Quote from: sureshot;1061800Imagine a entire convention being run by contessa rules it would sound like a bunch of people tripping on some good shit imo.

"Can we just FF past all the combat scenes? I really think we should. That way we have more time for all of the character interaction parts and we can RW to play them over and over until they sparkle."

Quote from: sureshot;1061800To be fair I used to game with what could be called some real pieces of work and not in a good way. They lacked the emotional and social maturity to understand that if a person was the victim of some trauma telling them to " suck it up buttercup" is not the way to go. So on one hand I see the need for that to stop at tables because I would not want to game at such tables. On the other a refusal to mention what the issue is that is bothering a player at the table is also just as bad. As how is anything to be resolved if the table does not know what kind of behavior to change. It's a fine balance not easily achieved imo. Things like X-Card while helpful as they are defined are poorly implemented. Imagine a entire convention being run by contessa rules it would sound like a bunch of people tripping on some good shit imo.



I would hazard a guess any forum that is a echo chamber that matches their views. Any other like this one that does not is not a welcoming place.

That emotional immaturity applies to the "suck it up, Buttercup" mindsets as well. I've found those people to just be a different flavor of the same turd that is trying to control others.

Quote from: sureshot;1061800Things like X-Card while helpful as they are defined are poorly implemented.

Helpful for what, exactly? As far as I can tell, the only intended purpose of an X-card (however spectacularly it might fail at its goal) is to help people saddled by trauma to indulge in RPGs. The elephant in the room of course is "why RPGs?" Why does the specific activity of gaming suddenly become the one venue where those peoples' trauma matters and needs to be given control to steer the discourse?

Why not in school? During sporting events? Cheerleading practice? How about during casual conversation at the local pub? If we're really concerned about people's trauma, shouldn't we be supporting and honoring the use of X-cards at all times, during all activities?

No doubt the NPCs reading this are already typing such phrases as "if just one life is helped!" and  "gotta start somewhere!", but of course this misses the point entirely. The fact that X-cards are somehow related and restricted to gaming reveals that the real purpose behind the idea isn't to help the "victims", but to harass the gaming community.

Bottom line is: people who have real trauma issues have to deal with them 24/7, not just at the gaming table, and it's their responsibility to do so. There is absolutely nothing unique about the gaming table in that regard. No doubt some posters here think people walking around with X-cards all the time is a damn fine idea, but if like me you find the notion blatantly absurd then it's pretty obvious why X-cards are just as absurd in any venue as they would be in every venue.

Well said Zalman.

What I think is really bothering me is the revisionist history the SJW are engaging in when it comes to all kinds of hobbies and certain subjects in general. Yes were their those in the tabletop hobby who were so insecure in their own manhood or in general with low self-esteem who banned women from their tables. Yes their were. To the extent the revisionists SJWs would like others to believe definitely not. Why would those who are already social pariahs ban people. It's like some in the LBQT community who do the same thing. One person on a forum tried to convince me that his uncle came out in 1970s south of the USA in bible country and no one in his family had a issue with it including friends and co-workers. When called out on his bullshit like I did were accused of hating gay people. Back then only the truly brave souls came out of the closet. The most remained firmly in the closet to avoid becoming a social pariah and in some cases losing their jobs. I'm just tired of them not looking deeper at the issue and accusing us gamers as the main villian who kept women out of rpgs. Again if the targeted group is not interested in the hobby it means they are not interested. Not because gamers hate women.

Quote from: Zalman;1061805Bottom line is: people who have real trauma issues have to deal with them 24/7, not just at the gaming table, and it's their responsibility to do so. There is absolutely nothing unique about the gaming table in that regard. No doubt some posters here think people walking around with X-cards all the time is a damn fine idea, but if like me you find the notion blatantly absurd then it's pretty obvious why X-cards are just as absurd in any venue as they would be in every venue.

I believe the disconnect springs from a surface glance at the "role playing" form of therapy, that thinks it is the much the same thing as "role playing" as a gaming activity.  In reality, they are not the same thing at all.  

If they were the same thing, then some extra protection for roleplaying games would make sense.  And in that case, again, the X-card would be criminally insufficient.

Quote from: Zalman;1061805Helpful for what, exactly? As far as I can tell, the only intended purpose of an X-card (however spectacularly it might fail at its goal) is to help people saddled by trauma to indulge in RPGs. The elephant in the room of course is "why RPGs?" Why does the specific activity of gaming suddenly become the one venue where those peoples' trauma matters and needs to be given control to steer the discourse?

