Quote from: Azraele;1060729*Places his X-card on the table*

*Steeples fingers*

Your move, RPGsite

https://www.google.ca/search?q=the+thing+burn+it+gif&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi47sr7y47eAhVFheAKHeI-A5UQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=the+thing+burn+it+gif&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-img.12...8154.19438..21291...1.0..0.237.3742.23j9j2......0....1.......5..0j35i39j0i8i30j0i67j30i10.ChAnJtYALo0&ei=68DHW_jMA8WKggfi_YyoCQ&client=ms-android-rogers-ca&prmd=ivsn&biw=360&bih=560#imgrc=O8II_MlgKqrR9M

Quote from: jhkim;1060736This is some sort of disconnect, though, since using the X-card doesn't mean the game is G or PG. Heck, the last game that I was in that used it was probably NC-17 for a number of people. Many of the X-card games I have been in were chock full of war, death, racism, and hatred.

Greetings!

Hello, Jhkim! Well, ok. That may be--and I'm glad your experience wasn't fucked up by it. But it leads me to the conclusion--what the hell is it for, if not to cater to the stuffed animal "I'm so fragile" crowd? If someone is so emotionally and psychologically fragile--then they need to be in a psychologist's office, and not at a gaming table. I know I wouldn't want to play with anyone like that that is so emotionally damaged and fragile. On another note--while certain "adult themes" are absent when playing with kids, in the kids I have played with--10, 12, 14 year olds--they are savage little beasts! LOL. They are all for womping on evil monsters, blood everywhere. LOL. I just have my doubts about all of the coddling going on...oh, my god, you were *raped* before? Fine. What the fuck does that have to do with these orcs raping women from mayberry over here, which, by the way, is a make-believe, fantasy world and fantasy game we're playing. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people. I don't see what the value or purpose is in having an "X-card." If you don't like war, death, racism and hatred, whatever--in a fantasy game, then run your own game of Barney World, you know?

Where are all of these stuffed animal people coming from? Why are they so emotionally "triggered" by references to stuff *in a game*? What the fuck do they do if a professor mentions something in a lecture? Or some other student in a class, shares a story or something from their own lives in class? Well, I'm offended! Or if you're having lunch in a group at work, and talking, and someone mentions some stuff they have gone through, or their kids have gone through, and you said, Oh my god. I'm offended! They'd tell you you can leave, princess, and go fuck yourself then. Most wouldn't say something like that, LOL--but you know what they *would* do? They'd be quite likely not to ever sit with you again, or invite you to lunch with them, or sit by you in class, or invite you to their study groups--because such a emotional stuffed animal person would be viewed as being hopelessly fragile, and too weird to risk hanging around. What *else* might trigger these people? You know what I'm saying? These whiny, constantly offended babies need to reach down and grow the fuck up. Get hard. Life is full of lots of shit--get used to it. And noone cares about the laundry list of shit that you find "offensive" or "problematic".

I'm not angry with you, Jhkim. I'm just far too tired of seeing all these stuffed animal people--polluting our society, at every level. I don't want to tolerate such bullshit in my *games* too. I think that is a lot of the "pushback" you're seeing with lots of folks here. It isn't necessarily with the technicals--it's the whole principle involved.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1060741I just have my doubts about all of the coddling going on...oh, my god, you were *raped* before? Fine. What the fuck does that have to do with these orcs raping women from mayberry over here, which, by the way, is a make-believe, fantasy world and fantasy game we're playing. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people.

Well, the imaginary people that you're creating here sound terrible to play with - but they're imaginary, right? Likewise, the example of being triggered by owls is a hypothetical created by nDervish here, right? I think there's a pretty wide range between an invented hypothetical player who is triggered by owls versus a real person who in uncomfortable with their character being raped (of which I know several).

I'll admit to being one of those who may be bothered by having characters raped in the game - particularly depending on how much it is detailed. I know it happens pretty frequently in history and war, but it's one of those uglinesses I would prefer to do without in my entertainment.

Different people have different thresholds, which is the intent of the X-card. Maybe all the players are fine with off-screen NPCs being raped, and Gareth doesn't mind if his character is raped during a session as long as it isn't too graphic - but David absolutely doesn't want that happening. That might be the line to be signaled.

