Quote from: nDervish;1060947Have you actually read the canonical X-card document by John Stavropoulos, the creator of the X-card?  The initial summary, on page 2 (the first non-cover page), states:

The list of things the author has seen X-carded on page 12 includes smoking and in-flight air turbulence.  By the creator's own document, it is not just used for egregiously offensive topics such as rape or graphic gore.

I'm not disputing any of that, as the originator of the document Stavropoulos's words obviously carry considerable weight. What I would draw your attention to is the (more recent) stuff at the start of the document.

QuoteWe've learned a lot about the X-Card since this original document was published.

QuoteThe X-Card is an optional tool (created by John Stavropoulos) that allows anyone in your game (including you) to edit out any content anyone is uncomfortable with as you play. Since most RPGs are improvisational and we won't know what will happen till it happens, it's possible the game will go in a direction people don't want. An X-Card is a simple tool to fix problems as they arise.

Quote"I'd like your help. Your help to make this game fun for everyone. If anything makes anyone uncomfortable in any way... [ draw X on an index card ] ...just lift this card up, or simply tap it          [ place card at the center of the table ]. You don't have to explain why. It doesn't matter why. When we lift or tap this card, we simply edit out anything X-Carded. And if there is ever an issue, anyone can call for a break and we can talk privately. I know it sounds funny but it will help us play amazing games together and usually I'm the one who uses the X card to protect myself from all of you! Please help make this game fun for everyone. Thank you!"

Notes (see next page):
The X-Card speech above can be more useful that the X-Card itself. It makes it clear that we are all in this together, will help each other, and that the group of people playing are more important than the game.

QuoteThe X-Card does not have to be a tool of last resort. The less special it feels, the more you use it, the more likely someone will use it when it really is badly needed.
The X-Card is not a replacement for conversation.

QuoteSome GMs (usually those who haven't used the X-Card) fear that the X-Card will limit their creativity. Many GMs who use the X-Card find the opposite is true. Since the GM doesn't have to be a magical mind reader, it frees up their energy to focus on other elements of GMing.

I think all of that supports what I've been saying.

The examples Stavropolous listed....I wasn't there, and neither were you, I don't think it is useful to back seat drive those situations, we don't know the scene, we don't know the depiction, we don't know the personalities at the table. I mean smoking sounds like an odd thing to want the GM to veer away from, but if it was that critical to a player at my table, sure why not? I'm hard-pressed to think of NPCs I've utilised where smoking a cigarette was integral to their personalities. Hell, these days, they are more likely to be vaping or wearing a Nicorette patch anyway....

A couple of take-aways from a read of the document: Stavropoulos pushes the use of the document at his table to make it less special. I mean, we all get it, I'm just not sure it's a realistic expectation, and I've never seen it pushed in that way. But if that works for some folks / tables, fine with me.



I do get the "no explanation" thing. Firstly, it's most likely going to be pretty obvious what the concern is, and it won't take a leap of imagination to understand why someone might be uncomfortable with the direction the game is going. It will also most likely be pretty obvious why they may not be wanting to detail their issue in front of everybody. But if it's not the case, the document clearly states:

QuoteCall for a break and have the person running the game or a close friend speak privately with the person who used the X-Card. In general, we tell people that no explanations are needed, but if they want to share, they are welcome to. It's their choice.

Just as an aside, the document references the earlier tools of "Lines" and "Veils". I'm not familiar with the formality of those, I will try to get round to reading up on that at some point. I absolutely use informal versions of those in my games, it sounds like most people in this thread do so as well.

Again I think the no explanation cause is pure bullshit imo. Yes sometimes it's obvious. If I'm detailing the torture of npc in disturbingly clear detail it's obvious and should not be at the game table lift your X-card. If like in my example of the player bursting into tears over the death of  a imaginary dog I think it's their personal and to the group responsible to tell them. Nor is it that easy to just casual a break. The group has to agree to it and the issue has to be a major issue. My group would be opposed to X-card on general principles. Random breaks in the game for no good reason would be a mutiny on the Bounty situation. The X-card is a good idea the rules to implement them are written in such a naive and disruptive way to causal gaming imo.

