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;1124252Someone might point out that no one ever wore a hat like that.

Then I'll go double pendantic on their ass! And with no pants, I shall explain that many people have most certainly worn the Viking Hat...just not the Vikings!

X Card! X Card!

My God, the X Card.....she does nothing!

Great.  Now I want a big cardboard tower shield with a huge X painted on it.  If something in the game bothers you too much, pick up the "card" and place it between you and the game.  Remove when ready.  No explanation needed!  I guess it also needs to have an attached set of ear muffs. :D

It's a bi-directional X card.  Not only do you not need to deal with the game, no one else in the game needs to deal with you.  Almost as if the person using it had left the room ...

Quote from: Snark Knight;1123830Christ, even on his sign-up forms Daniel can't resist trying to 'get his name out'.

Well, you know, megalomaniacs...

Quote from: RPGPundit;1124575Well, you know, megalomaniacs...

    Dang it, Pundit, warn us before you're going to spike the ironimeter like that! :)

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1124578Dang it, Pundit, warn us before you're going to spike the ironimeter like that! :)

Pundit vs Fox reminds me of the Lord of the Rings on servants of the Shadow - that they would "seem fairer, and feel fouler". Pundit doesn't seem fair, but Fox feels foul.

Quote from: S'mon;1124621Pundit vs Fox reminds me of the Lord of the Rings on servants of the Shadow - that they would "seem fairer, and feel fouler". Pundit doesn't seem fair, but Fox feels foul.

   Oh, I'm not taking Fox's side by any means--but for Pundit to call someone out as a megalomaniac, well ...

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1124631Oh, I'm not taking Fox's side by any means--but for Pundit to call someone out as a megalomaniac, well ...

Yeah, Pundit is one very black pot.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1124578Dang it, Pundit, warn us before you're going to spike the ironimeter like that! :)

I go out of my way NOT to show off my name, image or anything else about me. I've also never sockpuppeted 4chan, either to promote my game or try to doxx my business rivals.

Dude, you put the MEGA in the Lomaniac. It's your brand and its done you good. Wear it with honor.

And you don't pull bullshit like Danny Asshat because you're not a scumbag. People notice. His "Woke Warhammer" scam doesn't have a future. He's shit all over his brand, alienated Warhammer fans and his product is an overpriced brick. And I was an early supporter of his project before he and the book went off the rails.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1124681Dude, you put the MEGA in the Lomaniac. It's your brand and its done you good. Wear it with honor.

And you don't pull bullshit like Danny Asshat because you're not a scumbag. People notice. His "Woke Warhammer" scam doesn't have a future. He's shit all over his brand, alienated Warhammer fans and his product is an overpriced brick. And I was an early supporter of his project before he and the book went off the rails.

warhammer is dead to me

OK they (you know who you are)  said mandatory use of safety tools at conventions was just a conspiracy theory put out by Nazis.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4220[/ATTACH]

https://tabletop.events/conventions/friends-of-contessa-cyberspace-game-fest/pages/code-of-conduct27

Quote from: Gagarth;1124774https://tabletop.events/conventions/friends-of-contessa-cyberspace-game-fest/pages/code-of-conduct27

Oh, yeah, that's ConTessa. They tend to be at the forefront of pretty much all this crap, so this isn't surprising in the least.

Quote from: Gagarth;1124774OK they (you know who you are)  said mandatory use of safety tools at conventions was just a conspiracy theory put out by Nazis.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4220[/ATTACH]

https://tabletop.events/conventions/friends-of-contessa-cyberspace-game-fest/pages/code-of-conduct27

I've found its my players that bring disturbing content into my campaign vs me the GM and its the usual suspects so we just roll our eyes and move on.  

No x card needed but then again most of us are adults who have played together for 30+ years so we don't usually have any issues like this.

From the sounds of it, I will never go to another convention again.   Let them live in their fantasy land while my group will continue to have fun in ours.

Crazy Cat Lady Con does not count.

Quote from: Melan;1124812Crazy Cat Lady Con does not count.

Why things always start from somewhere.  For instance eating bats.

Quote3. All GMs must use some form of safety tool during their game. Explain to your players how it will work with your game at the beginning.

This is the X-Card.  At this table, during this game session, if something happens you find triggering, offensive, distasteful, etc. you are free to tap the X-Card.  When you do you are immediately allowed to excuse yourself from the rest of the game without anyone questioning you as to why. This way the rest of us may play in safety and not have to worry about breaking you down into a gibbering glob of neurosis that should never have come to a public game in the first place.

