What would you, the GM, do? A question about Player power.

[Blackleaf]

I thought the argument in favour of the GM being able to change/ignore rules, dice-rolls, maps, etc. was that this allowed them to make the game more fun.  Trust the GM and all that.

So shouldn't you be trying to make the game fun for the players? If they're coming right out and telling you they've got a problem with the content (and it could be something else: racism, sex, gore, etc)  -- isn't the job of the GM to listen to that and get them back to having fun again?

[James McMurray]

sometimes they don't even have to tell you. If I started layering on a thick esduction routine in a game (as player or GM) whoever was on the other end of it would be freaked out (unless my wife was playing that night and it was her). For that reason (and that it would freak me out) I don't do it.

[RPGPundit]

So Pundit, if you're dealing with it on a personal human level, what are you doing?  What does that look like?

Well, frankly, I've never had anything remotely like this come up. Nor do I expect it would be something that would happen often. I only play Amber (which I see as a somewhat "advanced" kind of RPG) with players I'm already familiar with, and I tend to end up vetoing players over time, particularly removing those with serious social or mental problems.
So someone with the level of trauma you describe here would probably never get into an Amber game of mine; but supposing they did, supposing that somehow the player has a very specific trauma that had somehow escaped me and everyone else until that very moment, what it would "look like" would be me stopping the game, and talking with the player person-to-person since its not a "game" issue.

RPGpundit