Quote from: sureshot;1060954The X-card is a good idea

It's a shit idea and a sign that the bearer doesn't need to be in any game I'm running.

Quote from: ThatChrisGuy;1060970It's a shit idea and a sign that the bearer doesn't need to be in any game I'm running.

I agree yet I also see the need. Certain topics like a person being raped or tortured is not the rest of the table needs to know imo. Not unless the person is good with the group knowing. Yet would never play or run a game for anyone wanting to use them.

As I said earlier, I'm not an advocate for the X-card. I don't even use it myself, much less push it for other people. However, I do think that some of the arguments against it are off-base, and don't reflect what I see in practice for games that use it.

1) I think it's reasonable to be disturbed by stuff that happens in an RPG. In particular, I take issue with SHARK's comment,

Quote from: SHARKI 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.

I think plenty of people can reasonably be upset by rape happening in a fantasy game.

2) Further, I think people's lines will be different. There is a grey area of what is acceptable between "OMG you're a special snowflake" / "WTF you're a freak with bad taste" - where people should communicate personal differences.

Quote from: jeff37923If 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.

Quote from: jeff37923This is one of those reading comprehension moments of yours. Lurtch pointed out that he was talking about rape in actual play and I absolutely agree with him.

OK, so jeff - sorry I misunderstood. Can you give some examples about how rape would appear in your game and you would fade to black? It's not clear to me what you meant by it happening in your game and fading to black.

Quote from: jhkim;1061009OK, so jeff - sorry I misunderstood. Can you give some examples about how rape would appear in your game and you would fade to black? It's not clear to me what you meant by it happening in your game and fading to black.

By not having the player characters graphically engaging in the act, but having them interact with the results.

Half-orcs, indicate rape by the very nature of the orc.

Finding a victim of rape who is trying to escape their captors is an indicator of rape.

If a player is going to get raped by placing themselves in an untenable position I say, "You feel the Mind Flayer's tentacle enter your anus. The rest is the stuff of nightmares." I do not get explicitly graphic about it and do a point by point account of the act. Just like if a player says that the are taking a tavern wench up to their room, "She goes up with you, you pay her 50 gold, and she is worth every copper. Now the next morning...."

Like if a vampire attacks a player character, "He stands there before you, intoxicating in his beauty. He reaches for you and you gladly enter into his embrace, his lips touch your neck and then there is a piercing kiss that explodes into an ecstasy that drives you into unconsciousness. When you awaken...."

Do my examples help to explain my technique?

Quote from: jeff37923;1061077By not having the player characters graphically engaging in the act, but having them interact with the results.

Half-orcs, indicate rape by the very nature of the orc.

Finding a victim of rape who is trying to escape their captors is an indicator of rape.

If a player is going to get raped by placing themselves in an untenable position I say, "You feel the Mind Flayer's tentacle enter your anus. The rest is the stuff of nightmares." I do not get explicitly graphic about it and do a point by point account of the act. Just like if a player says that the are taking a tavern wench up to their room, "She goes up with you, you pay her 50 gold, and she is worth every copper. Now the next morning...."

Like if a vampire attacks a player character, "He stands there before you, intoxicating in his beauty. He reaches for you and you gladly enter into his embrace, his lips touch your neck and then there is a piercing kiss that explodes into an ecstasy that drives you into unconsciousness. When you awaken...."

Do my examples help to explain my technique?

OK, thanks, that seems reasonably clear. My impression from Lurtch was that he didn't have rape come up at all. I took this to mean that even if a PC is captured by mind flayers or charmed by a vampire, there would be no mention of rape happening. Obviously, Lurtch - feel free to clarify.

