TheRPGSite

I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

It seems to me that the idea that the world will change shape to suit you is the result of overindulgence as a child, getting what you want and being protected from things you don't like.

Is the rejection of them a function of a working class background?

Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

Or maybe a lack of adversity while growing up - people have nothing to measure unpleasant things against and so have no sense of proportion.

The quote (from the purple place) "I used a deck of playing cards with images from the television show The Walking Dead for a Savage Worlds campaign until one of my players expressed discomfort over the images." If this was an adult I can imagine my aged mother taking the piss thusly "Awwww, did the nasty pictures scare the little man, there there, all gone".

Or am I wrong?

Your right people are too sensitive and easily triggered nowadays. Are their subjects, topics and issues that should should offend someone yes to be sure. Pictures of Zombies on cards is not really one of them. Funny how they are not outraged at the treatment of gay people and women in the Middle East with such righteous intensity. I don't use them, will never use them and never play or run at at a table that does. To be honest I don't like or care for the concept of a X-card.  They are a means for players to avoid being responsible and communicating with the DM on what they can or want in a campaign. If players have issues with the material they act responsibly like a grown adult should and tell me at session Zero. Where I may or may not agree to change what is bothering them in a campaign. Though I'm sure the Regressive Purple place would have a fit because I'm not bending over backwards to accommodate a player desires.

Quote from: Altheus;1060278I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

RPGs in general are a sheltered middle class phenomenon.  (I kid, I kid.  Sorta'.)

Quote from: Altheus;1060278Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

Or maybe a lack of adversity while growing up - people have nothing to measure unpleasant things against and so have no sense of proportion.

A gaming group could do worse than to say "I don't want to play a game about people who gain power from pedophilia, which uses lolicon cards to help 'get in the mood'," while brainstorming what to play next.  Everybody's comfort level is disrupted sooner or later, and establishing that in advance rather than assuming things isn't necessarily a bad idea.  That said, if you have a bunch of folks who are jaded with life and fazed by nothing short of auto-cannibalism, a person who doesn't want violent games is likely just a bad fit for that group.  And accepting "it's not them but you" is a hard thing for some folks to accept.

Honestly, it's all about the hypotheticals in these situations.  If you know who you play with vs. if you don't know who you play with.  Stable groups just don't have these problems; at least not to the levels to justify how people keep talking about them.  It's not like book clubs or softball teams or theater troupes spend this much energy on hypothetical members' feels.  Personally, I figure if someone can't find a stable group, and stay in a stable group, for whatever reason, they need a different hobby.

Quote from: Altheus;1060278I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

It seems to me that the idea that the world will change shape to suit you is the result of overindulgence as a child, getting what you want and being protected from things you don't like.

Is the rejection of them a function of a working class background?

Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

I'm not an advocate for the use of the X-card, but this hypothesis seems stupid to me.

These are make-believe games I play for fun. I know goddamn well that I have to live with things I don't like in real life. In my games, I want all the players to have fun - not teach them life lessons. Like if we're going out to dinner after the game, and I know that David hates Thai food, then I'm going to suggest we go some place that everyone likes - not go out to Thai food and tell David "Toughen up - you've go to learn to live with things you don't like". That's not being working class, that's being an asshole.

I'm not convinced that the X-card is a better approach for everyone to have fun, but I do subscribe to the bigger principle of taking everyone's preferences into account, and trying to make sure everyone has fun.

Quote from: jhkim;1060305These are make-believe games I play for fun. I know goddamn well that I have to live with things I don't like in real life. In my games, I want all the players to have fun - not teach them life lessons. Like if we're going out to dinner after the game, and I know that David hates Thai food, then I'm going to suggest we go some place that everyone likes - not go out to Thai food and tell David "Toughen up - you've go to learn to live with things you don't like". That's not being working class, that's being an asshole.

Yep.

But the difference between a dinner and a TTRPG is there aren't any groups of people who accept random walk-ups to go out with for dinner.  No "we need two more people to come with us and try this new Indian place" sort of meet up for organized eating.  But at this point it all breaks down in to "how do we attract and keep a hypothetical player" and I think all the talk of X-cards and such avoids the bigger issue of just communicating between people beforehand, and how some players and some groups simply aren't a good fit.

I bring a picnic basket of puppies & kittens, along with crayons & coloring books, to my RPG campaigns. :) We resolve in-game conflicts with cats' cradle and the best compliments about the veggie tray. Sometimes we draw baby carrots to break ties (hint: we really don't ever break ties! we're all winners together during ties!). :p

You know, after a few offensive game sessions you can take all the X-cards and collect them into an X-file...:D

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060369You know, after a few offensive game sessions you can take all the X-cards and collect them into an X-file...:D

The truth the regressive rpgers desire is hopefully not out there.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1060311I bring a picnic basket of puppies & kittens, along with crayons & coloring books, to my RPG campaigns. :) We resolve in-game conflicts with cats' cradle and the best compliments about the veggie tray. Sometimes we draw baby carrots to break ties (hint: we really don't ever break ties! we're all winners together during ties!). :p

Imagining your table made me feel warm and happy. Like napping on a fresh-baked muffin while angels sing songs about raindrops and hugging and where all the dice roll "20" and are made of cotton candy.

Quote from: sureshot;1060371The truth the regressive rpgers desire is hopefully not out there.

It's in the hands of NPCs.

'Shit writes itself, yo.

Quote from: jhkim;1060305I'm not an advocate for the use of the X-card, but this hypothesis seems stupid to me.

These are make-believe games I play for fun. I know goddamn well that I have to live with things I don't like in real life. In my games, I want all the players to have fun - not teach them life lessons. Like if we're going out to dinner after the game, and I know that David hates Thai food, then I'm going to suggest we go some place that everyone likes - not go out to Thai food and tell David "Toughen up - you've go to learn to live with things you don't like". That's not being working class, that's being an asshole.

I'm not convinced that the X-card is a better approach for everyone to have fun, but I do subscribe to the bigger principle of taking everyone's preferences into account, and trying to make sure everyone has fun.

So much this.

I think though there is a big difference between someone stating a reasonable "that makes me uncomfortable..." and "I'd rather not have that theme present." with "I demand you remove anything that even slightly offends my delicate sensibilities!" and "Oh gawwwwd! Take it away! Momeeeee! sob-sob!" hysteronics.

I have on many occasions told a player "I'd rather not have that theme present." or been told much the same and we worked around that. I have had a rare few sessions where a subject got introduced out of the blue and it put me off playing. Usually I have a talk with the player about it after and explain why. If they get belligerent about it then ta-ta. You need me, not the other way round.

I have twice had prospective players get belligerent and tell me there will be NO xyz in a session when there was no such mention of these things or its even something I noted I dont like. And I've told them to either stand down and chill out or take a walk. But overall people have been pretty reasonable and are just voicing a dislike that may not feel quite ok with. Or alot not ok with.

Theres been enough threads here where members have commented on things they dont want in a session.

This whole conversation is so American.

What a fucking embarrassment for this hobby.

Quote from: Altheus;1060278I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

It seems to me that the idea that the world will change shape to suit you is the result of overindulgence as a child, getting what you want and being protected from things you don't like.

