Quote from: SHARK on January 28, 2024, 08:51:41 PM
Greetings!

Cipher, your situation is terrible. Don't play with Leftist Woke morons, no matter how desperate. Solo Gaming until you find an appropriate group!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Greetings to you as well, Shark!

I tried that but I found the experience unrewarding. It left me with an urge to just write stories instead. I've been a forever GM for so long, that when I GM I want to be surprised by the Players actions and how their choices carve a story out of the game we all share.

As a Player, I want to do the same. Not hating on people that enjoy solo gaming and maybe I am doing it wrong, but to me it just felt like writing with extra steps.

I'll rather just write, read a book or play a videogame. It just doesn't scratch that "I want to roleplay" itch.


Maybe one day I can find a group of old farts online or IRL. I am keeping my hopes up.

Quote from: Cipher on January 28, 2024, 05:32:23 PM
I said that I disagreed with their consensus and decided that the game was not for me and left, without raising my voice or flinging insults.

You made the right choice.

Like I would take, "no slurs, no bigotries" to mean it's not funny to make up slurs for dwarves, and you definitely shouldn't roleplay cultural prejudice against other humans, not "don't kill dangerous monsters."

If you have PTSD and have altered consciousness, disorientation, lost time, and panic episodes from stress in imaginative mutual discussions with other people then do not play D&D or rpgs.

Quote from: Silverblade on January 28, 2024, 08:47:43 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 28, 2024, 08:31:23 PM
It seems to me that this is a problem not with trigger warnings per se, but with the others' attitudes over bigotry and vampires.

As for your attitude about undead -- that is something that depends on the game world. For example, in the world of my current campaign, there are many non-evil undead creatures. There are holy mummies, specters of righteous vengeance, and helpful ghosts. Different worlds have different rules. As another example, in the "True Blood" book and TV series, there are many well-meaning vampires. In other worlds, vampires strongly tend towards evil but there are a few exceptions, like in Buffy the Vampire Slayer or World of Darkness, where a vampire might resist being evil.

I've had some recent discussions of times in my past where I was accused of being a murderhobo or the equivalent for something I did. I think the clash can happen regardless of trigger warnings.

---

Regarding the poll, I had trouble with the categories. I think it's important to talk about levels of content like romance, sexuality, torture, gore, rape, and so forth -- but I'm not sold on trigger warnings as a specific means of talking about it.

The game world is obviously Faerun since the character was a paladin of Lathander.  If you are going to use a game world, then they should honor the lore of the world.  Lathander hates undead because they are an abomination to the cycle of birth and rebirth.  The player roleplayed correctly, in my opinion.  I don't understand why you are bringing up different worlds when clearly the setting was established?

Because that's what jhkim does.  Read any post he makes here.  First, he takes one small element of any post and disagrees with it, usually in asserting that there is no solid line of delineation (i.e. he always argues that there is a gray area, so any dichotomies are wrong).  He follows it with a personal anecdote intended to show that, since he's come up with one (usually made up by the sound of it) example, any attempt to categorize or label something is futile.  Honestly, you could write an AI to make every one of his posts following that formula and no one could tell the difference.  Don't take my word for it... he'll follow this pattern in just about every interaction...

To the OP's point, the problem is that stupid and damaged people have invaded our hobby.  First, they feel some kind of pride in being damaged, so much so that most of them make up their "mental illnesses" altogether.  I've met more self-diagnosed such-and-suches in this hobby than anywhere else.  They wear their "illness" as both a badge and an excuse to not behave like decent human beings.  Whenever they behave like spoiled brats and are called on it, they fall back on their self-diagnosed whatever.  As such, they attempt to use psychologically-inspired terminology, only they are too stupid to use it correctly.  This is where "trigger warnings" come from.  These morons want to pretend that their soft, meaningless lives have been so traumatic that they can compare their experiences to PTSD, when the vast majority of psychologists will tell you that the proper approach to trauma is habituation, not avoidance.  But snowflake zero over there doesn't want to have to listen to anything that might confirm the realities that they don't want to hear (life is hard, they are not special, men can't become women, an awkward pass is not "rape"... and you should be thankful someone was desperate enough to ask you out, etc.).  So they pervert the meaning and application of "triggers" to weaponize it so they can control others around them.