When rape has come up in games I've played in, it was roughly similar to what you say. i.e. In Ars Magica, there was a dominating, lecherous older mage that the PCs were staying with - the other PCs would discuss what they assumed was happening to Idelle ("We need to get out of here before Idelle is pregnant with his child"), but we never went into details of what happened. It was entirely off screen, more like "Creans has been calling Idelle into his chambers."

However, these days, I generally run things that I just don't mention rape at all. We agree that rape happens in the world, but it's not going to be a part of the game.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061077By not having the player characters graphically engaging in the act, but having them interact with the results.

Half-orcs, indicate rape by the very nature of the orc.

Finding a victim of rape who is trying to escape their captors is an indicator of rape.

If a player is going to get raped by placing themselves in an untenable position I say, "You feel the Mind Flayer's tentacle enter your anus. The rest is the stuff of nightmares." I do not get explicitly graphic about it and do a point by point account of the act. Just like if a player says that the are taking a tavern wench up to their room, "She goes up with you, you pay her 50 gold, and she is worth every copper. Now the next morning...."

Like if a vampire attacks a player character, "He stands there before you, intoxicating in his beauty. He reaches for you and you gladly enter into his embrace, his lips touch your neck and then there is a piercing kiss that explodes into an ecstasy that drives you into unconsciousness. When you awaken...."

Do my examples help to explain my technique?

Greetings!

Hey Jeff! How are you? I like what you said here, for sure. I'm kind of boggled, though. Isn't this *normal*? Jhkim takes "exception" to what I said, though in my mind, what you have here is clearly what I was thinking. This is how I have always handled such stuff, in general. With this, I suppose I'm wondering where all of these stuffed animal people are coming from. All of this "concern" over running a game as John what's his name said, is "Fun for everyone." Well, no shit, moron. What the fuck have we all been doing for the last 40 years? This shit isn't rocket science. It's how we've been running games since we were fucking 10 years old for god's sake, you know?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1061093Greetings!

Hey Jeff! How are you? I like what you said here, for sure. I'm kind of boggled, though. Isn't this *normal*? Jhkim takes "exception" to what I said, though in my mind, what you have here is clearly what I was thinking. This is how I have always handled such stuff, in general. With this, I suppose I'm wondering where all of these stuffed animal people are coming from. All of this "concern" over running a game as John what's his name said, is "Fun for everyone." Well, no shit, moron. What the fuck have we all been doing for the last 40 years? This shit isn't rocket science. It's how we've been running games since we were fucking 10 years old for god's sake, you know?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The way that I and jhkim run these explicit things are the common method of handling it. However, some do not. In public games and private games, I absolutely do not go into graphic detail by personal choice. In private games, among consenting adults, I really can't dictate what other gamers do - although I can and will mock them for it. There has been a gradual movement in gaming to have the events that the characters go through get more and more transgressive and explicit. These games are usually referred to as "misery tourism".The game Poison'd was a watershed moment for this movement. Poison'd is most remembered for having the player characters engage in beheading a cabin boy and then raping the corpses esophagus to succeed in the game.

Come to think of it, the rise of "misery tourism" games may have led directly to the invention of the X-card.

Long before there were any story games, there were GMs and players who reveled in shocking material, as well as GMs and players who kept their games squeaky clean.

I remember in the mid-1980s, my friend Chris was shocked by our friend Steve and his troop of Slaanesh-aligned warriors in Warhammer (Chaos god/"Prince of Pleasure"), where when a troll fell over in battle, they asked the all-important question "Did it fall over on its back, or on its front?"  Conversely, my friend Mark never had controversial material in his games.

I would say this is something that varies with personal taste, not with politics or with story-game/traditional. Taking this example,

Quote from: jeff37923If a player is going to get raped by placing themselves in an untenable position I say, "You feel the Mind Flayer's tentacle enter your anus. The rest is the stuff of nightmares." I do not get explicitly graphic about it and do a point by point account of the act. Just like if a player says that the are taking a tavern wench up to their room, "She goes up with you, you pay her 50 gold, and she is worth every copper. Now the next morning...."

There are some traditional RPG players who would feel this is going too far, and that's a valid preference.