Is the rejection of them a function of a working class background?

Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

Or maybe a lack of adversity while growing up - people have nothing to measure unpleasant things against and so have no sense of proportion.

The quote (from the purple place) "I used a deck of playing cards with images from the television show The Walking Dead for a Savage Worlds campaign until one of my players expressed discomfort over the images." If this was an adult I can imagine my aged mother taking the piss thusly "Awwww, did the nasty pictures scare the little man, there there, all gone".

Or am I wrong?

You've a theory.  How would you go about testing it and ensuring confirmation bias is not a confounding influence?

X Cards are not something that makes a whole lot of sense to me. But I don't think this theory explains them.

As Omega posted

Quote from: Omega;1060387I think though there is a big difference between someone stating a reasonable "that makes me uncomfortable..." and "I'd rather not have that theme present." with "I demand you remove anything that even slightly offends my delicate sensibilities!" and "Oh gawwwwd! Take it away! Momeeeee! sob-sob!" hysteronics.

Instead of talking with the DM/GM and trying to find a common ground on what they want or don't want to see at the table. Some players refuse to assume their responsabilites. If one is totally against slavery why play in a campaign or even worse not mention at session zero. No it's the DM/GM who is to be a mind reader of course. Over on another forum their are players who apprently cry over a random dog being killed in a module because that player likes dogs. Once, twice three times you will be told to get a pair or ask to leave the campaign. I don't care what your gender is. It's venturing into needing to go see a mental health care specialist and it's not the table job let alone their responsibility to need to put up with it constantly imo.

To give another real world example. I work in customer service and people have to give their apartment numbers when setting up deliveries. Suddenly it seems to way too many it's optional. They call in angry and yelling assuming the person who made the order was going to ask them. All the salesperson needs to do is ask for their address. Why would anyone not give their apartment number. Then they demand compensation ( a bribe ) for their time wasted. Go haead and go to the Better Business Bureau and see how they don't do anything because they screwed up. It's also when they move and think that everyone else like companies and the government will update their personal information. We don't and were not allowed without a person permission.

I despise X-cards because it gives a player a reason not to assume their responsabilities as a player.

Quote from: jhkim;1060305I'm not an advocate for the use of the X-card, but this hypothesis seems stupid to me.

These are make-believe games I play for fun. I know goddamn well that I have to live with things I don't like in real life. In my games, I want all the players to have fun - not teach them life lessons. Like if we're going out to dinner after the game, and I know that David hates Thai food, then I'm going to suggest we go some place that everyone likes - not go out to Thai food and tell David "Toughen up - you've go to learn to live with things you don't like". That's not being working class, that's being an asshole.

I'm not convinced that the X-card is a better approach for everyone to have fun, but I do subscribe to the bigger principle of taking everyone's preferences into account, and trying to make sure everyone has fun.

Right, but when David doesn't like Thai, Beth doesn't like Italian, Jo won't eat Mexican and Anne won't eat seafood you end up always going to generic restaurant B for steak.  And you know what, sometimes I don't want steak because damn it we've gone for steak every time for the last 6 months and I do like Italian and Mexican and seafood and Thai.  So sometimes you have to look David (or Beth or Jo or Anne) in the face and say you are sorry, but tonight we're going for X and I know you don't like that so we'll catch you next time.  That's not being an asshole, that's just being honest.  And if someone has a problem with not getting their way every once and a while and having to not participate, well, boo-fucking-hoo.

It's the same with gaming.  My weekly group is made up of friends who've known each other for at least 12 years now.  Some go back almost 20.  If we excluded everything someone didn't like we'd be playing vanilla D&D all the damn time.  It's because people are willing to bend and shift their tastes that we're still together and not bored in our gaming.  Sure, Anne may not like modern horror games, but she's happy to either find something that will keep her interest within that set-up or let us know she's just going to sit that one out.  We don't need an X-card because we're all adult enough to talk to each other and make our own decisions.

I've never used or needed X cards but I dont play with degenerates either.

These are silly make believe games. We slay dragons and hunt trolls, we play cowboys and Indians, or westerns in space.

If you're fucking playing a game and some landwhale or pear shaped engineer wants to start having sex scenes or other bullshit, I'm not getting an x card but I'm getting up and finding new people to play with.

Only weirdos would run a game where an x card would be needed. But we have a lot of weirdos in this hobby.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060374It's in the hands of NPCs.

'Shit writes itself, yo.

Quote from: rgalex;1060431Right, but when David doesn't like Thai, Beth doesn't like Italian, Jo won't eat Mexican and Anne won't eat seafood you end up always going to generic restaurant B for steak.  And you know what, sometimes I don't want steak because damn it we've gone for steak every time for the last 6 months and I do like Italian and Mexican and seafood and Thai.  So sometimes you have to look David (or Beth or Jo or Anne) in the face and say you are sorry, but tonight we're going for X and I know you don't like that so we'll catch you next time.  That's not being an asshole, that's just being honest.  And if someone has a problem with not getting their way every once and a while and having to not participate, well, boo-fucking-hoo.

It's the same with gaming.  My weekly group is made up of friends who've known each other for at least 12 years now.  Some go back almost 20.  If we excluded everything someone didn't like we'd be playing vanilla D&D all the damn time.  It's because people are willing to bend and shift their tastes that we're still together and not bored in our gaming.  Sure, Anne may not like modern horror games, but she's happy to either find something that will keep her interest within that set-up or let us know she's just going to sit that one out.  We don't need an X-card because we're all adult enough to talk to each other and make our own decisions.

You game at most once a week. You can sack up and have steak one night a week so everybody can enjoy a good meal.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060433You game at most once a week. You can sack up and have steak one night a week so everybody can enjoy a good meal.

Sometimes like Rgalex I don't want Steak. So just like I have to sack up and have steak. The others can also sack up and eat something other than Steak. It's a two way street. I no longer hang out with some of my older gaming group. They also wanted to eat at the corner restaurant in their area because it was not too expensive. Which I understand and ate there as well eventually I became tired of the same food and went elsewhere. They were too cheap to eat anywhere else but my life and what I want does not revolve around them only.

No one is saying don't compromise. Some us refuse to compromise all the damn team. Especially when it's one sided. Sometimes people can't get what they want. Shocker I know but I'm not always interested in eating at greasy spoon style burger joints simply because they are cheap. Or Frank is vegan. It's his choice yet I like meat and not going to stop eating it not for one member of the group.

There is a reason why pepperoni and cheese pizza are the most popular. You may like anchovies but we go with the broader way to eat pizza or play silly pretend games so everyone can have fun.

If you want to roleplay sexual nonsense or extreme violence then find a specific group to do that. Or just tell the normal person who doesn't want to watch landwhales and Mr. Manboobs talk about their sexual tastes that the group has changed and unless he wants to be playing with degenerates he might want a new group.

X cards are stupid. And I've never seen them used in the real world and only talked about on forums by people that I dont think actually play games.

The example from moving to horror from a vanilla d&d game is something the group can vote on. If 3/5  players want to play a horror game because its October and sounds fun the 2/3 that dont can sack up and play. These are games and usually the core of every game doesn't change regardless of the setting.