Do body-condoms count as safety-devices?

Quote from: tenbones;1124836Do body-condoms count as safety-devices?

They're phallic and a thus symbol of toxic masculinity/the patriarchy, so no.

Quote from: Gagarth;1124774OK they (you know who you are)  said mandatory use of safety tools at conventions was just a conspiracy theory put out by Nazis.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4220[/ATTACH]

https://tabletop.events/conventions/friends-of-contessa-cyberspace-game-fest/pages/code-of-conduct27

See, #1 doesn't bug me. Some games get into the deep end of the pool (Call of Cthulhu, Unknown Armies, even WoD/CoD) so it's a good idea to be upfront about it. It's the same reason I don't have a problem with ratings on vidya and movies.

But here's the thing: if you stick with rule #1, you shouldn't even NEED #3. Everyone there should be aware 'hey, we're going to the Dark Place, make sure you have your helmet on and your flashlight charged'.

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1124927Everyone there should be aware 'hey, we're going to the Dark Place, make sure you have your helmet on and your flashlight charged'.

The problem is not everyone agrees what a 'dark place' is.  Having 'don't drop the soap' jokes may seem lighthearted fun to some of the guys, and maybe Bruce Banner doesn't want to have to explain about his YMCA rape to explain why he doesn't think that's funny.  Tapping an x-card is less disruptive than Hulking out (or suffering a panic attack).

Quote from: Ghostmaker;1124927See, #1 doesn't bug me. Some games get into the deep end of the pool (Call of Cthulhu, Unknown Armies, even WoD/CoD) so it's a good idea to be upfront about it. It's the same reason I don't have a problem with ratings on vidya and movies.

But here's the thing: if you stick with rule #1, you shouldn't even NEED #3. Everyone there should be aware 'hey, we're going to the Dark Place, make sure you have your helmet on and your flashlight charged'.

In practice, I find that even among traditional players, it's normal for people to sign on for a "dark" game -- but then later have misgivings if it gets *too* dark for them. Everyone has their lines, whether that's torture or child abuse or sex or whatever.

That doesn't mean that the X-card is the required answer, though. There are many other approaches -- like just speaking up and saying "Hey, this is too dark for me" and then informally talking to the GM about it. I would note that at Big Bad Con, the phrase "safety tool" can mean a number of approaches - including the simple "open door policy" - which just means that if you have a problem with the game, you're welcome to walk out.

Quote from: jhkim;1124953That doesn't mean that the X-card is the required answer, though. There are many other approaches -- like just speaking up and saying "Hey, this is too dark for me" and then informally talking to the GM about it. I would note that at Big Bad Con, the phrase "safety tool" can mean a number of approaches - including the simple "open door policy" - which just means that if you have a problem with the game, you're welcome to walk out.

Probably the best comment written about this subject yet. But an "open door policy" does not give SJWs the opportunity to inject their politics into everyone else's fun, which is the real goal.

Quote from: jhkim;1124953I would note that at Big Bad Con, the phrase "safety tool" can mean a number of approaches - including the simple "open door policy" - which just means that if you have a problem with the game, you're welcome to walk out.

Has there ever been an RPG in a public place where a participant wasn't welcome to get up and walk out? I would love to say that this is the norm in private venues too, but there are likely some weird outliers somewhere that I neither know of or really care to know.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1124949The problem is not everyone agrees what a 'dark place' is.  Having 'don't drop the soap' jokes may seem lighthearted fun to some of the guys, and maybe Bruce Banner doesn't want to have to explain about his YMCA rape to explain why he doesn't think that's funny.  Tapping an x-card is less disruptive than Hulking out (or suffering a panic attack).

Which works if the person tapping the X-card actually says what bothers them. The supporters of it forget or conveniently that flaw of the X-card. So if the scene is a dark, dank cave with Spiders and the player taps the card which of those elements would I need to alter or change? The fact that the cave is dark or dank or full of Spiders. If no response is given than according to the rules of the X-card the game grinds to sudden halt. With the rest of the players and DM just looking at each other and wondering what is bothering the player who tapped the X-card.