Long story short: there are no triggers in the context of RPGs; it is a misuse of the term and context.  Unpleasant ideas can't hurt you.  It is your responsibility to handle material you don't like, through adult conversation.  Anyone in RPGs who unironically uses the term "triggers" is a vile piece of garbage and should be avoided like the plague.

In my experience, trigger warnings tend to be a tell for political junk. I'm sure a few are put in with well-meaning intent, but more often than not it usually is a sign that the game has been padded to protect the feelings of otherwise overly sensitive individuals. I wouldn't play in a group that used them. Especially if it were for stuff like, "this game includes smoking and drinking, mild fantasy racial tensions" etc. I mean if you can't play an elf game without getting triggered over the term knife-ears, then we don't belong at the same table.

If you play Cyberpunk 2020, you have to except some dark stuff to happen, it's just the nature of the game. And if you can't handle cosmic horror, why are you playing Cthulhu games? That said, there's no reason you shouldn't consider the people you're playing with, especially if they're your friends. I'm all about playing a mature game, but I don't want something with all edge and no point, it ends up being shocking in a dumb way.

There's being courteous, and then there's being controlled.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 28, 2024, 10:26:58 PM
Long story short: there are no triggers in the context of RPGs; it is a misuse of the term and context.  Unpleasant ideas can't hurt you.  It is your responsibility to handle material you don't like, through adult conversation.  Anyone in RPGs who unironically uses the term "triggers" is a vile piece of garbage and should be avoided like the plague.

There are lots of perfectly well functioning human beings out there who, if they encountered something unexpected in an RPG context, might be triggered. For instance, someone who was a kidnapping victim might be triggered by an in-game abduction. Unpleasant ideas can hurt you. And it's not their fault they feel that way; it's a natural reaction to something horrible something else did. That is, in fact, what a trigger is; a trauma response to a non-threatening situation. If I had a friend who was a war veteran, and they asked me not to shoot fireworks at my picnic because it triggered them, I would try to accommodate that. I'm not actually placing them in danger, they know it's not actually dangerous, but it's stressful. And a highly traumatic childhood is as bad for you, health-wise, as smoking. I'm not sure what "adult conversation" means to you, but to me that would include a certain amount of vulnerability, and a certain amount of respect for other people's feelings. No one is trying to ruin anyone's fun by saying "these things happen."

I think experience shows it's a lot easier to deal with certain issues ahead of time, then to find out in the middle of your game session that someone is going to have to step out, because something occurred that put them right where they were when their grandma got murdered or whatever. It certainly doesn't hurt, or anyone else, to take a pause now and then. RPGs are supposed to be fun. If something gets too intense, that's really against the purpose. An RPG session isn't supposed to be flooding therapy. It's not supposed to be brutal. It's supposed to be fun, maybe even engaging, perhaps uplifting or cathartic.

The trigger warning, like so many other things, is rooted in something solid. That's how ideological subversion works.

A content warning is a valid concept. Some people just don't want to play in another person's sexual fantasy, for instance. However, this is being weaponized by a particular segment of the hobby. A trigger warning is not the same thing as a content warning. Every last one of us knows it. A trigger warning is not about letting squeamish people know the game will feature excessive gore, it's about ideological purity tests and Marxist struggle sessions.

When the radical activists have all been expunged from the hobby, then we can talk about the validity of content warnings, but until that point, you're just carrying water for them if you pretend like a trigger warning is anything other than hostile and malicious.

Quote from: Cipher on January 28, 2024, 07:24:24 PM

Quote from: Wisithir on January 28, 2024, 06:38:00 PM
A content advisory is a tool for the GM to let potential players know "you might not like this." At the table safety tools are a power mechanism for players to manipulate the experience without facilitating it. It's a social game not a therapy or bondage session, no one is compelled to participate and is free to walk away at any time.

So, if I understood your stance correctly, and please do mention if I am not, you are fine with content advisory such like the old VtM games mentioning "this is a game about sex and violence", so everyone can know what kind of game they are getting into and bow out if they don't find it appealing, right?

But, you are not fine with trigger warnings as "safety tools" because there is no need for them since, like you said: "It's a social game not a therapy or bondage session, no one is compelled to participate and is free to walk away at any time."


Correct?

Exactly. It is good to know what the game is about and what non obvious issues may come up. At the table, handle any unpleasantness like a functional adult in any other social circumstance, including excusing yourself if need be.