X cards usually always relate to sex or extreme violence.

I like Pepperoni and Cheese pizza like the next gamer. I'm not going to shovel it down my mouth if I'm not in the mood to have it and order something else. It's a group activity yes but I see no need to be the one to compromise all the time. If the rest of the group is unwilling to eat anything else I can respect that. They can also respect that not everyone is going to be in the mood for Pizza. Thankfully I game with normal people who understand that.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060439The example from moving to horror from a vanilla d&d game is something the group can vote on. If 3/5  players want to play a horror game because its October and sounds fun the 2/3 that dont can sack up and play. These are games and usually the core of every game doesn't change regardless of the setting.

Which is how must tables function. Except if you go by what the SJWs think. One is not only supposed to bend over backwards to accommodate the 2/3 that refuse to play. One is not even allowed to tell them to sack up and play. My real example of a player crying over a random npc dog being killed off and crying. Well not only are we supposed to accept it whenever it happens. We are also not allowed to tell that player to stop no matter how disruptive  it is to the game or anyone else. Telling someone to sack up is also considered being privileged it's also smacks of being misogynistic if your male. Bullshit to me yet it seems to be the pablum that SJWs thrive on.

Quote from: Omega;1060387I think though there is a big difference between someone stating a reasonable "that makes me uncomfortable..." and "I'd rather not have that theme present." with "I demand you remove anything that even slightly offends my delicate sensibilities!" and "Oh gawwwwd! Take it away! Momeeeee! sob-sob!" hysteronics.

I have on many occasions told a player "I'd rather not have that theme present." or been told much the same and we worked around that. I have had a rare few sessions where a subject got introduced out of the blue and it put me off playing. Usually I have a talk with the player about it after and explain why.

This sounds to me like the opposite of the OP. The OP specifically had the example of someone expressing discomfort, and that the reaction should be to ridicule them and presumably ignore the request - hypothesizing that they are an overprotected middle-class child.

I haven't used the X-card in games that I run, but I've played in many games (probably over a dozen) at conventions that use an X-card. They weren't full of any sobbing or histrionics. In fact, the X-card was never used that I saw. It was just a reassurance, it seems. (I have seen histrionics at games that bugged me, but they weren't ones with an X-card.)

I'm not advocating for the X-card here, but I don't agree with the logic of the OP. In the bigger picture, I favor your approach where if a player expresses discomfort then working around that, as opposed to mocking them and theorizing about their psychological issues.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060433You game at most once a week. You can sack up and have steak one night a week so everybody can enjoy a good meal.

Go to Applebee's or such. They have eveything. Or bring your own food. Or order from different places. Who the fuck are some people hanging out with that such trivialities are a problem?! ;)

I draw the line at bacon, though. Hate bacon? You're out!

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060454Go to Applebee's or such. They have eveything. Or bring your own food. Or order from different places. Who the fuck are some people hanging out with that such trivialities are a problem?! ;)

Do not under estimate the notorious cheapness of some gamers. I had a player who would eat expired food to save money. "That cheese has mold no problem remove the mold it's still good". They will spend 40-60$ or more on rpgs and such. Applebee's or the non-American equivalent they suddenly were always "broke" and Applebee's "expensive".

Quote from: Lurtch;1060432I've never used or needed X cards but I don't play with degenerates either.

Lurtch you nailed it from my perspective.  

However, if I am at a convention the time is limited and not inviting the player to next session isn't really much of an approach.  If (and this has never happened and I have sat down with some real weirdos) someone is being over-the-top offensive, I'm not afraid to say something like "Do you mind laying off describing your cannibalistic necropilia fetish in such great detail each time?  I think after the 10th meal/episode we get it, your character is a flat out freak."  And if the individual does not desist, then anyone and everyone is free to walk.  Of course, if the judge/gm/dm tells the player to lay off, then that's the table rule and the player needs to decide if a mere nod to his culinary/sexual deviancy is sufficient.

I think x cards are an RPG manifestation of Safe Space culture.

I am in favour of games abiding by community standards of decency and having appropriate age ratings, defaulting to something like pg-13 or UK 12 or 15 I guess. I think extreme material is different from having a special snowflake player.

I sympathise with my player who found the gore in Hook Mountain Massacre icky. I don't expect to X card sinking ships because of my personal issues there and I don't think it would be fair on anyone else at the table to bring it up.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060432I've never used or needed X cards but I dont play with degenerates either.

These are silly make believe games. We slay dragons and hunt trolls, we play cowboys and Indians, or westerns in space.

If you're fucking playing a game and some landwhale or pear shaped engineer wants to start having sex scenes or other bullshit, I'm not getting an x card but I'm getting up and finding new people to play with.

Only weirdos would run a game where an x card would be needed. But we have a lot of weirdos in this hobby.

^^This sums it up for me.

I wouldn't want to have someone at my game table who was so psychologically fragile that they insisted on using X-cards.

Quote from: sureshot;1060458Do not under estimate the notorious cheapness of some gamers. I had a player who would eat expired food to save money. "That cheese has mold no problem remove the mold it's still good". They will spend 40-60$ or more on rpgs and such. Applebee's or the non-American equivalent they suddenly were always "broke" and Applebee's "expensive".

Yeah, I have met people like that...

Quote from: jeff37923;1060485^^This sums it up for me.

I wouldn't want to have someone at my game table who was so psychologically fragile that they insisted on using X-cards.

Thinking further on the subject, I don't know what would make me want to use an X-Card in a game run by any kind of halfway reasonable GM. Undoubtedly there is stuff out there that will fill me with revulsion and I have a couple of phobias but they aren't bad enough to cause a reaction on a description. In all cases I would talk to the GM about any problems I had.

Maybe that's why I don't like the idea, I'm not carrying around enough trauma or psychological stuff to warrant using it but others might be. I get the feeling that I am old, stoic and thick skinned so most things don't affect me, but might affect others.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060432I've never used or needed X cards but I dont play with degenerates either.

These are silly make believe games. We slay dragons and hunt trolls, we play cowboys and Indians, or westerns in space.

If you're fucking playing a game and some landwhale or pear shaped engineer wants to start having sex scenes or other bullshit, I'm not getting an x card but I'm getting up and finding new people to play with.

Only weirdos would run a game where an x card would be needed. But we have a lot of weirdos in this hobby.

My first ever foray into online gaming was over Discord, with strangers I met online, to run Blades in the Dark, which is a pretty grim and potentially violent and adult setting. I simply asked the group, one of which was a woman, "What rating do people want?". "Game of Thrones" is apparently now considered a rating, but it worked. ;)

A few moments came up that involved violence and sex and we handled them maturely. It was never an issue. What's funny is I later realized, through out-of-game chat, that those four were pretty Left-leaning. Still, we played for several months until life just happened. It was, overall, a great experience that never needed X-cards.

Where I'm confused is what happens if I'm running a game and a player holds up an X-card but it's not obvious why? Do we play X-Card-a-Mole until the offending topic is smooshed? There's also the issue of a person outing themselves to the group by holding up a card that lets the table know, "This thing bothers me! Now do what's natural and mull it over in your head as to why". I dunno, it just seems better to at most, ask for a break and then talk to whoever you need to in whatever fashion is comfortable.

