Quote from: Corolinth on January 30, 2024, 04:36:56 PM

Quote from: BadApple on January 30, 2024, 12:19:24 PM

QuoteIt's possible to be a vegan and shut the fuck up about it.

[citation needed]

Classic paradox: anybody who cites themselves as an example disqualifies themselves in the act.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 30, 2024, 07:25:28 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on January 30, 2024, 06:52:46 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 29, 2024, 08:44:55 PM
For better or worse, DMs have a leadership role at the RPG table.

This is what was missing from the original post. The DM told the OP through a text they were wrong after the fact instead of ending the argument with their opinion. They could have just stated that in their Forgotten Realms campaign the god in question believes Vampire Minions are sad victims that should not be called names or killed outright. I think the DM was weak in this situation.

If the DM is going to go with "this is my own version of Forgotten Realms," he needs to tell people before char gen.

If the player made a Pally with the concept of righteous undead smasher, the DM suddenly saying "my version of your god is caring and understanding when it comes to undead" is a rug pull.

This is what I felt when the cleric pointed out to me that "Lathander would disapprove of merciless acts of unprovoked violence".

Quote from: Cipher on January 30, 2024, 08:21:25 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 30, 2024, 07:25:28 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on January 30, 2024, 06:52:46 PM

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 29, 2024, 08:44:55 PM
For better or worse, DMs have a leadership role at the RPG table.

This is what was missing from the original post. The DM told the OP through a text they were wrong after the fact instead of ending the argument with their opinion. They could have just stated that in their Forgotten Realms campaign the god in question believes Vampire Minions are sad victims that should not be called names or killed outright. I think the DM was weak in this situation.

If the DM is going to go with "this is my own version of Forgotten Realms," he needs to tell people before char gen.

If the player made a Pally with the concept of righteous undead smasher, the DM suddenly saying "my version of your god is caring and understanding when it comes to undead" is a rug pull.

This is what I felt when the cleric pointed out to me that "Lathander would disapprove of merciless acts of unprovoked violence".

"Gruumsh is the god of charity, and a friend of the Elves."

I've seen in other discussions about the whole #twatgate thing that progressive people have a fundamental blind spot in clinging to a belief that individual bad actors don't exist, but are created by flaws in the system, leading to their desire to control all the systems of governance and society and therefore, in their eyes, lead to a perfected humanity.  That's why you see them coming out of the woodwork if some homeless drug addict knifes an old woman to death, because by their worldview it isn't the man's fault; he is a co-victim of a failure in the system that made him into a murderer.

That's why the people with the trigger warnings and X-cards and consent sheets and whatnot seem insanely naive to anyone who isn't part of their club: They cannot conceive of a person being a petty little bitch who'll abuse those tools to stomp on other people just to satisfy a whim for control.  It falls outside of their vision of the world. 

Quote from: Valatar on January 30, 2024, 09:34:24 PMThey cannot conceive of a person being a petty little bitch who'll abuse those tools to stomp on other people just to satisfy a whim for control.

I think that's overthinking it.  My experience is that these people (in the gaming hobby) are simply insecure and pathologically conflict-avoidant.  These RPG "safety tools" serve to help them avoid having to say directly to another human being "dude, knock that shit off."

I remembered reading this article awhile back that makes the case that trigger warnings don't help in any meaningful way, and may actually cause some harm.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/parenting-translator/202307/do-trigger-warnings-do-more-harm-than-good

QuoteAnother risk? Trigger warnings may increase trauma survivors' tendency to see their trauma as central to their identity, which has been linked to increased PTSD symptoms. Trigger warnings also rely on the principle that avoiding upsetting content helps reduce anxiety, but in fact, research consistently finds that avoiding upsetting content can worsen symptoms of PTSD and anxiety over time.

Quote from: daniel_ream on January 30, 2024, 10:26:12 PM

Quote from: Valatar on January 30, 2024, 09:34:24 PMThey cannot conceive of a person being a petty little bitch who'll abuse those tools to stomp on other people just to satisfy a whim for control.