Referees or games where rapes take place and/or are described in detail are games that I would get up and just leave. Doing that adds nothing to the game, at all.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060747Referees or games where rapes take place and/or are described in detail are games that I would get up and just leave. Doing that adds nothing to the game, at all.

Ditto.

If it is graphic sex or violence, I just fade to black and let it happen off screen. Those things still happen in my games, I just don't see the need to shove them in people's faces.

Unless the players tap the XXX card, eh?

Quote from: SHARK;1060741Greetings!

Hello, Jhkim! Well, ok. That may be--and I'm glad your experience wasn't fucked up by it. But it leads me to the conclusion--what the hell is it for, if not to cater to the stuffed animal "I'm so fragile" crowd? If someone is so emotionally and psychologically fragile--then they need to be in a psychologist's office, and not at a gaming table. I know I wouldn't want to play with anyone like that that is so emotionally damaged and fragile. On another note--while certain "adult themes" are absent when playing with kids, in the kids I have played with--10, 12, 14 year olds--they are savage little beasts! LOL. They are all for womping on evil monsters, blood everywhere. LOL. I just have my doubts about all of the coddling going on...oh, my god, you were *raped* before? Fine. What the fuck does that have to do with these orcs raping women from mayberry over here, which, by the way, is a make-believe, fantasy world and fantasy game we're playing. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people. I don't see what the value or purpose is in having an "X-card." If you don't like war, death, racism and hatred, whatever--in a fantasy game, then run your own game of Barney World, you know?

Where are all of these stuffed animal people coming from? Why are they so emotionally "triggered" by references to stuff *in a game*? What the fuck do they do if a professor mentions something in a lecture? Or some other student in a class, shares a story or something from their own lives in class? Well, I'm offended! Or if you're having lunch in a group at work, and talking, and someone mentions some stuff they have gone through, or their kids have gone through, and you said, Oh my god. I'm offended! They'd tell you you can leave, princess, and go fuck yourself then. Most wouldn't say something like that, LOL--but you know what they *would* do? They'd be quite likely not to ever sit with you again, or invite you to lunch with them, or sit by you in class, or invite you to their study groups--because such a emotional stuffed animal person would be viewed as being hopelessly fragile, and too weird to risk hanging around. What *else* might trigger these people? You know what I'm saying? These whiny, constantly offended babies need to reach down and grow the fuck up. Get hard. Life is full of lots of shit--get used to it. And noone cares about the laundry list of shit that you find "offensive" or "problematic".

I'm not angry with you, Jhkim. I'm just far too tired of seeing all these stuffed animal people--polluting our society, at every level. I don't want to tolerate such bullshit in my *games* too. I think that is a lot of the "pushback" you're seeing with lots of folks here. It isn't necessarily with the technicals--it's the whole principle involved.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

FIASCO and Carolina Death Crawl are story games, not role-playing games.

Quote from: Altheus;1060278I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

It seems to me that the idea that the world will change shape to suit you is the result of overindulgence as a child, getting what you want and being protected from things you don't like.

Is the rejection of them a function of a working class background?

Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

Or maybe a lack of adversity while growing up - people have nothing to measure unpleasant things against and so have no sense of proportion.

The quote (from the purple place) "I used a deck of playing cards with images from the television show The Walking Dead for a Savage Worlds campaign until one of my players expressed discomfort over the images." If this was an adult I can imagine my aged mother taking the piss thusly "Awwww, did the nasty pictures scare the little man, there there, all gone".

Or am I wrong?

Democrats raised by baby-boomers, who then raised SJWs, are only in it for the undermining of freedom around the world. They tattoo their bodies to make up for their self-loathing and self-hate when they can't deface others.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060698If someone has issues with a type of content, you would either respect that or ask them to leave the game, right?

The X-Card does nothing but formalize the process.

The problem wouldn't be the X-Card itself, it would be weaponized use of the X-Card to control a game beyond tolerable limits.