I see gaming at a table as just another playground: you learn to fight, share, apologize and all the other things considered to be part of social growth, just with less sand. It seems there's a bigger issue of being poorly-socialized people than a problem gaming needs to fix.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060507It seems there's a bigger issue of being poorly-socialized people than a problem gaming needs to fix.

You have just nailed it.

IMHO, the vast majority of the bullshit we are dealing with now in the hobby are the result of poorly-socialized people being allowed to remain poorly-socialized without consequences. The geek social fallacies demonstrate this. Lack of women gamers? The largest reason I've been told why women don't game as often is that they do not want to deal with creepers at the table who don't know how to act socially around them. SJWs getting offended about gaming products and people they find "problematic"? People using their social ineptness as playing pieces in the Oppression Olympics to see who can be the biggest victim while trying to bully others because they enjoy different games. Catpissmen? Gamers who have not been told to get some self-respect and take care of their personal hygiene because they are part of the game group. Lawncrappers? Gamers who haven't been reeled in from doing stupid shit because they cannot discern the difference between good attention and bad attention. It seems to me that a lot of this stems from people being socially retarded and others not looking at them and telling them to quit acting that way. This ain't hard to figure out. If a gamer can read a 300 page book of rules and understand them, then they can damn well get their shit together enough to act like a normal human being - but only if they are told and there are negative consequences to their continued bad behavior.

OK, I'm jumping off of my soapbox now.

Quote from: jeff37923;1060509The largest reason I've been told why women don't game as often is that they do not want to deal with creepers at the table who don't know how to act socially around them.

If only socially inept geeks would come up with a hobby of their own and a build their own place to play it instead of trying to take tabletop RPGs and game shops away from women.

QuoteLawncrappers?

Whoa, wait a minute.

jeff37923, from your box of soaps truths are spoken!

I gamed for a brief stint with a guy who said he had crippling anxiety. Fine, that sucks, "Who am I to judge?", etc. However, when said anxiety crippled him and he said he needed to bow out of the game, he then became upset by proxy (another player was bullied into being his mouthpiece) and we learned our polite understanding of his need to pull back and deal with his anxiety itself caused more anxiety. This Gordian Knot of attention-whoring became more obvious when I offered an olive branch of private conversation and quickly realized that what he was going to need constant care, arguing the whole way. It was like having a Chia Pet that whined but never grew. So, his hiatus became permanent.

I. Don’t. Need. That. Shit.

None of us do.

This whole X-Card thing seems to only be "necessary" if you have a socially broken DM or a socially broken player, or both.

The idea that I'd be so sensitive to something that I couldn't just say "hey, knock that out" is foreign to me.

The idea that the people playing would need a hard "rule" saying that they would have to listen to that is, also, foreign to me.

But if someone feels that they need it, and can't game without it?  Weird, I guess, but fine.  

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060507It seems there's a bigger issue of being poorly-socialized people than a problem gaming needs to fix.

I've played hockey (on hiatus).  I play video games (hell, I make 'em).  I play music.  I've flown model planes.

TTRPGs have the highest percentage of people with horrible, tremendously horrible, social skills of any hobby I've dealt with.  Computer games are a reasonably close second.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060525The idea that I'd be so sensitive to something that I couldn't just say "hey, knock that out" is foreign to me.

I've never used the x-card thing, but I don't see the big deal. Saying "hey, knock that out" interrupts the flow of the game and breaks the mood. A nice non-verbal signal that lets you wave the DM away from something that grosses you out keeps things moving smoothly for everyone.

Also, just because one player taps out, that doesn't mean they're a special snowflake. It just means they tapped out first. Maybe all your players think you're a creep who needs to back off the lovingly detailed description of cannibal clown rape, but they didn't all use the x-card simultaneously so you just see the first one.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1060512If only socially inept geeks would come up with a hobby of their own and a build their own place to play it instead of trying to take tabletop RPGs and game shops away

They've got Fantasy Football for that.  :D

I always feel a little like an anthropologist in these conversations, "X-carders in the mists" (to twist the simile).

1. On the one hand, anyone that thinks they need an X-card in any game I was in, is a special snowflake that needs to straighten out their personality disorders before they do any roleplaying--or is lying or otherwise has some other agenda.  

2. On the other, I can see intellectually how someone running a game right on the edge of something horrific would want a non-verbal way for everyone involved to signal, "Stop!"  I get it.  It's similar to what is used in psychological counseling when trying to confront something horrific.  It's only that the desire to run a game up to that edge is so utterly alien to my desires, I cannot fully understand or empathize with it.  There is no way I want to mix serious counseling with my games.  Serious counseling is a lot of good things, but one thing it is not is pleasant and diverting.

3. However, what I suspect is occurring with some of these sillier instances is people roleplaying the victim.  Not in the usual gaming sense of "roleplaying" but in the psychological sense.  They want to "confront their fears" or otherwise get that little thrill of having survived something "dangerous" but they know their background doesn't warrant it.  It's playing at being serious.  

I would venture that if you found a way to study it, that last group would be disproportionally from a "sheltered" background.  I'd even go so far as to guess more second or third generation "upper middle class" than simply "middle class."

How some people talk here about the X-card is at odds with my experience. I've played in over a dozen games with the X-card at conventions. The GM explains it, the players nod, and then the game goes on otherwise like it otherwise would. I haven't seen it used in any of those sessions. It's seen as a safety net, not something to indulge in regularly. The people who used it seem pretty functional socially as far as I can see.

If someone really really is bothered by just the idea of an X-card and it would drive you up the wall for it to be used, then sure, rant against it.  But rant against what it's actually like in play.

Who is ranting?  I think the X-card makes an excellent signal.  As soon as it appears on the table, I'm out.  Either the game is going to be about something potentially nasty (and thus not to my taste), or the GM thinks that some of the players are potentially snowflakes (also not too my tastes in a different way) or the GM is incorrect or pandering or perhaps merely being cautious.  In the latter cases, I'm possibly abandoning an alright game, but life is too short.  Also, there is a really good chance that I'm not a good fit for that table, even if the game is OK.  So it is the polite thing to do to get out early.

Quote from: fearsomepirate;1060512If only socially inept geeks would come up with a hobby of their own and a build their own place to play it instead of trying to take tabletop RPGs and game shops away from women.

This is absolutely brilliant. I'm just going to sign off for the night right here.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060544Who is ranting?  I think the X-card makes an excellent signal.  As soon as it appears on the table, I'm out.  Either the game is going to be about something potentially nasty (and thus not to my taste), or the GM thinks that some of the players are potentially snowflakes (also not too my tastes in a different way) or the GM is incorrect or pandering or perhaps merely being cautious.  In the latter cases, I'm possibly abandoning an alright game, but life is too short.  Also, there is a really good chance that I'm not a good fit for that table, even if the game is OK.  So it is the polite thing to do to get out early.