As for the filthy bloodsucker; it was a bloodsucker, it was engaged in the filthy deed of detaining other without consent or authority to, and it if it was a helpless pawn, it warranted a mercy killing followed by proper burial rights.

As for the other players, some people are so dysfunctional that they would not want thrier murder brought to justice if said murdered belonged to some designated as underprivileged class, completely failing to understand that society cannot function that way.

Movies have ratings with warnings about the kinds of content within.

I think that a lot of the players you find in conventions have needlessly thin skins and that this phrase "trigger warning" is probably bad terminology, and the X-Card is now used to ruin everyone's immersion more than help anyone get out of permanent brain damage. But do not confuse the smoothbrain implementation with the idea itself being bad. The idea itself is good and helpful, especially if you keep the entire table on topic on what kind of story they are telling.

I mean, I don't take a position at either goalpost. I see how various tools and approaches can be helpful in a smooth, and enjoyable experience. At the same time, I don't really enjoy it when the first meetup is just creating characters together and talking about potential triggers, lines, and so forth. I just want to play. I think, really, the less you know people, the more valuable it is to maybe map this stuff out in advance. Especially in an essentially formal situation, like a convention game. Once you know people better, you know, I hope a close-knit group that is respectful to each other can kind of feel it out, and catch anybody if things take a wrong turn.

I think it can challenging, too, to address everyone's potential triggers when the game itself is a lot grittier. I'm not saying people should just sit in silence, but I think there are situations where some people shouldn't dive into some games, and some players may not be a good fit for a group wanting something a little darker. Again, not just for misery's sake. But just as some people love horror movies or thrillers or heart-rending real-life dramas, some people like RPGs that are more on the heavy side.

Quote from: 1stLevelWizard on January 28, 2024, 10:45:43 PM
In my experience, trigger warnings tend to be a tell for political junk. I'm sure a few are put in with well-meaning intent, but more often than not it usually is a sign that the game has been padded to protect the feelings of otherwise overly sensitive individuals. I wouldn't play in a group that used them. Especially if it were for stuff like, "this game includes smoking and drinking, mild fantasy racial tensions" etc. I mean if you can't play an elf game without getting triggered over the term knife-ears, then we don't belong at the same table.

If you play Cyberpunk 2020, you have to except some dark stuff to happen, it's just the nature of the game. And if you can't handle cosmic horror, why are you playing Cthulhu games? That said, there's no reason you shouldn't consider the people you're playing with, especially if they're your friends. I'm all about playing a mature game, but I don't want something with all edge and no point, it ends up being shocking in a dumb way.

There's being courteous, and then there's being controlled.

Interesting. I would say that I am someone that has no trigger warnings. There's stuff that I like and stuff that I don't like but I wouldn't say anything "triggers" me in a game of make believe.

I don't like playing edgy games or being villains or even quote unquote "heroic" murder hobos. But, I do agree that if the idea of the game is playing amoral pirates out for gold and mischief, then I know from the get go what type of stuff its going to happen and if that game is or isn't for me. But, I have played Shadowrun and Cyberpunk games that were serious without being edgy and I really enjoyed them!

I agree with you on the "knife-ear" stuff, but I remember a discussion in the old WotC forums back when they announced what was then called "D&D Next", and someone was saying that calling dwarves "noseys" or "big noses" was a racial slur against jewish people, and someone mentioned calling drow "darkies" also being considered a racial slur, the same with "greenskins" for Orcs and Goblins, although that's more of a Warhammer fantasy thing.

In that case, do you agree? If not, then where do you draw the line? Meaning, what makes refer to elves in a derogatory manner due to the shape of their ears more acceptable than doing the same for dwarves and their noses?

Quote from: Corolinth on January 28, 2024, 10:55:52 PM
The trigger warning, like so many other things, is rooted in something solid. That's how ideological subversion works.

A content warning is a valid concept. Some people just don't want to play in another person's sexual fantasy, for instance. However, this is being weaponized by a particular segment of the hobby. A trigger warning is not the same thing as a content warning. Every last one of us knows it. A trigger warning is not about letting squeamish people know the game will feature excessive gore, it's about ideological purity tests and Marxist struggle sessions.

When the radical activists have all been expunged from the hobby, then we can talk about the validity of content warnings, but until that point, you're just carrying water for them if you pretend like a trigger warning is anything other than hostile and malicious.