I think that's overthinking it.  My experience is that these people (in the gaming hobby) are simply insecure and pathologically conflict-avoidant.  These RPG "safety tools" serve to help them avoid having to say directly to another human being "dude, knock that shit off."

There is certainly room for both types of actor.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 30, 2024, 07:25:28 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on January 30, 2024, 06:52:46 PM
This is what was missing from the original post. The DM told the OP through a text they were wrong after the fact instead of ending the argument with their opinion. They could have just stated that in their Forgotten Realms campaign the god in question believes Vampire Minions are sad victims that should not be called names or killed outright. I think the DM was weak in this situation.

If the DM is going to go with "this is my own version of Forgotten Realms," he needs to tell people before char gen.

If the player made a Pally with the concept of righteous undead smasher, the DM suddenly saying "my version of your god is caring and understanding when it comes to undead" is a rug pull.

Yup. I agree it's a matter of communication between DM and players.

I don't know the specifics of what was communicated. Maybe the DM had it in for Cipher the whole time, and the DM secretly told the other players about background and deliberately didn't give the info to Cipher. Or maybe the DM intended to communicate to everyone, but the message didn't reach Cipher for some reason. I don't know.

It sounds like the others thought that the the merchant was a victim like Lucy Westenra in Dracula, or many other examples in vampire fiction of an innocent turned and controlled by a master vampire. That's not always the case with vampires, but it's a common trope since early in vampire fiction. I had an adventure in my D&D campaign last year where the PCs had a mission to rescue the governor's son, and they found that he had been turned into a vampire spawn. They did kill him, but they did so reluctantly after concluding that there was no way to bring him back.

I think an innocent like Lucy turned vampire is a similar case to goblin babies. It's an open question at the table about how to handle them.

---

Looking back, my note about the vampire spawn in my campaign might be suspicious to Brad:

Quote from: Brad on January 30, 2024, 08:50:56 AM
I always just thought he was a sycophant, but now that you're pointing it out, it is fucking ridiculously suspicious he just ALWAYS has a specific anecdote that disputes a general point. Like always. Say most of the trans people you've met are mentally ill? Welp, jhkim plays with two of them who are paragons of society and have PhDs in particle physics, hardly mentally ill!

That's because I tend to talk about what I have actual experience with, instead of white-room theorizing. And I'll specify my experience rather than trying to claim it as a generality which must be true for everyone.

So about vampires -- below is the campaign log for my current campaign. Dealing with the vampire spawn was in "The Dragon Lord's Son". I also ran that adventure as a convention game in Oct 2022.

http://solar-empire.wikidot.com/events

https://admin.bigbadcon.com/events/the-dragon-lord-s-missing-daughter/

Quote from: Brad on January 30, 2024, 08:50:56 AM

I always just thought he was a sycophant, but now that you're pointing it out, it is fucking ridiculously suspicious he just ALWAYS has a specific anecdote that disputes a general point. Like always. Say most of the trans people you've met are mentally ill? Welp, jhkim plays with two of them who are paragons of society and have PhDs in particle physics, hardly mentally ill!

The woke seem to do that alot.

I was telling one of my players about the whole fake "battle against racism in gaming" and he countered that one of his friends was black and had encountered racism and so yes everyone has to be policed.

Quote from: daniel_ream on January 30, 2024, 09:15:38 AM

Quote from: S'mon on January 30, 2024, 02:30:24 AM
And WoTC seem deathly afraid of simply telling people what to do. And it has of course gotten much worse over time.

I think you're confusing "deathly afraid" with "intentionally keeping its customers dependent on an endless flow of published adventures".

That would be a great argument. If it werent completely false. WotC's 5e adventure flow has been anemic and people have been complaining about it since year 2.

Since release they have put out only 2 modules a year. (And 2 Starter box sets and 1 Essentials box.) And at least 3 were 2nd party created. (Kobold Press, Sasquatch, and Green Ronin)

Quote from: yosemitemike on January 29, 2024, 09:16:12 AM
The difference is that the X-card is an unquestionable veto that can be invoked at any time for any reason with no need for justification or explanation and no questioning or discussion allowed.  It's so easy to abuse that part of me suspects that it was designed to be abused.  You would have to be a fool to not anticipate that such an easy to abuse tool will be abused.  If something can be abused, it will be and these tools are very, very easy to abuse.