I've had plenty of sub-par table experiences (at conventions) over the decades. These have mostly been boredom (due to an unprepared DM or a lame adventure), and occasionally a terrible DM (combination of inexperience and poor preparation). Once or twice it's been an obnoxious player (typically some kind of alpha that shouts other players down, challenges the DM all the way along, that kind of thing).
I don't think an X-card would have helped in any of those situations.

But I've got to say I'm with @jhkim here. I've been on maybe half-a-dozen tables (all but one at Gen Con) where an X-card has been on display. I don't think it guarantees anything, I don't think it restricts anything.

I've never once seen it used.

But nevertheless I do think it has value. I think it's there as a message that the DM is available and willing to take feedback, and to remind everyone that we are all there to have fun.
Sure I think players have some responsibility to not sign up for games that they might have a bad reaction to, but honestly, at Gen Con especially, it's really hard to tell beyond identifying the general genre, the paragraph descriptions can't really do the session justice.
Beyond that, I love signing up blind for stuff, trying out games and themes I have little knowledge about. I've come across some amazing gems over the years.

I think the above really only applies to conventions or pick-up store games. One of my friends (an excellent CoC Keeper) hosted a home game for a couple of new people. It ended terribly, the new players were shocked by the horror content, which was, my friend admits, maybe too graphic for a pick-up game.
Would an X-card have saved that situation? Impossible to know. But I think my friend would have liked the opportunity to be advised earlier than his guests / players were bouncing off the content much harder than he had appreciated.

But where I disagree with you is your reticence to even sit down at the table. At Gen Con at least, the X-card seems to be a room/organizer thing, or a publisher thing. It doesn't really say anything about the GM, the game / mechanics, or the other players. The only person you would be hurting is yourself.

I was in a group with "varied food needs" and instead of compromising, we simply ate before the game and brought our own personal snacks.

Problem solved.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060544I think the X-card makes an excellent signal.  As soon as it appears on the table, I'm out.

LOL. Agreed.

Quote from: jhkim;1060543I haven't seen it used in any of those sessions.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060557I've never once seen it used.

So it's virtue signalling bullshit. How surprising.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1060537I've never used the x-card thing, but I don't see the big deal. Saying "hey, knock that out" interrupts the flow of the game and breaks the mood. A nice non-verbal signal that lets you wave the DM away from something that grosses you out keeps things moving smoothly for everyone.

Also, just because one player taps out, that doesn't mean they're a special snowflake. It just means they tapped out first. Maybe all your players think you're a creep who needs to back off the lovingly detailed description of cannibal clown rape, but they didn't all use the x-card simultaneously so you just see the first one.

OK, so let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that the X-card is a good idea and has all the benefits you suggest.

There's still the problem that, in your example scenario, there's no way for the GM to know whether, when a player taps the X-card, the player actually means "the cannibal rapists are all well and good, but I really can't deal with clowns", or even "I'm loving the cannibal clown rape, but your incidental descriptions just mentioned the sound of an owl hooting from the trees, and owls creep me the fuck out".  There's no way to know what it is that's upsetting the person who raises the X-card without talking to them about what they're reacting badly to, and X-card rules tend to explicitly prohibit any such discussion.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1060579So it's virtue signalling bullshit. How surprising.

Well I quoted what one person thinks of that in my sig. But rather than just sling stuff, I'll throw something positive out there as well.

One of the games I signed up 'blindly' for at this Gen Con turned out to be run by the ConTessa  (http://www.contessa.rocks/about-contessa-1)crowd. It was in the open floor of the Lucas Oil stadium, you can see some photos in the link (though those are not from 2018)

They had at least eight tables., could have been many more. I don't recall seeing an X-card at my table, but maybe it was just buried under character sheets and the table map. The organizers and several of the GMs were identifiably dressed up (lots of badges etc), but the players were more of a mix. Can I say for a fact that ConTessa's welcoming approach brought in players that might otherwise not have attended? No, I can't.

But clearly ConTessa thinks that it does. Here's a snippet from Stacy Dellorfano, the founder of ConTessa. (full piece here (http://www.contessa.rocks/blog/founders-forum-the-future-of-contessa)). AFAIK Stacy is pretty respected in the community for her efforts, I recall seeing posts to that effect here on the RPGsite, not exactly the most inclusive place in our hobby.

QuoteThe people who come to our events are some of the best in the community. My favorite part about running ConTessa events at conventions is talking to all the people who participate and run our events. It's very special to me when people come and sit down next to me, and tell me their story as a gamer. They're all unique, precious, and perfect stories, and they are the fuel that keeps me going even though there are times when being the founder of an organization like ConTessa feels like being target practice for trolls.

Because of ConTessa, I walk away from every convention with a huge smile on my face, a deep sense of love, satisfaction, hope for the future, and a whole bag of stories to share with others. Those who know me know that I'm an incredibly emotional person. At every convention ConTessa has represented at, I've had to take some time alone to cry with joy over everything that I see and hear.

...

You may think that just running a game at one of our events isn't enough to turn the tide, but I promise you, it is. Every person who's run a ConTessa event has touched - and changed - many lives. I can't tell you how many people have told me they've been empowered to create because they saw someone like them GMing at one of our events - there are too many to count. All you have to do is show up and run a game, and lives change, become enriched, become better. Your vulnerability, your power, your willingness to try something new and break out of the box you've been stuffed in inspires others in ways that change their lives forever. Never forget that.  

Especially now.

I'm not the (nominal) target audience for ConTessa, being a straight white male. But I had a great time, friendly GM and players, with a fun adventure - though the game world needed maybe too much background exposition for a one-shot, but the GM wrangled it successfully.

To swing full circle - I think the X-card works the same way. It doesn't need to be overtly / actively used to be effective.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060557I think it's there as a message that the DM is available and willing to take feedback, and to remind everyone that we are all there to have fun.  

 At Gen Con at least, the X-card seems to be a room/organizer thing, or a publisher thing. It doesn't really say anything about the GM, the game / mechanics, or the other players.

So what is an X-card? A message that the DM is available and willing to take feedback or it doesn't really say anything about the DM, the game/mechanics, or the other players? You are talking out of your ass here.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060594I'm not the (nominal) target audience for ConTessa, being a straight white male.

Ah yes, ConTessa - the group which supports marginalized gamers by marginalizing the largest demographic of gamers.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060544Who is ranting?  I think the X-card makes an excellent signal.  As soon as it appears on the table, I'm out.  Either the game is going to be about something potentially nasty (and thus not to my taste), or the GM thinks that some of the players are potentially snowflakes (also not too my tastes in a different way) or the GM is incorrect or pandering or perhaps merely being cautious.  In the latter cases, I'm possibly abandoning an alright game, but life is too short.  Also, there is a really good chance that I'm not a good fit for that table, even if the game is OK.  So it is the polite thing to do to get out early.

