Safety Tools in RPGs Meta-Discussion

[EmperorNorton]

Every time they're brought up, it seems to be about convincing other people to use them, in which case a mixture of mockery and arguing seriously about their harm is completely warranted.

Eh, my experience on this forum is that when they are brought up, the proponents on this forum are usually saying "This can be a useful tool for certain tables and it is good people are aware of them if they need them", not that everyone needs to use them.

I know the few times they are brought up, I've explicitly pointed out that I don't use them, but think they are a potentially good tool in certain groups.

If what you got from them was the idea that there is a contingent of people who think they should be used in every game here on this forum then I'm not sure how you got to that conclusion, because I've never seen anyone say that here. Maybe there is a one off post by one user somewhere that I haven't read, but you know, a one off opinion is pretty shite for characterizing a whole side of the conversation.

EDIT: Just adding in that this was a tangent from another thread that got moved.

 

[Dammit Victor]

Well, I'm imagining a hypothetical [Mod+] thread for the pro-safety tool contingent to sit together and yak about how safety tools saved their tables from distress, but I really doubt that thread would ever happen. Every time they're brought up, it seems to be about convincing other people to use them, in which case a mixture of mockery and arguing seriously about their harm is completely warranted.

Speaking of my quarrelsome nature...

I'm not an X-Card GM. Never used them, though there've been a few times-- before I'd heard of the concept-- that I wished I'd had. There is merit to the arguments that the specific tools and their specific implementation are corrosive to table cohesion, but the mockery... the mockery is all about shaming people for being "sensitive" and "triggered" about the shit that comes up in the typical course of play.

Except... any community that consists of more than a couple dozen gamers has the most amazing collection of absolute horror stories. We all know, we all goddamned know, that even if it's never been a problem at our personal tables, that we know at least one other gamer that it has personally and justifiably and sympathetically affected. Think about your friends.

Kinda makes you wonder about the people mocking them.

 

[Stevethulhu]

Wait, Liet Keynes has been gender flipped? And people are up in arms? Couloir me surprised!

Do you want to have the safety tools discussion here? Cause this isn't a [Mod+] thread for it. Wonder all you want, but if you only discuss these things on neutral ground, you're gonna get all comers.

Safety on tools is a good thing. Just the other day, my brother in law got a new chop saw. Only for one of the diamond tipped teeth to break off the first time he used it. They were lucky the chip hit a car window, not an eye or something.

 

[Dammit Victor]

Do you want to have the safety tools discussion here? Cause this isn't a [Mod+] thread for it. Wonder all you want, but if you only discuss these things on neutral ground, you're gonna get all comers.

The topic itself doesn't interest me.

 

[Ladybird]

I think we're saying the same thing. You don't use them, so in our hypothetical thread of a bunch of pro-safety tool types sitting around talking about their great experience, you'd have nothing to say. But you think other groups should use them, so you kind of need other people to talk to in order to have that discussion. No sense preaching to the choir.

I don't think anyone here is interested in having that conversation, because none of us are interested in trying to control what happens at tables other than our own. The times we've tried to discuss safety tools at all, it's started off as ways to make other players more comfortable at the table, before being hijacked and belittled by some folk who seemingly are against that sort of thing, or folks have just read the terms "safety tool" and kicked off on principle.

but the mockery... the mockery is all about shaming people for being "sensitive" and "triggered" about the shit that comes up in the typical course of play.

Kinda makes you wonder about the people mocking them.

It's worse that that. Pretty much everybody has things they don't like seeing or dealing with in their leisure time; maybe it's spiders, maybe it's graphic scenes of narrative control. The mockery just winds up mocking people for being human.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Great, so there never was a risk that it couldn't be discussed, you just wanted to pretend that discourse was being shutdown by all the meanies on this board rather than the complete lack of interesting things to be said about it.

To add to what Ladybird is saying, the one time I remember it really blowing up, a game system was being discussed, and due to the wording of one bullet point in it's market copy, someone came in to take a big shit on the idea of "safety tools" unprompted by anyone else on the forum.

More comfortable at whose table? If you are talking about your table, I really don't think anyone cares. If you are talking about other tables - including game stores and convention games, then it's open for debate.

Also, this logic is bizarre. Then why do we have posts about how to make sandboxing work better at your table? There are any number of topics on this forum that solely have to do with finding ways to do something better at the table that people might want to do. Should they not exist either?

 

[Baulderstone]

I don't follow this question at all. I haven't said anything shouldn't exist. I keep saying you guys can have all the safety tools discussion you want, and Tristram has said he'd enforce a Mod+ rules situation if you just want positivity vibes, but elsewhere you'll get disagreement. What is bizarre about that?