I would probably use the X-card at my table with the stipulation that the player tapping it MUST tell me the issue bothering them, almost no exceptions and non-negotiable. If they want to keep it secret or pass me a note then it is acceptable. If any player thinks that they will come to my table and most other tables and tap an X-card, then expect the game to grind to a halt is going to be asked what is wrong and if no response is given shown the door. I have to worry about the enjoyment and everyone else at the table. I'm not going to spend 4-6 hours in silence staring at the other players or DM because player XYZ joined a Lolth  themed campaign who is afraid of Spiders. Then decides that every Spider encounter is going to be subject to an X-card and not tell us why he is tapping the card.

Quote from: jhkim;1124953There are many other approaches -- like just speaking up and saying "Hey, this is too dark for me" and then informally talking to the GM about it. I would note that at Big Bad Con, the phrase "safety tool" can mean a number of approaches - including the simple "open door policy" - which just means that if you have a problem with the game, you're welcome to walk out.

The problem as I see it anyway is that even saying something like "hey this is too dark for me" is too extreme and a personal attack by more extreme SJWs in the hobby. Most issues can be solved with just simply talking it out with everyone else. In some cases it does not come to a solution. Still imo better to talk it out then use an X-card.

The X-card is only going to work in practice if the table fudges how they use it.   In that way, it is similar to bad rules that people talk about being almost perfect, and then it turns out that it "works" for them because the GM simple fudges any roll using that rule if it goes against the group consensus of how things should happen.

Not that the pros and cons of fudge or imperfect rule or (even better) a GM adjudicating things is necessarily compromised by all that.  But the cognitive dissonance unthinkingly demonstrated by the combination of "This thing works fine" and "(because) We ignore it when it doesn't" is striking.

Quote from: Brendan;1123951Maybe we're thinking about this all wrong.  Maybe we should stop resisting the inevitable and get on the "right side" of history guys.  Time to stop whining and get with the program.  Gaming needs to be inclusive of EVERYONE'S feeling, regardless of their gender, beliefs, neuro-diversity OR social position.   I suggest we whole-heartedly adopt the  X card as a valuable tool in creating group consensus and a more inclusive gaming experience, BUT we can't leave out the GM can we?  That wouldn't be very inclusive.  

What we need therefore is a Z CARD.  The Z card is the sole possession of the GM/DM/Ref/Storyteller [sic].  It overrules all other cards, A through Y inclusive.  The Z card has text on it which states "My game, my rules."  Whenever a particularly insensitive deplorable player throws down a silly piece of paper with an "X" drawn on it, or tries to cite rules to argue with the GM, or is just being a whiny little bitch, the GM is encouraged to show him/her/zir the Z card.  It is polite to tell them to "Read Z-card" or if there is any concern they may be visually impaired to hold it up to their face while saying loudly (because they also may be hearing impaired) "SEE Z-CARD!"  The Z-card can be laminated, mounted on a metal structure, or engraved on a wooden surface, for reuse.  If the GM feels sufficiently threatened by multiple non-compling players, he/she/zir may then create a safe space by liberally swinging the Z-Card as needed.

Failure to heed Z-Card is grounds for immediate ejection from the game.

The gender one is easy since there are only two options, male and female. I've gamed with both genders over the years. Anything else is some form of mental illness that I choose not to encourage.

Quote from: Gagarth;1124774OK they (you know who you are)  said mandatory use of safety tools at conventions was just a conspiracy theory put out by Nazis.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4220[/ATTACH]

https://tabletop.events/conventions/friends-of-contessa-cyberspace-game-fest/pages/code-of-conduct27

What about the "harassment" rule? It applies to any interaction you might have with anyone(even people not at their "convention") in any social media platform.

QuoteOur policy applies to everyone at the convention, including, but not limited to: exhibitors, attendees, GMs, speakers, guests, staff, and volunteers. All members of the community are held to the same standards and disciplinary action.

Because this is an online convention, this applies to any social media interaction before, after, or during the event.

Anyone can report harassment. If you witness or are targeted by harassment, contact staff by sending an email to staff@contessa.rocks, through Facebook Messenger, or Direct Messages on Twitter.

If you are the GM, moderator, or facilitator, please remember most platforms allow you to ban or block accounts. You don't need our permission to block anyone for any reason, but please contact us once it's happened so we can take any additional steps necessary to protect the community.

Failure to adhere to these Community Standards may result in mediation by ConTessa staff. This may include but is not limited to verbal warnings, ejection from the convention (including revocation of convention badge), banning from all ConTessa online communities, or contacting local law enforcement.

Sorry shitlords you're banned from attending for wrongthink, even before the convention.