In my experience, the thing about the "personal sexual fantasy" has never been a thing because, as you say, no one wants to play that. So, as soon as that starts I would leave and never come back. I assume most people would.

However, I do notice that for whatever reason, it seems sexual and romantic themes are more common nowadays. Not that they were non-existant before, I told in a previous post about one female player in the AD&D 2e games of my youth that would always flirt with "handsome" male NPCs without missing a single opportunity. But, now it seems that even games that are revolved around that are somewhat popular, like the Thirsty Sword Lesbians example.

In that sense, I don't really understand the idea of a content warning beyond something akin to the ESRB in videogames meaning a quick blurb about: "this game contains profanity, blood and gore, drug use" and such. So people that want to play with children know the game is geared towards adults.

Outside of that, the LFG places that, at a glance, have more traffic seem to be sometimes have requirements instead of content warnings.

I've seen stuff like: "Must have LGBT representation" or "Women ONLY". I couldn't find the opposite, meaning "Cannot have LGBT representation" or "Men ONLY".

Quote from: Wisithir on January 28, 2024, 10:59:54 PM

Quote from: Cipher on January 28, 2024, 07:24:24 PM

Quote from: Wisithir on January 28, 2024, 06:38:00 PM
A content advisory is a tool for the GM to let potential players know "you might not like this." At the table safety tools are a power mechanism for players to manipulate the experience without facilitating it. It's a social game not a therapy or bondage session, no one is compelled to participate and is free to walk away at any time.

So, if I understood your stance correctly, and please do mention if I am not, you are fine with content advisory such like the old VtM games mentioning "this is a game about sex and violence", so everyone can know what kind of game they are getting into and bow out if they don't find it appealing, right?

But, you are not fine with trigger warnings as "safety tools" because there is no need for them since, like you said: "It's a social game not a therapy or bondage session, no one is compelled to participate and is free to walk away at any time."


Correct?

Exactly. It is good to know what the game is about and what non obvious issues may come up. At the table, handle any unpleasantness like a functional adult in any other social circumstance, including excusing yourself if need be.

As for the filthy bloodsucker; it was a bloodsucker, it was engaged in the filthy deed of detaining other without consent or authority to, and it if it was a helpless pawn, it warranted a mercy killing followed by proper burial rights.

As for the other players, some people are so dysfunctional that they would not want thrier murder brought to justice if said murdered belonged to some designated as underprivileged class, completely failing to understand that society cannot function that way.

Indeed, Wisithir!

That was my reasoning. But, as I said, I am going off on the Forgotten Realms lore at the time of the original Baldur's Gate games so maybe something changed in the 5e version that I am not aware off.

As far as I know, vampires and undead in general are always evil monsters beyond redemption and Lathander is anti-undead.  After re-telling the events across this thread I think perhaps there was an idea about maybe interrogating the vampire spawn but that argument was never brought up or else I would have considered it.

Quote from: Cipher on January 29, 2024, 12:06:44 AM

In my experience, the thing about the "personal sexual fantasy" has never been a thing because, as you say, no one wants to play that. So, as soon as that starts I would leave and never come back. I assume most people would.

However, I do notice that for whatever reason, it seems sexual and romantic themes are more common nowadays. Not that they were non-existant before, I told in a previous post about one female player in the AD&D 2e games of my youth that would always flirt with "handsome" male NPCs without missing a single opportunity. But, now it seems that even games that are revolved around that are somewhat popular, like the Thirsty Sword Lesbians example.

In that sense, I don't really understand the idea of a content warning beyond something akin to the ESRB in videogames meaning a quick blurb about: "this game contains profanity, blood and gore, drug use" and such. So people that want to play with children know the game is geared towards adults.

Outside of that, the LFG places that, at a glance, have more traffic seem to be sometimes have requirements instead of content warnings.

I've seen stuff like: "Must have LGBT representation" or "Women ONLY". I couldn't find the opposite, meaning "Cannot have LGBT representation" or "Men ONLY".

It's self insertion.  It's the same reason people write doctorate essays on character backgrounds and hate to see their character die.  It's the reason why their characters have the same world view, fears and phobias as their players.  RPGs have become a form of escapism that, I think, might be unhealthy for some individuals.  They can't seem to separate themselves from the game.

And this idea of self insertion is festering across all forms of entertainment.