Just drop it.

We get it. You don't like safety tools. Stop looking for someone to fight about it.

 

[Dammit Victor]

Great, so there never was a risk that it couldn't be discussed, you just wanted to pretend that discourse was being shutdown by all the meanies on this board rather than the complete lack of interesting things to be said about it.

Literally no part of this post follows from a single word in mine. If you want to have an argument with yourself in public, have the decency to leave me out of it.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

This one strikes me as straightforward.

Can you say you think safety tools are a shit idea in a "are safety tools worthwhile" thread? Yes.

In the currently purely hypothetical situation where someone is arguing that everyone should be forced to use safety tools, that is not going to be given "protected opinion" status.

Is "they don't because they suck" a good response in a "how have safety tools worked at your table" thread? No, for the same reason that "dungeon crawls are for children" is not a good response in a "tips and tricks for running dungeon crawls".

Really, the only grey areas I'm actually seeing is stuff like convention games and they're best handled on a case by case basis. "I prefer to go to conventions that use safety tools" or "I don't like playing in games that use safety tools" is an obviously different premise than "Every convention should do what I want on safety tools".

And if anyone really wants a fight on this I have some time on my hand, so feel free to start a thread in general about my use of casting questionairres in LARP.

 

[EmperorNorton]

In the currently purely hypothetical situation where someone is arguing that everyone should be forced to use safety tools, that is not going to be given "protected opinion" status.

My thing is that I just don't think I've ever even seen this kind of opinion on this forum. Even as someone who is "pro-safety tools" (in that I can see why some people will use them and good for them if it helps their games), I would have the opinion of "oh fuck off" to this kind of attitude.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

My thing is that I just don't think I've ever even seen this kind of opinion on this forum. Even as someone who is "pro-safety tools" (in that I can see why some people will use them and good for them if it helps their games), I would have the opinion of "oh fuck off" to this kind of attitude.

Yeah, I think people are probably arguing with TBP on that one where I have seen that argument (because of course they have).

 

[CRKrueger]

I don't think anyone here is interested in having that conversation, because none of us are interested in trying to control what happens at tables other than our own. The times we've tried to discuss safety tools at all, it's started off as ways to make other players more comfortable at the table, before being hijacked and belittled by some folk who seemingly are against that sort of thing, or folks have just read the terms "safety tool" and kicked off on principle.

It's worse that that. Pretty much everybody has things they don't like seeing or dealing with in their leisure time; maybe it's spiders, maybe it's graphic scenes of narrative control. The mockery just winds up mocking people for being human.

I haven’t played RPGs with many humans who claim their dislike of smoking, means that all the halflings in the Shire are now doing them actual psychological damage by puffing on their pipes in an imagined game, yet that’s exactly the kind of stupidity the X-Card fosters, the unassailable Identity Tag of Victim that now gives you social control over what others may say or do at the table.

Of course, control has nothing to do with it...says the same person smugly proud that their gaming club requires its usage.

 

[Giganotosaurus]

Now I'm imagining that the rate of lung cancer among hobbits is significantly higher than the surrounding population.
The idillic landscape of the Shire interrupted by massive bouts of hacking and wheezing coughs.

 

[CRKrueger]

Now I'm imagining that the rate of lung cancer among hobbits is significantly higher than the surrounding population.
The idillic landscape of the Shire interrupted by massive bouts of hacking and wheezing coughs.

It’s Pipeweed, not tobacco.

 

[Giganotosaurus]

It’s Pipeweed, not tobacco.

And now I'm picturing the shire is just full of stoned hobbits. OH MY GOD that's why they have so many meals! Second Breakfast is the munchies!

 

[Ladybird]

I haven’t played RPGs with many humans who claim their dislike of smoking, means that all the halflings in the Shire are now doing them actual psychological damage by puffing on their pipes in an imagined game, yet that’s exactly the kind of stupidity the X-Card fosters, the unassailable Identity Tag of Victim that now gives you social control over what others may say or do at the table.

Of course, control has nothing to do with it...says the same person smugly proud that their gaming club requires its usage.

That's the second time you've used this decision that other people took in an attempt to criticise me; for someone who hates it when other people ascribe motives and emotions to him, you sure don't seem to have much problem doing it to other people.

If you wanted to know my opinion, you could just ask me.