Why not in school? During sporting events? Cheerleading practice? How about during casual conversation at the local pub? If we're really concerned about people's trauma, shouldn't we be supporting and honoring the use of X-cards at all times, during all activities?

No doubt the NPCs reading this are already typing such phrases as "if just one life is helped!" and  "gotta start somewhere!", but of course this misses the point entirely. The fact that X-cards are somehow related and restricted to gaming reveals that the real purpose behind the idea isn't to help the "victims", but to harass the gaming community.

Bottom line is: people who have real trauma issues have to deal with them 24/7, not just at the gaming table, and it's their responsibility to do so. There is absolutely nothing unique about the gaming table in that regard. No doubt some posters here think people walking around with X-cards all the time is a damn fine idea, but if like me you find the notion blatantly absurd then it's pretty obvious why X-cards are just as absurd in any venue as they would be in every venue.

Word.

These people are so incapable of self-accountability they're losing their shit over Goblin Slayers existing. They could just not watch it, but instead they want it banned. In a perfect world nothing offensive would be created to begin with.

Vampire the Masquerade brought more women to the Hobby then things like X-Cards ever did.

5th edition Dungeons and Dragons brought more people, minority and otherwise to the hobby recently than things like X-Cards and pages dedicated to safe spaces ever did.

Geek is now Chic. There's a lot of reasons why people are more interested in what was previously determined to be far to "Geeky" but I would wager things like X-cards have very little to do with it.

Quote from: sureshot;1061800To be fair I used to game with what could be called some real pieces of work and not in a good way. They lacked the emotional and social maturity to understand that if a person was the victim of some trauma telling them to " suck it up buttercup" is not the way to go. So on one hand I see the need for that to stop at tables because I would not want to game at such tables. On the other a refusal to mention what the issue is that is bothering a player at the table is also just as bad. As how is anything to be resolved if the table does not know what kind of behavior to change. It's a fine balance not easily achieved imo. Things like X-Card while helpful as they are defined are poorly implemented. Imagine a entire convention being run by contessa rules it would sound like a bunch of people tripping on some good shit imo.

When you say "imagine being run using those rules" -- What I find is that people here will readily imagine that any game with the X-card at all is full of people constantly shitting themselves, crying, and/or curling up into balls. I think that says more about the delusions of people here than about the X-card. What I find in actual practice is that games with the X-card have been roughly the same as games without the X-card. People play their characters and have adventures.

Quote from: jhkimLikewise, I think the naive interpretation of Chekhov's gun is false. If a character is walking around holding a gun and talking - that gun matters and changes how we interpret the speech, even if the gun is never fired.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061753Chekhov's Gun doesn't need to be held by characters. It simply has to exist in the scene, its presence looming with the expectation it will be used, thus it has its effect.

The X-card looms over the game, used or unused. Its a statement that the GM believes one or more of the adults at that table is mental basket case who can't play make believe without shitting themselves.

And that's apparently a correct assumption for games which draw certain types of players.

So it sounds like you are agreeing with me and disagreeing with Spinachcat, right? His argument was that if the X-card wasn't touched then it was useless and had no effect. You agree that it looms over the game and thus has an effect even if it isn't actively used.

As for believing people are basket cases, I don't see that. All that it inherently means is that the GM probably thinks that players overall will enjoy things more with the X-card there than not. Some people might read more into the X-card, but it's not necessary for using it.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061753And that's apparently a correct assumption for games which draw certain types of players.

Tell me about it. See, I love all different kinds of RPGs and RPG-adjacent games. Like I'll try stuff pretty much anywhere on the RPG <-> Storygame spectrum, no problem. I find the different mechanics, dynamics, focuses, and whatnot really interesting. But there are a lot of games out there that, while not bad in and of themselves, just attract the absolute whiniest people. I have some ideas why, but I'm not going to write a whole thesis here. Whenever I participate in them, I do my best to curb that kind of stuff(more firmly when I'm the GM, of course). But I'm not a dick about it; there's a limit, but I'm willing to put up with a little bit of that crap in the interest of group harmony and getting to try out something new.

Quote from: sureshot;1061800Imagine a entire convention being run by contessa rules it would sound like a bunch of people tripping on some good shit imo.