I don't really get the X-Card but neither do I understand this. Personally I find X Cards silly (and I can't imagine any of my players taking them seriously). I wouldn't allow that to stop me from trying out a game at an event. If the game itself doesn't look like fun, sure I wouldn't play. But if the game looked interesting I could still play even if I personally don't really agree with the whole X Card thing (and I could respect the table's desire to have X Cards and not make a fuss about it). I don't need all my tastes and preferences 100% catered to to have a good time at a game table. And there is room for different approaches. If people want X cards, it isn't any skin off my back. In my own group I won't use them (even if people come in asking for rather). Because that is the standard at our table. But if I am a guest at another persons table I can adjust to how they do things. At the very least it gives me a clearer understanding of what the X Card actually is.

Quote from: nDervish;1060590There's still the problem that, in your example scenario, there's no way for the GM to know whether, when a player taps the X-card, the player actually means "the cannibal rapists are all well and good, but I really can't deal with clowns", or even "I'm loving the cannibal clown rape, but your incidental descriptions just mentioned the sound of an owl hooting from the trees, and owls creep me the fuck out".  There's no way to know what it is that's upsetting the person who raises the X-card without talking to them about what they're reacting badly to, and X-card rules tend to explicitly prohibit any such discussion.

I'm not opposed to the concept of the X-Card it's what you said exactly here to why I dislike using them and the concept of them. It's not enough I need to spend time creating a campaign. I also need to be amateur psychologist as well at the game table. No not unless I'm payed to do so. What is it with people who insist on acting like children in adult bodies. If one has a issue with the DM/GM tell them. I will concede if the player was raped or beaten as a child it will be hard to do and that should be said in private. If one hates organized religion (why are you even playing D&D which main setting is full of religions) tell the DM and players. I could understand if I stupidly ran a game with rape elements the players rightfully call me out on it. I'm not sure if I would run let alone want a player who is creeped out by the hooting of owls at the game table. X-Cards is just another way for adults to act like children and shrug off the responsability of acting like one.

Gamers like Motorskills just want to keep holding the hands of such people until their 90+ years old. I get it sometimes certain topics can be uncomfortable to talk about. Don't expect everyone and anyone around you to be amateur psychologists coupled with mind reading ability.

As for Contessa I'm glad it exists yet most tables and conventions never turned away women and gay people. LBGT is a newer phenomenon and they would usually not be turned away either. Contessa is just another fancy term for an organized safe space.  


As a aside WHY do people who order stuff refuse to include apartment numbers when they place the original order. It's common fucking sense people.

X-cards didn't exist in the community at large until recently...

The uncomfortable situations requiring X-cards didn't exist in the community at large until recently...

The people who require nigh-constant protection from uncomfortable situations didn't exist in the community at large until recently...

In the Ven Diagram of all of these bizarre things, "SJW" sits smack in the middle.

Quote from: sureshot;1060614I'm not opposed to the concept of the X-Card it's what you said exactly here to why I dislike using them and the concept of them. It's not enough I need to spend time creating a campaign. I also need to be amateur psychologist as well at the game table. No not unless I'm payed to do so. What is it with people who insist on acting like children in adult bodies. If one has a issue with the DM/GM tell them. I will concede if the player was raped or beaten as a child it will be hard to do and that should be said in private. If one hates organized religion (why are you even playing D&D which main setting is full of religions) tell the DM and players. I could understand if I stupidly ran a game with rape elements the players rightfully call me out on it. I'm not sure if I would run let alone want a player who is creeped out by the hooting of owls at the game table. X-Cards is just another way for adults to act like children and shrug off the responsability of acting like one.

Gamers like Motorskills just want to keep holding the hands of such people until their 90+ years old. I get it sometimes certain topics can be uncomfortable to talk about. Don't expect everyone and anyone around you to be amateur psychologists coupled with mind reading ability.

As for Contessa I'm glad it exists yet most tables and conventions never turned away women and gay people. LBGT is a newer phenomenon and they would usually not be turned away either. Contessa is just another fancy term for an organized safe space.  


As a aside WHY do people who order stuff refuse to include apartment numbers when they place the original order. It's common fucking sense people.

Two bits I'd like to expand upon:

1) Yes, we're aren't mind-reading psychiatrists required to anticipate the needs of adults playing pretend. Spot on there, sir.

2) ConTessa exists because it scores points from people with whom victimhood is a virtue. What's between your legs (and who you let touch it) shouldn't exist in public and girls have always been welcome, they just wanted to be included with caveats. We see this repeatedly in current feminism.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060557I've had plenty of sub-par table experiences (at conventions) over the decades. These have mostly been boredom (due to an unprepared DM or a lame adventure), and occasionally a terrible DM (combination of inexperience and poor preparation). Once or twice it's been an obnoxious player (typically some kind of alpha that shouts other players down, challenges the DM all the way along, that kind of thing).
I don't think an X-card would have helped in any of those situations.

But I've got to say I'm with @jhkim here. I've been on maybe half-a-dozen tables (all but one at Gen Con) where an X-card has been on display. I don't think it guarantees anything, I don't think it restricts anything.

I've never once seen it used.

But nevertheless I do think it has value. I think it's there as a message that the DM is available and willing to take feedback, and to remind everyone that we are all there to have fun.
Sure I think players have some responsibility to not sign up for games that they might have a bad reaction to, but honestly, at Gen Con especially, it's really hard to tell beyond identifying the general genre, the paragraph descriptions can't really do the session justice.
Beyond that, I love signing up blind for stuff, trying out games and themes I have little knowledge about. I've come across some amazing gems over the years.

I think the above really only applies to conventions or pick-up store games. One of my friends (an excellent CoC Keeper) hosted a home game for a couple of new people. It ended terribly, the new players were shocked by the horror content, which was, my friend admits, maybe too graphic for a pick-up game.
Would an X-card have saved that situation? Impossible to know. But I think my friend would have liked the opportunity to be advised earlier than his guests / players were bouncing off the content much harder than he had appreciated.

But where I disagree with you is your reticence to even sit down at the table. At Gen Con at least, the X-card seems to be a room/organizer thing, or a publisher thing. It doesn't really say anything about the GM, the game / mechanics, or the other players. The only person you would be hurting is yourself.

What would an X-card have done other than stop the game? What aspect triggered the X-card? You're so blinded by your ideology you can't see the problems it causes. What about voice-only games?

The X-card is nothing more than an infantile replacement for mature communication.

Quote from: sureshot;1060614Gamers like Motorskills just want to keep holding the hands of such people until their 90+ years old. I get it sometimes certain topics can be uncomfortable to talk about. Don't expect everyone and anyone around you to be amateur psychologists coupled with mind reading ability.

As for Contessa I'm glad it exists yet most tables and conventions never turned away women and gay people. LBGT is a newer phenomenon and they would usually not be turned away either. Contessa is just another fancy term for an organized safe space.  

I'm very happy to "hand-hold", I've been doing it for more than thirty years, bringing people into (and back into) the hobby. TSR actually sponsored D&D in UK schools back in the day, I was one of the participating GMs. The look of wondrous delight on the kids' faces still resonates with me today.

The main obstacle was convincing the nervous parents. While we never had the terminology, essentially we had to explain that the gaming table was a "safe space" for their kids. It wasn't a big deal then, the parents got it straight away; they either observed from a distance, or happily wandered off to do their own things.
And it still isn't a big deal today.