A chair can be abused. Someone could decide, in the middle of a session, that they don't like what's happening in the game, become triggered, and pick up their chair and hit you with it.

If someone is abusing the X-card, or their needs are such that they simply can't be reasonably accommodated in the planned game, wouldn't you just un-invite them?

Do you need an X-X-card, to play when someone's use of the X-card is affecting your experience?

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2024, 02:20:20 PM
That would be a great argument. If it werent completely false.

The 5E adventures are fifty-buck full-colour hardbacks that span ten or more levels.  They're not 32 page monochrome folios any more.  You're comparing apples to oranges.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 31, 2024, 02:30:32 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on January 29, 2024, 09:16:12 AM
The difference is that the X-card is an unquestionable veto that can be invoked at any time for any reason with no need for justification or explanation and no questioning or discussion allowed.  It's so easy to abuse that part of me suspects that it was designed to be abused.  You would have to be a fool to not anticipate that such an easy to abuse tool will be abused.  If something can be abused, it will be and these tools are very, very easy to abuse.

A chair can be abused. Someone could decide, in the middle of a session, that they don't like what's happening in the game, become triggered, and pick up their chair and hit you with it.

If someone is abusing the X-card, or their needs are such that they simply can't be reasonably accommodated in the planned game, wouldn't you just un-invite them?

Do you need an X-X-card, to play when someone's use of the X-card is affecting your experience?

Your undermine your own counterpoint with your own example. If I see the chair coming I can reasonably block or dodge it.

Once an X-card is played and because the creator of the card is too stubbornly stupid to fix the main flaw of it. Unless I kick the player out of the game there is no countering the card. If played nether the GM or the players or both either privately or publicly are not allowed to ask the player why they played the card.  Neither does the player who used the card need to volunteer any information. Which can cause games to come to a crashing halt. The fact that you and many of the woke are purposefully blind to that flaw is on you.

Which you equally stubbornly stupidly woke always choose to ignore. As it goes against your carefully constructed personal narrative on the subject

Quote from: Abraxus on January 31, 2024, 10:06:55 PM

Quote from: pawsplay on January 31, 2024, 02:30:32 PM

Quote from: yosemitemike on January 29, 2024, 09:16:12 AM
The difference is that the X-card is an unquestionable veto that can be invoked at any time for any reason with no need for justification or explanation and no questioning or discussion allowed.  It's so easy to abuse that part of me suspects that it was designed to be abused.  You would have to be a fool to not anticipate that such an easy to abuse tool will be abused.  If something can be abused, it will be and these tools are very, very easy to abuse.

A chair can be abused. Someone could decide, in the middle of a session, that they don't like what's happening in the game, become triggered, and pick up their chair and hit you with it.

If someone is abusing the X-card, or their needs are such that they simply can't be reasonably accommodated in the planned game, wouldn't you just un-invite them?

Do you need an X-X-card, to play when someone's use of the X-card is affecting your experience?

Your undermine your own counterpoint with your own example. If I see the chair coming I can reasonably block or dodge it.

Once an X-card is played and because the creator of the card is too stubbornly stupid to fix the main flaw of it. Unless I kick the player out of the game there is no countering the card. If played nether the GM or the players or both either privately or publicly are not allowed to ask the player why they played the card.  Neither does the player who used the card need to volunteer any information. Which can cause games to come to a crashing halt. The fact that you and many of the woke are purposefully blind to that flaw is on you.

Which you equally stubbornly stupidly woke always choose to ignore. As it goes against your carefully constructed personal narrative on the subject

Hey man the X card is for trogs like you and me, not for our emotionally and intellectually superiors. Grunt.

Seriously though, it's ironic that most people who advocate for the X card don't know how it was designed to be used.

Quote from: pawsplay on January 31, 2024, 02:30:32 PM
Do you need an X-X-card, to play when someone's use of the X-card is affecting your experience?

Best suggestion I've seen regarding X cards!