 

[Tulpa Girl]

Now I'm imagining that the rate of lung cancer among hobbits is significantly higher than the surrounding population.
The idillic landscape of the Shire interrupted by massive bouts of hacking and wheezing coughs.

Well, in AD&D they get a bonus to save vs poison, and in Basic it's their best save, so maybe some make it out okay?

Could be their way of culling the weak...

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

I haven’t played RPGs with many humans who claim their dislike of smoking, means that all the halflings in the Shire are now doing them actual psychological damage by puffing on their pipes in an imagined game, yet that’s exactly the kind of stupidity the X-Card fosters, the unassailable Identity Tag of Victim that now gives you social control over what others may say or do at the table.

Of course, control has nothing to do with it...says the same person smugly proud that their gaming club requires its usage.

But literally nobody on here has said that. If you've had that in your own group, that sucks, but it isn't the fault of anybody here.

 

[Endless Flight]

I don’t want to get into the X card stuff in this thread but if you game with a group of friends and know them well and something triggers one of them to the extent that they want to use a X card, there must be a good reason for it and not that they want to control the session.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I don’t want to get into the X card stuff in this thread but if you game with a group of friends and know them well and something triggers one of them to the extent that they want to use a X card, there must be a good reason for it and not that they want to control the session.

Even in a public game, I've found "this is bad because a shitty player would disrupt a game with it" an uncompelling argument because... shitty players are just going to disrupt your game. It doesn't matter whether there are "x-cards" or whatever.

 

[Dammit Victor]

Even in a public game, I've found "this is bad because a shitty player would disrupt a game with it" an uncompelling argument because... shitty players are just going to disrupt your game. It doesn't matter whether there are "x-cards" or whatever.

I mean, shit, aren't shitty players/GMs the problem all these safety tools were invented to address?

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

Even in a public game, I've found "this is bad because a shitty player would disrupt a game with it" an uncompelling argument because... shitty players are just going to disrupt your game. It doesn't matter whether there are "x-cards" or whatever.

I don't use them, but I can actually see them having more utility in a public game. With players I know well a) I'm much more likely to know any potential issues and b) if they're uncomfortable they're more likely to chat to me informally. Whereas a player I don't know isn't going to go for the standard tack of catching me on a cig break for a chat.

 

[A Fiery Flying Roll]

I mean, shit, aren't shitty players/GMs the problem all these safety tools were invented to address?

That is, for me, one of the main issues with them tbh. We possibly are getting into a discussion better in its own thread now though. (My bad as much as anyone else).

 

[EmperorNorton]

I mean, shit, aren't shitty players/GMs the problem all these safety tools were invented to address?

Not really. People can step on issues without meaning to.

I think that their use, with public games, has more to do with the fact that a bunch of strangers don't necessarily know each other's hangups.

That is different from "but a disruptive player could use them to disrupt a game!" which... yeah, but a disruptive player would do that anyway.

 

[Ladybird]

I mean, shit, aren't shitty players/GMs the problem all these safety tools were invented to address?

Shitty players and GM's will find a way to be shitty regardless, only safety tool that would help there is a good pair of shoes. Safety tools are for groups that mean well, don't necessarily know each other enough to go into detail about all their history and boundaries, but would still like to try and avoid making each other feel uncomfortable; they're a last resort that ideally don't need to be used.

And yes, a shitty player could abuse the system by using it to try and cancel out general story elements they don't like ("My character failed? No, I don't want that") or mundane things in the setting (Pipeweed, say), but if it wasn't via abusing a safety tool it they'd be disrupting the game in a different way; in practice, someone using a safety tool would likely be fairly rare in general, and if someone used one more than a couple of times in a session then it would indicate some sort of fairly serious GM / player / group / expectation mis-match that would need a more in-depth out-of-game discussion to resolve.

 

[Nobby-W]

I mean, shit, aren't shitty players/GMs the problem all these safety tools were invented to address?

The idea was originally used in BSDM circles where people could have wildly different tastes. For example, you could get folks into really confining bondage (like rubber body suits with tiny breathing holes) that would induce claustrophobic panic attacks in other people; you can even make this happen by draping a handkerchief over the face of someone in bondage. Even without malicious intent it's quite easy to bump into things that squick people or worse, and that can happen with quite mild play. If you were at a S&M play party with people you didn't know that well, then something like an X card is a low pressure way to express boundaries or things that you don't want to get into.

I've seen someone have a psychotic episode at a play party and a couple of dramas about people crossing boundaries - even with people who thought they were playing in good faith.