Quote from: jhkim;1061122There are some traditional RPG players who would feel this is going too far, and that's a valid preference.

I would feel Jeff's description of mind flayer anal rape was going too far and wouldn't have that in my games. I have a rule against PCs getting raped, ever, unless the player explicitly requested it I guess. If the situation made it inevitable, which is very unlikely and has never happened, then it'd happen entirely off stage with veils drawn.

With NPC-NPC rape, I don't think it has ever come up 'on stage' in a tabletop game, though it has been implied to have happened, like some orcs who were found sleeping with their male & female human slaves. Online can get a higher age rating, but I've never said more than "she's on top of him" (and that only a couple times I can recall in the past ten years), definitely no description of X being inside Y.

The sad part is the same regressives rpgers defend what Mind Flayers do to others. It's strange insane how they try and justify that it's all good for Mind Flayers to suck out other creatures brains because it's the only source of nourishment. Talk about being fucking insane to the max. Then again it's perfectly right for the giants to attack the dwarves in the Against the giants module as well. since the giants( native americans ) are striking a well deserved blow against the Dwarves ( white colonials ).

Quote from: jeff37923;1061077By not having the player characters graphically engaging in the act, but having them interact with the results.

Half-orcs, indicate rape by the very nature of the orc.

Finding a victim of rape who is trying to escape their captors is an indicator of rape.

If a player is going to get raped by placing themselves in an untenable position I say, "You feel the Mind Flayer's tentacle enter your anus. The rest is the stuff of nightmares." I do not get explicitly graphic about it and do a point by point account of the act. Just like if a player says that the are taking a tavern wench up to their room, "She goes up with you, you pay her 50 gold, and she is worth every copper. Now the next morning...."

Like if a vampire attacks a player character, "He stands there before you, intoxicating in his beauty. He reaches for you and you gladly enter into his embrace, his lips touch your neck and then there is a piercing kiss that explodes into an ecstasy that drives you into unconsciousness. When you awaken...."

Do my examples help to explain my technique?

I agree wholeheartedly with the way you handle things but have to ask: Why is the mindflayer going up the butt?! Seems rather nasty way to get to dinner.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061153I agree wholeheartedly with the way you handle things but have to ask: Why is the mindflayer going up the butt?! Seems rather nasty way to get to dinner.

I'm tweaking jhkim's nose.

Quote from: jhkim;1061122Long before there were any story games, there were GMs and players who reveled in shocking material, as well as GMs and players who kept their games squeaky clean.

I remember in the mid-1980s, my friend Chris was shocked by our friend Steve and his troop of Slaanesh-aligned warriors in Warhammer (Chaos god/"Prince of Pleasure"), where when a troll fell over in battle, they asked the all-important question "Did it fall over on its back, or on its front?"  Conversely, my friend Mark never had controversial material in his games.

I would say this is something that varies with personal taste, not with politics or with story-game/traditional. Taking this example,



There are some traditional RPG players who would feel this is going too far, and that's a valid preference.

Definitely varies with "personal taste". The question is, who gets to decide if that player's preference is "valid" or not? If the material is "controversial" or not? The whole point of an X-card is that those judgments are left entirely up to the player, and explicitly not to that social contract we all agree to when we're talking about how rape is a controversial topic. Just because we all happen to agree on rape being so, doesn't make the general principle of accepting anything as  "legitimate" or "valid" works.

To wit: I had a player one time that freaked out about rats. In a dungeon. It was, he explained, triggering for him. That's the sort of person who should be avoiding D&D tables, rather than hauling X-cards along with him to games. And if we agree that some preferences are "valid" while judging others less so, then we're not really honoring the idea of the X-card now are we? We're only honoring it when we agree that the content is (potentially) disturbing subject matter.

My point is well-illustrated by the fact that a conversation regarding the use of X-cards has devolved into a discussion on the merits of various levels of rape descriptions. Get it? If we're arguing about when X-cards get used, we've already dismissed them in principle.