QuoteAs a aside WHY do people who order stuff refuse to include apartment numbers when they place the original order. It's common fucking sense people.

I feel ya. :D

It's one thing to hold a person hand. I draw the line at doing it 24/7/365 days a year. After a certain point a adult needs to act like one. Not be a child in a adult body.

Players are responsible for telling the DM what bothers them at the table. DMs also need to make the appropriate judgement calls as well. Player is uncomfortable with rape it's gone from the campaign.  Being bothered by a Owl thst hoots they stay in the campaign.   At the very least not without a piece of paper that certifies that the player suffers from a phobia of owls.

Modern SJWs and society in some cases insist on wanting go hold a person hand for far too long. A person decides that they want to tske a major in Lesbian Dance instead of business and think they will get the same pay. It's not going to happen, society owes you nothing and your the douchebag who ignored everyone else advice who told you not to do it.

Motorskills, just because J. Wright said something that echoes nicely in your chamber doesn't mean it isn't a weak defense against your aversion to the phrase "virtue signaling".

I do still kind of like you, though. You're polite. And you're apparently coordinated. Or are a great driver. Or both.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1060537I've never used the x-card thing, but I don't see the big deal. Saying "hey, knock that out" interrupts the flow of the game and breaks the mood. A nice non-verbal signal that lets you wave the DM away from something that grosses you out keeps things moving smoothly for everyone.

Did you miss the part where I said:

Quote from: robiswrong;1060525But if someone feels that they need it, and can't game without it?  Weird, I guess, but fine.

or are you just agreeing with me?

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1060537Also, just because one player taps out, that doesn't mean they're a special snowflake. It just means they tapped out first. Maybe all your players think you're a creep who needs to back off the lovingly detailed description of cannibal clown rape, but they didn't all use the x-card simultaneously so you just see the first one.

Again, I never said anything of the sort.  I never said that needing an X-Card meant you were "a special snowflake" or wasn't legit, for whatever issues you might be dealing with.

Again, maybe you missed the part where I said:

Quote from: robiswrong;1060525The idea that the people playing would need a hard "rule" saying that they would have to listen to that is, also, foreign to me.

implying that GMs should listen to their players and take out things the players aren't comfortable with, and respect their boundaries?

I mean, the whole point of my post was that while I don't personally see a need for an X-Card, if someone really does, then it doesn't cost anything to put it in (outside of extreme boundary weaponization tactics), so why not just do it?  That really the point was that I don't have to understand something myself to acknowledge that others have some kind of valid need for it.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060650Motorskills, just because J. Wright said something that echoes nicely in your chamber doesn't mean it isn't a weak defense against your aversion to the phrase "virtue signaling".

I do still kind of like you, though. You're polite. And you're apparently coordinated. Or are a great driver. Or both.

I try to be polite, there's a few people here that enjoy getting a rise out of me, and occasionally I let rip in return, prefer not to do that, hence I let the signature speak for me.

I honestly don't even remember who J Wright is, I'm guessing he was (is?) a poster here. The virtue signalling thing does resonate with me though, those that accuse (the likes of) ConTessa of being the bad guys...well they are on the wrong side, plain and simple. But is SpinachCat actually a sociopath because he rants and raves about this stuff?
I don't think I would go that far, I certainly would try to avoid making that extreme a judgment before having a face to face.


Maybe it's time to update my sig, we'll see.



P.S. I am far from coordinated (that's where the moniker originated). I am a fantastic driver. My wife disagrees.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060544Who is ranting?

Quote from: sureshot;1060647It's one thing to hold a person hand. I draw the line at doing it 24/7/365 days a year. After a certain point a adult needs to act like one. Not be a child in a adult body.

Players are responsible for telling the DM what bothers them at the table. DMs also need to make the appropriate judgement calls as well. Player is uncomfortable with rape it's gone from the campaign.  Being bothered by a Owl thst hoots they stay in the campaign.   At the very least not without a piece of paper that certifies that the player suffers from a phobia of owls.

Modern SJWs and society in some cases insist on wanting go hold a person hand for far too long. A person decides that they want to tske a major in Lesbian Dance instead of business and think they will get the same pay. It's not going to happen, society owes you nothing and your the douchebag who ignored everyone else advice who told you not to do it.

I don't know if it is a rant per se, but I'd argue it's close. Sureshot's unhappiness is totally out of proportion to the impact it has on his gaming or his everyday.

Quote from: jhkim;1060543If someone really really is bothered by just the idea of an X-card and it would drive you up the wall for it to be used, then sure, rant against it.  But rant against what it's actually like in play.

What is this preposterous notion that I should base my opinions on experience rather than preconception and prejudice?

I can see that it's a tool for more sensitive players to express discomfort without having to explain themselves, our cultures are moving on and attitudes are evolving. If we are to keep the younger generations (and their cash) coming in to the hobby then having an x-card is a small price to pay. Chances are I'll never have the need to use it personally, thick skinned, middle-aged, robust in mind etc. but other people might and it might keep a situation minor rather than having it blow up.

Now you know why many on this site have issues with your post Motorskills. If you think what I posted is a rant. I too can be disingenuous  and claim anyone and everyone who disagrees with what I post " ranting ".

If you want to treat grown-ups as children go right ahead. Your behaviour is the exception not the norm. X-cards are just a excuse for people to not act like responsible adults.   If you have a issue with something at the table tell me.

Do you know how immersion breaking it is to have someone in the middle of a exciting combat or npc interaction to hold a card and stop everything. It's annoying, childish and kills both the mood and momentum imo. For what because joe or jane adult child is offended by the hooting if a  owl.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060665I try to be polite, there's a few people here that enjoy getting a rise out of me, and occasionally I let rip in return, prefer not to do that, hence I let the signature speak for me.

I honestly don't even remember who J Wright is, I'm guessing he was (is?) a poster here. The virtue signalling thing does resonate with me though, those that accuse (the likes of) ConTessa of being the bad guys...well they are on the wrong side, plain and simple. But is SpinachCat actually a sociopath because he rants and raves about this stuff?
I don't think I would go that far, I certainly would try to avoid making that extreme a judgment before having a face to face.


Maybe it's time to update my sig, we'll see.



P.S. I am far from coordinated (that's where the moniker originated). I am a fantastic driver. My wife disagrees.

I hear ya'. I've poked at people (and have been poked back by them), including you, more than I probably should at times. I don't agree with a lot of what you post but honestly, I do appreciate that you and I and others can come here and...as obnoxious as it can end up being...bloody each other's virtual noses, then shake hands after.

I still think X-cards are dumb, though. :D

Quote from: Motorskills;1060666I don't know if it is a rant per se, but I'd argue it's close. Sureshot's unhappiness is totally out of proportion to the impact it has on his gaming or his everyday.

I may be incorrect but if sureshot is anywhere close to my feelings on the topic, it's not so much the impact on his gaming table, but in real life. I'm hoping you can see how insane things have gotten in the Gordian Knot of current Leftist politics and when one wants to escape to their hobby, it's infuriating to keep seeing how everything in that hobby now apparently sucks, and how you....a straight, white, inherently-rapey/racist/ableist/etc. cis-male demon-thing...are ruining not only the hobby you're trying to escape to, but the lives of people you don't know and who you would almost assuredly love to share said hobby with.

