Monte Cook would like to force YOU to ban tracking Food Rations in your game because they're privileged. And, Police Harassment in Waterdeep.
Also, to ban any player who doesn't think exactly like he does.

When I first saw his "consent checklist" I thought it was parody. It's not: it's Maoism.



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

Wait...that checklist is for real?

Quote from: Doom;1103732Wait...that checklist is for real?

Yup. Monte Cook wrote it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1103734Yup. Monte Cook wrote it.

Oy Vey!

This is shit we don't need in RPGs.....

- Ed C.

Can we all agree to not drag in real life politics into gaming at all?  Can't we just do that?  I guess not thanks to the SJWs.

.....Listening to the YouTube video.....

Wait a sec....

Voted differently than me?
People in an RPG group?
Holy Freaking Kahless - that is every game group I have been in for 30 years plus,

- Ed C.

I think this is the checklist from a free booklet called "Consent in Gaming" from Monte Cook games. The booklet lists the designers as Sean K. Reynolds and Shanna Germain. Monte Cook is listed as Creative Director. There's already a thread on the booklet started by Gagarth:

A new exciting product has been-release for the Cypher system

All this Woke thinking keeps springing forth from members of the old D & D design teams.  There must have been something in the water at WOTC?

Say what you will about Mao but I don't think worrying about consent and other peoples feelings were really part of his governing philosophy.

Quote from: Razor 007;1103744All this Woke thinking keeps springing forth from members of the old D & D design teams.  There must have been something in the water at WOTC?

No just pretending to suddenly be woke to pander to a certain demographic in the gaming industry. While thinking no one will notice that they suddenly became woke. Really for nothing more than profit. Or fear of being ostracized as not being woke enough.

Quote from: ligedog;1103750Say what you will about Mao but I don't think worrying about consent and other peoples feelings were really part of his governing philosophy.

That's a really good point.

Quote from: ligedog;1103750Say what you will about Mao but I don't think worrying about consent and other peoples feelings were really part of his governing philosophy.

True, but having the public struggle sessions were a part of his regime, and that seems to be a large part of current Awokening going on.

I don't think Monte Cook or Shanna Germain are Maoists. I read the book this morning and I don't really agree with the books premise or content very much. I would even say I find it a bit silly personally. But my sense is they are part of a gaming culture in the north west where this is just the norm. Where I game, I don't think a checklist like the book has would go over well at all. But i do think the book is well intentioned. If they want to write a book like this, I am fine with it. What bothers me is the pushback I see online when people disagree with the book. That is where the real problem. Presenting an idea or a concept is fine by me. Not allowing people to discuss its merit openly, or to just simply have honest disagreements over it, is where I start to lose people.

There is a lot wrong with the book in my my opinion. One issue with the book is by framing it as a consent issue, it is using language more associated with sexual abuse and assault than with a GM presenting content in a game that upsets people. So I think making this about consent isn't the right way to even frame the discussion. It kind of takes the topic to a whole other level than what it really is. I mean we'd never talk about movies in that way (for example if a director surprises you with an avalanche of spiders, you would never say you didn't consent to a spider care).

Also the checklist itself is very unusual. There are things on there that most people have to address someway in an RPG. But it is filled with so many items ranging from cancer, to thirst, to terrorism and eyeball horror, that it doesn't even really seem like it would be manageable to juggle that with 4-6 players. And I don't think objecting to thirst or even terrorism (which are both pretty standard tropes in RPGs) is a reasonable thing. If someone has a specific issue with terrorism because something horrible happened to them, then sure I think a GM can easily handle that. But to go in assuming it needs to be on a checklist of concerns strikes me as very odd.

Quote from: sureshot;1103777No just pretending to suddenly be woke to pander to a certain demographic in the gaming industry. While thinking no one will notice that they suddenly became woke. Really for nothing more than profit. Or fear of being ostracized as not being woke enough.

Reynolds was always that way.  Don't know if the others were too, or were just better at hiding it to not offend their customers for awhile.  By about 2007, I had stopped buying anything that Reynolds worked on.  He's one of those people that pissed me off so much that every time I used a book with his name on the credits, my enjoyment of the content suffered because of being reminded about him.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1103785Reynolds was always that way.  Don't know if the others were too, or were just better at hiding it to not offend their customers for awhile.  By about 2007, I had stopped buying anything that Reynolds worked on.  He's one of those people that pissed me off so much that every time I used a book with his name on the credits, my enjoyment of the content suffered because of being reminded about him.

SKR was also great at messing up Pathfinder rules, so much so that I made it a point to ignore his rulings.