If you're a middle class HMV (het-male-vanilla) bloke from a comfortable background then this kind of thing might seem a bit abstract but there are plenty of folks who have places they don't want to go and may not be good at asserting themselves. I've never had occasion to use these sorts of things in a game but I could envisage people for whom they might be relevant, even without bringing creepy edgelords into the mix.

Shitty players will play shitty regardless, but they're not the only reason to use an X-card by any means.

 

[Tommy Brownell]

Even in a public game, I've found "this is bad because a shitty player would disrupt a game with it" an uncompelling argument because... shitty players are just going to disrupt your game. It doesn't matter whether there are "x-cards" or whatever.

Yeah, I'm a big fan of not gaming with shitty people. And since I game with non-shitty people, I try to make it a point to be non-shitty.

Shitty players (and GMs) are going to give you shit games, generally.

 

[Fenris-77]

GTFOOMB. Or, get the fuck out of my basement. Thats what I have for shitty players.

 

[Nobby-W]

GTFOOMB. Or, get the fuck out of my basement. Thats what I have for shitty players.

I think this stuff is mostly relevant to games in public venues like a con or a club or FLGS. With an established group you can have conversations about this sort of stuff unless you have somebody who has a problem with assertiveness.

 

[Tommy Brownell]

I think this stuff is mostly relevant to games in public venues like a con or a club or FLGS. With an established group you can have conversations about this sort of stuff unless you have somebody who has a problem with assertiveness.

Which is valid. We don't use an X-Card or anything like it. I have three players, two of whom are my best friends, but one of whom is married to one of them. She's an enthusiastic player, but 100% the type who wouldn't rock the boat because she would feel bad about disrupting the game if I did touch on something that made her completely uncomfortable (I don't know her and her history half as well as I do the guys), even though I would feel terrible about making her uncomfortable (and our games are pretty "Hard R" so it's possible). Heck, in a recent session we had a child murderer as the baddie, and I "cast" the character with an actor - who looked alarmingly like a pedo she knows. Totally unintentional and I wouldn't have done it if I'd had an inkling...because I have good players so I try to not be shitty.

 

[Skywalker]

I think safety tools are going to become more important with time, especially as both remote gaming and games with higher player contributions become more popular.

The X-Card is one of the most basic safety tools, but I think even proponents of such tools would say that its not the best. It is literally an eject button if all else fails, so if you are using it things are already bad. On saying that, there is an entire spectrum of safety tools that can be used prior to that point and some of them are not only more effective, but can also have a positive impact on gameplay beyond safety.

Though I also agree that playing with reasonable people reduces the need for these tools, the tools can still help to pre-empt issues. I have found that the most benefit comes from talking about safety and people being aware that it is being considered, rather the tools themselves.

 

[Voros]

I think the whole 'debate' is a tempest in a teapot. One has to ask what exactly is even being debated? I don't feel like I'd need the xcard but that others would need it, particularly when playing a horror game or other game dealing with dark subject matter in a public setting, seems fine to me.

The hypercriticism of what others may or may not do at their tables is strange to me, it obviously has a lot to do with American Culture Wars moreso than the xcard as an actual table tool.

I do find a lot of the criticism online also wildly off the mark of the actual quite common sense advice in its use as presented by its creator John Stavropoulos.

X-Card by John Stavropoulos

docs.google.com

 

[Fenris-77]

I'm going to assay an opinion that might prove unpopular. Just because you, personally, have never felt the need for an X card, or whatever safety measure, doesn't actually mean shit about whether or not they might be useful generally or indeed in some specific circumstances. Lots of us play with friends and don't ever really need anything like the X card (like me). That's fine, but that also does not mean that it isn't necessary, at least in some circumstances. Arguments about how it allows people to run tables based on their perceived victimhood are shitty and should have no particular place her IMO, we should be better than that.

 

[Bunch]

I can't really see using them but I mostly game with friends. My first encounter with them is from over at TBP and playing with some of the folks proposing them there turned me off to the idea. Playing with them with the folks here I could understand. So I guess I see both sides. I can see how and who they can be useful for and I can see why some people would not want them at their table because it might attract the folks from TBP I don't think I'd enjoy playing with.

 

[Skywalker]

I'm going to assay an opinion that might prove unpopular. Just because you, personally, have never felt the need for an X card, or whatever safety measure, doesn't actually mean shit about whether or not they might be useful generally or indeed in some specific circumstances. Lots of us play with friends and don't ever really need anything like the X card (like me). That's fine, but that also does not mean that it isn't necessary, at least in some circumstances. Arguments about how it allows people to run tables based on their perceived victimhood are shitty and should have no particular place her IMO, we should be better than that.