That certainly is a potential problem if the X-card is abused.  But there's also the problem that, by design, a properly-used X-card is completely opaque.  It just says "I have a problem with what's going on", but gives no indication of just what it is about the events that causes a problem for you, and nobody else is allowed to ask.  Instead, they have to try to guess what has to be removed from the game.

Granted, in most cases where an X-card might be invoked, there's probably going to be an obvious answer to that question, such as rape or graphic descriptions of gore, but I'm not ready to assume that this will be true in every case, nor to dismiss the possibility that, even if there is an obvious answer, the obvious answer might be incorrect and the player was actually objecting to some other element.

This is my primary objection to X-cards.  Not that they're a way to unilaterally put the brakes on something that's headed into A Bad Place, but that, after you put the brakes on, I'm not allowed to ask what I would have to change to make things better for you, so that we can then determine whether we can work out a compromise that we're both happy with or if it would instead be best for us to not game together in the future.

Quote from: jhkim;1060746Well, the imaginary people that you're creating here sound terrible to play with - but they're imaginary, right? Likewise, the example of being triggered by owls is a hypothetical created by nDervish here, right? I think there's a pretty wide range between an invented hypothetical player who is triggered by owls versus a real person who in uncomfortable with their character being raped (of which I know several).

Yep, the owls were my own half-assed attempt at a hypothetical case of "there's something obvious for the player to be objecting to, but they're actually just fine with the obviously 'objectionable' content and their problem is with some other, completely unrelated, thing".

It wasn't meant as an example of an unreasonable player (which seems to be how most people referring back to it seem to have taken it), but rather as an example of how the opacity of the X-card could cause problems - they tap the X-card, so you take out the obvious problem of cannibal clown rape, but their real issue hasn't been addressed and they're going to have to tap out again the next time the PCs walk through a forest at night.  The "real issue" doesn't have to be something as ridiculous as owl-phobia, it just needs to be something which coincidentally happens at the same time as something else which the rest of the table considers to be a more obvious problem, leading them to make the wrong assumption about why the X-card was invoked.

Quote from: nDervish;1060794That certainly is a potential problem if the X-card is abused.  But there's also the problem that, by design, a properly-used X-card is completely opaque.  It just says "I have a problem with what's going on", but gives no indication of just what it is about the events that causes a problem for you, and nobody else is allowed to ask.  Instead, they have to try to guess what has to be removed from the game.

Granted, in most cases where an X-card might be invoked, there's probably going to be an obvious answer to that question, such as rape or graphic descriptions of gore, but I'm not ready to assume that this will be true in every case, nor to dismiss the possibility that, even if there is an obvious answer, the obvious answer might be incorrect and the player was actually objecting to some other element.

This is my primary objection to X-cards.  Not that they're a way to unilaterally put the brakes on something that's headed into A Bad Place, but that, after you put the brakes on, I'm not allowed to ask what I would have to change to make things better for you, so that we can then determine whether we can work out a compromise that we're both happy with or if it would instead be best for us to not game together in the future.

This is pretty much why I really do not like the concept of a X-Card. No real indication of what is wrong. While wasting time at the game table trying to figure what is wrong. With the added bonus of not being allowed to ask what is wrong. Some here are wondering why we don't like them. I wonder why.

Quote from: nDervish;1060794Yep, the owls were my own half-assed attempt at a hypothetical case of "there's something obvious for the player to be objecting to, but they're actually just fine with the obviously 'objectionable' content and their problem is with some other, completely unrelated, thing".

It wasn't meant as an example of an unreasonable player (which seems to be how most people referring back to it seem to have taken it), but rather as an example of how the opacity of the X-card could cause problems - they tap the X-card, so you take out the obvious problem of cannibal clown rape, but their real issue hasn't been addressed and they're going to have to tap out again the next time the PCs walk through a forest at night.  The "real issue" doesn't have to be something as ridiculous as owl-phobia, it just needs to be something which coincidentally happens at the same time as something else which the rest of the table considers to be a more obvious problem, leading them to make the wrong assumption about why the X-card was invoked.