My experience is not exactly statistically valid, but I honestly couldn't distinguish my single game at a ConTessa table at Gen Con 2018 from any of the other tables I was at the whole week. If it didn't have a ConTessa banner in the background, I wouldn't even have noticed. (I didn't notice it said ConTessa on the ticket until the morning of).

Quote from: sureshot;1061774I know your all about pushing a narrative. Did it ever occur to you and others that think like you that the increase is because women are recently becoming more interested in rpgs. I hate to tell you yet when I began in the mid 1980s in the hobby. Women were almost non-existent at least in my area. They would not be caught dead playing a tabeltop rpg. As they were the domain of "losers, nerds and geeks." Same thing with comics, fantasy/sci-fi novels and computer/video games. it was only in the mid 1990s at college and even later than that where I began to see more women playing rpgs at my college campus. Early 2000s where we began to see more women into comic books and video games. Now I'm not saying that no women did any of those activities before they were the exception not the norm. If their is no interest from a specific target group in an activity we can't very well force them to do it can we.

Now I'm sure you will ignore what I wrote because it does not fit into the narrative of women being barred from the hobby by us rapist, misogynistic, anti-women gamers. My gaming group tried when we started. If women look at you like a lower form of life-form for even asking why should we subject ourselves to that kind of ridicule and abuse it's hard to welcome them into the hobby. If needing a safe space for everything and anything as a person why would I want someone no matter their gender at my tables. I expect a certain amount of maturity from my players no matter their gender.  

Fell free to claim the the "EVEL GAMERS" kept women away on purpose because they were women narrative and special safe space rules were needed to join. It's all about the narrative and anything that goes against the carefully constructed personal narrative is both wrong and does not exist.

I think the growth in gaming in general, and women TTRP gamers in general is a result of a lot of factors. A big one is actually boardgaming, it's a powerful entry drug. Social media is also a huge driver, FaceBook, MeetUp, etc.

5e has itself been a huge driver. I've provided (very limited) support for a friend's young teens (all girls) playing Phandalin. I only sent them some links, they had already decided to start a game when the mother requested some help for her daughter. I didn't do anything special, and I certainly didn't bring them into the hobby. But someone did, and that's awesome.

Are those girls fragile? Knowing the mother of just one of them, I very much doubt it. But the mother was still a little bit gunshy about the whole thing, we got snippets of updates over the following weeks, she was delighted that her daughter's group was having such a great time. I think she for one would be very happy to see the big convention etiquette banners, it might mean she was happy to send her kid and her friends to a convention.

Does that make the convention a "safe space" for those kids? I would certainly hope so, why not?

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1061789My wife does participate in a crafting forum, but even that gets "hostile" enough to drive her away at times--and it is mostly women.

You haven't seen true forum hostility until you've gone onto a mother's forum and discussed the pros and cons of breastfeeding.

Of all the game sessions I've had over a third of a century, the one with the most disturbing content was a Vampire game. We had Jewish vampires who drank victim's blood as kiddush wine, and there was a nightclub where vampires were having sex. The GM described in lavish detail (without our asking) two lesbian vampires in a 69, and one raising her head with bits of... well, you get the idea.

That game was run by a socially progressive lesbian, lapsed Jewish now Wiccan. She was apparently impervious to our winces of discomfort. The campaign didn't last.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1061859The GM described in lavish detail (without our asking) two lesbian vampires in a 69, and one raising her head with bits of... well, you get the idea.

That game was run by a socially progressive lesbian, lapsed Jewish now Wiccan. She was apparently impervious to our winces of discomfort. The campaign didn't last.

If you'd said anything, that'd make you homophobic.

I just wanted to state for the record, I like: coloring books, playdough, stuffed animals, cigars, bourbon, bubbles, spicy pickles, puppies, chips, dips, chains and whips.

Also, this:

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061802"Can we just FF past all the combat scenes? I really think we should. That way we have more time for all of the character interaction parts and we can RW to play them over and over until they sparkle."

... is how I feel during overly granular RPG games because the combat feels eternal, and I might as well pretend we're all glittery immortals if I am going to be bored to death in a 4-part trilogy.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061857Does that make the convention a "safe space" for those kids? I would certainly hope so, why not?

Absolutely not.

A convention is no more a "safe space" for teens than the mall. Probably less so since malls have wandering mall cops and a gazillion cameras.

As a former con organizer, we had a "Page for Parents" in most con booklets making it clear that while we hope their kids have a great time at the con, all responsibility for the child was solely that of the parent.

Cons =/= day care