I'll go one step further. I would say that a majority of the instances where a safety measure would have helped, one of the people involved did not feel the need for a safety measure. Most people don't go out of their way to cause an issue and jeopardize other people's safety. Nevertheless, these issues arise usually when one person believes they are being reasonable. People vary so much in regard to these matters.

 

[CRKrueger]

Safety implies protection from Harm.
Being uncomfortable is not Harm.
Being squicked out is not Harm.
Being faced with a phobia at the gaming table is not Harm. Ironically, avoiding your Phobias, does do actual Harm, it makes them worse.
Being introduced with an idea you do not like is not Harm.

X-Card and similar tools are Session Zero run amok backed by ideas and concepts we can’t talk about. Let’s take a look at the Consent in Gaming questionnaire put out by Monte Cook. It seriously puts these things on the list of things that players can list as “Do not include”...

• Rats
• Eyeballs
• Natural Disasters
• Extreme Weather
• Police
• Thirst

If you are so mentally fragile that you can’t handle a game where the police might show up...you need to go through professional therapy until you can. Expecting the outside world to cater itself to your specific issues, is what is harmful.

The only thing people who others think need an X-Card can actually be harmed by at the gaming table is the concept of the X-card.

I’ve known lots of people with severe traumas, with very bad phobias, with deadly allergies, and you know what all of them have in common? They handle their own shit. They didn’t expect the world to bend over backwards for them and they learned to deal with it and overcome.

Also let’s not pretend this is just something friends do for one of their own that’s had a hard time. This is being forced in public gaming venues, and if you’re not aware of it, you’re don’t know much about the topic.

 

[Fenris-77]

Dude, relax. This isn't snowflakes run amok, as much as you'd like it to be. This is about someone at a table full of strangers being able to reasonably say I'm not comfortable with that. That's not a bad thing unless you want to assume bad faith, which I don't think is appropriate here.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I've never played in a game that used an X-Card, but I'd say I've seen safety tools in play. Most are probably related to Session Zero, or knowing your players. I don't think there's anything wrong with these kinds of things.

I personally don't really dig when games focus on kids in peril in an extreme way. If it came up in a game, I don't think that I'd actually x-card a stop to it or anything, but I'd prefer that kind of stuff not come up, or be kept vague or to a minimum. My group knows this, and so it rarely comes up in play.

Seems pretty simple.

If we didn't know each other, we could determine this through some kind of Session Zero discussion. But not everything may come up in that format. I don't think having an X-Card is a bad idea inherently, although I would say it's frivolous use could be annoying.

The beautiful thing is if you feel that strongly about X-Cards or any other safety measure, you don't have to play in that game. I mean....you can't expect everyone else to cater to you.

 

[CRKrueger]

The beautiful thing is if you feel that strongly about X-Cards or any other safety measure, you don't have to play in that game. I mean....you can't expect everyone else to cater to you.

Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck


”You don’t have to go to any convention...”

 

[EmperorNorton]

I think the whole 'debate' is a tempest in a teacup. One has to ask what exactly is even being debated? I don't feel like I'd need the xcard but that others would need it, particularly when playing a horror game or other game dealing with dark subject matter in a public setting, seems fine to me.

The hypercriticism of what others may or may not do at their tables is strange to me, it obviously has a lot to do with American Culture Wars moreso than the xcard as an actual table tool.

I do find a lot of the criticism online also wildly off the mark of the actual quite common sense advice in its use as presented by its creator John Stavropoulos.

X-Card by John Stavropoulos

docs.google.com

It just feels like more of the whole "the sky is falling" type bullshit. There is always some culture out there trying to "destroy x" with x being whatever hobby someone is a part of. Like, if there were a bunch of people trying to force it in every game and you didn't want to play in a game with it... you also probably wouldn't have wanted to play with those people anyway?

If a public group decides "hey we want to use this in every game in our playspace" then like, ok, cool. If you have a problem with it, you don't have to play there with them. If you decide to play at their tables and someone is abusing it, bring it up with one of the group leaders if it becomes a pattern.

Honestly 99 games out of 100 that use X-Cards I wouldn't imagine they would even be used anyway.

I've honestly never used x-cards in a game, never seen the need cause I don't run in public and I mostly run with friends that I've played with for a significant amount of time. Also I just don't get super into really dark subject matter that much. But just on a personal level, the people gnashing and wailing about the existence of x-cards seem more like "snowflakes" to me than the people who want to use them. Like I said, can't handle it, don't play with groups that use it. Simple as that.