I was once told on another forum by a fellow player that one of his players cried because a random dog was killed in a module. All because his player liked dogs and she hated seeing even a imaginary one killed off by a imaginary npc. Only to be told not only was she allowed to do that non-stop at the table. we HAD to accept that players behavior no matter how disruptive. Anyone telling her to stop because it was disruptive he would consider a terrible person and a misogynist. All dure respect one is playing a rpg where one kills others other creatures for XP. Busting into tears every time a helpless imaginary animal is killed off in a game of D&D at my tables would get you the three strikes rule then ejected from our table. If the DM was going into graphic detail of the butchering of the dog then by all means raise the X-card because that kind of stuff is disturbing. Raising a X-Card at leas at my table because random animal noc was stabbed by a sword would be ignored by myself at least. So the example of being bothered by the hooting Owl may not be so far fetched after all.

Quote from: Franky;1060749Unless the players tap the XXX card, eh?

I've been waiting for someone to drop that! Well, played!

Quote from: Motorskills;1060750Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman. Tell me that shit’s not scary! Eyes all big and ready to swoop in and violate you.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060750Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060818I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman. Tell me that shit's not scary! Eyes all big and ready to swoop in and violate you.

Eh, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with "macho", happy to find another word if you can think of one.

What I was trying to get at is that many posters in this thread seem to think that distaste about the direction a game is taking is immediate and binary, and the options are either to walk away or suck it up.

I've certainly seen both of those, I've certainly done the latter myself (as described above). But absolutely those are not the only two options. Some posters in this thread seem to be arguing that any attempt to provide communication tools is some kind of left-wing conspiracy to shut down creativity.

I'm still bouncing off that hard. To my mind, having an extra tool to communicate to the DM or a fellow player(s) that something isn't having the intended effect just seems like a good thing to me.

As I DM, I want my players to know that they can communicate with me, and maybe that could include a subtle eye contact that draws my attention to the X-card. I adjust my language, tweak the scene, tell another player to back off a bit, whatever.

I do that all the time anyway, every good GM should be prepared to do that. Otherwise what's the point?

"Fuck you, I'm running this game for my enjoyment. If you enjoy yourself that's just a lucky side effect."

Well, the main problem with that is the idea that "more communication" is always a good thing.  Or at least the way most people mean it.  Technically, "communication" is not only a message, but a useful message that is sent and received.  So in the technical sense, more communication is a good thing.  However, what most people mean by communication is something more akin to "I got to express myself."  That can be good, but there is a limit.  One of the things missing, socially, from many people today is the ability to know when to shut up.  Not as in, "don't talk about this topic, ever, in polite society" (the opposite extreme) but rather, "OK, you've said your piece, but now you are just repeating yourself endlessly.  Give it a rest."

That's not "you" personally, but general, and there is no direct correlation to that example of shutting up and X-cards.  It's merely to illustrate the idea that "communication" isn't some automatic positive thing.  That doesn't mean that an X-card is necessarily bad from that line or argument, either--only that you can't say one way or the other from some general idea of valuing communication.

Onto a different slant on the X-card itself:  I think you are misreading the binary stuff.  Almost everyone has said things like, "talk about this stuff like adults," meaning that walk away or suck it up isn't the only option.  I'm walking away (generally) because of the odds.  But I'm an outlier, in that I don't particularly have the taste for many of the things that would even prompt an X-card in the first place.  Moreover, having had personal experience with people that have suffered real trauma, I think that in any case where an X-card is necessary, it is also grossly insufficient.  One of the reasons why I'd walk away from any game with an X-card, is that if someone picked it up, the game would immediately cease being fun for me. I'd go into "help this person retreat" mode until I could evaluate whether they were really in such bad shape that picking up the card was the only outlet.  That's probably not fair to them or the group, either, since the chances are remote that the card was picked up due to trauma, but rather just being pushed a little too far.  I can't help my response, because of past experiences with the real thing.  So I absent myself from the situation.  

As a GM, I certainly talk about such things with the players.  But I'm not plunking an X-card down, because again it is insufficient.  If a player said they needed an X-card, I'm asking them what is the subject that they are worried about.  If it's trivial, then I'm not running a game for them.  If it's serious, then the X is not going to be in the game that I run for them, period--not even if they ask for it.  A game isn't a therapy session. I'm not a qualified therapist, and even if I were, I wouldn't run such a game.