In short (too late), as a long-maligned and ostracized group who have been largely desperate for validation, it's disheartening to be told you're not included others.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060666I don't know if it is a rant per se, but I'd argue it's close. Sureshot's unhappiness is totally out of proportion to the impact it has on his gaming or his everyday.

I may be incorrect but if sureshot is anywhere close to my feelings on the topic, it's not so much the impact on his gaming table, but in real life. I'm hoping you can see how insane things have gotten in the Gordian Knot of current Leftist politics and when one wants to escape to their hobby, it's infuriating to keep seeing how everything in that hobby now apparently sucks, and how you....a straight, white, inherently-rapey/racist/ableist/etc. cis-male demon-thing...are ruining not only the hobby you're trying to escape to, but the lives of people you don't know and who you would almost assuredly love to share said hobby with.

In short (too late), as a long-maligned and ostracized group who have been largely desperate for validation, it's disheartening to be told you're not included others.

Quote from: sureshot;1060674Now you know why many on this site have issues with your post Motorskills. If you think what I posted is a rant. I too can be disingenuous  and claim anyone and everyone who disagrees with what I post " ranting ".

If you want to treat grown-ups as children go right ahead. Your behaviour is the exception not the norm. X-cards are just a excuse for people to not act like responsible adults.   If you have a issue with something at the table tell me.

Do you know how immersion breaking it is to have someone in the middle of a exciting combat or npc interaction to hold a card and stop everything. It's annoying, childish and kills both the mood and momentum imo. For what because joe or jane adult child is offended by the hooting if a  owl.

jhkim and I have given eighteen examples of experience with X-card between us, confirming that any impact that the X-card has is invisible and positive. You've likely never even seen the X-card, but somehow it is worth getting your knickers in a twist about it. Come on, man.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060679I hear ya'. I've poked at people (and have been poked back by them), including you, more than I probably should at times. I don't agree with a lot of what you post but honestly, I do appreciate that you and I and others can come here and...as obnoxious as it can end up being...bloody each other's virtual noses, then shake hands after.

I still think X-cards are dumb, though. :D



I may be incorrect but if sureshot is anywhere close to my feelings on the topic, it's not so much the impact on his gaming table, but in real life. I'm hoping you can see how insane things have gotten in the Gordian Knot of current Leftist politics and when one wants to escape to their hobby, it's infuriating to keep seeing how everything in that hobby now apparently sucks, and how you....a straight, white, inherently-rapey/racist/ableist/etc. cis-male demon-thing...are ruining not only the hobby you're trying to escape to, but the lives of people you don't know and who you would almost assuredly love to share said hobby with.

In short (too late), as a long-maligned and ostracized group who have been largely desperate for validation, it's disheartening to be told you're not included others.

Again, for the record, I am the archetypal evil demographic, and I have never felt unwelcome or unentertained at an "X-Table" (nor for that matter at my sole experience at a "ConTessa Table"). And my go-to game is Delta Green, so I'm not some shrinking RPG violet either.

At a Sound of Water  (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/146460/Sound-of-Water--World-of-Dew-Companion)game I sat in on, that had an X-Card, it was a super-tense back-and forth. It absolutely was a mature game for highly-experienced gamers. We never came close to needing the card.

At another table that had an X-card, we did some Fate Accelerated thing. The GM had a theme in mind - re-skinned Mormon Missionaries meets Star Trek basically - but wanted to be sure that everyone at the table would be okay with religious themes, especially in a game that was significantly free-formed as we went along.
We didn't need the X-card, but the GM being open to tweaking stuff was good IMO, religious stuff can cause issues, obviously it can.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060557But where I disagree with you is your reticence to even sit down at the table. At Gen Con at least, the X-card seems to be a room/organizer thing, or a publisher thing. It doesn't really say anything about the GM, the game / mechanics, or the other players. The only person you would be hurting is yourself.

I'm running some risk of depriving myself of a fun experience by also avoiding several possibilities that would be a not so fun experience--and also being polite by not putting myself into a position of taking a slot that someone else might enjoy more and/or might lead me to walk in the middle of the game.  If it's a room/organizer or publisher thing, we merely moved up another level.  Now instead of not sitting for the game, I don't want to go to the convention at all.  I don't particularly want to go to Gen Con for many reasons.  A habit of using X-cards would be a relatively tiny weight on that scale.  (And frankly, in this case, any gaming-related or political issues I have would be completely dwarfed by being in that much of a crowd for that long.)  If I plaid for a game, showed up, and it was rampant--then that's my bad for not doing my research better.  Money down the drain, I guess.

BTW, I'd feel exactly the same way if someone wanted an O-card for if people got annoyed with OOC character or a C-card if people didn't like the characterization/voice used by the players or a B-card if the balance was all off, of any other thing that makes a game potentially go off the rails.  The only thing special about the X-card is the tenuous connection to serious counseling of psychological trauma.  If that's present, then we aren't just talking about a game anymore.  

Now, in a longer-term group--say in a private home, we are talking a different animal.  If I went to a game like that by invitation, and the GM pulled out the X-card, I'd want to know why he thought it was needed, how often it had been used, if ever, and why.  Depending upon the answers, I might or might not walk.  But it is certainly a big enough signal to get me to ask the questions.  A 4-hour con game, I'd be monopolizing time that could be better spent elsewhere.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060692I'm running some risk of depriving myself of a fun experience by also avoiding several possibilities that would be a not so fun experience--and also being polite by not putting myself into a position of taking a slot that someone else might enjoy more and/or might lead me to walk in the middle of the game.  If it's a room/organizer or publisher thing, we merely moved up another level.  Now instead of not sitting for the game, I don't want to go to the convention at all.  I don't particularly want to go to Gen Con for many reasons.  A habit of using X-cards would be a relatively tiny weight on that scale.  (And frankly, in this case, any gaming-related or political issues I have would be completely dwarfed by being in that much of a crowd for that long.)  If I plaid for a game, showed up, and it was rampant--then that's my bad for not doing my research better.  Money down the drain, I guess.

BTW, I'd feel exactly the same way if someone wanted an O-card for if people got annoyed with OOC character or a C-card if people didn't like the characterization/voice used by the players or a B-card if the balance was all off, of any other thing that makes a game potentially go off the rails.  The only thing special about the X-card is the tenuous connection to serious counseling of psychological trauma.  If that's present, then we aren't just talking about a game anymore.  

Now, in a longer-term group--say in a private home, we are talking a different animal.  If I went to a game like that by invitation, and the GM pulled out the X-card, I'd want to know why he thought it was needed, how often it had been used, if ever, and why.  Depending upon the answers, I might or might not walk.  But it is certainly a big enough signal to get me to ask the questions.  A 4-hour con game, I'd be monopolizing time that could be better spent elsewhere.

I'm really only referencing conventions, I don't think it applies at home games (or rather I think stronger communication protocols are required there). Store games are a different beast, and I would have to give that some more thought.
 
But for conventions at least, you are being offered eighteen examples suggesting that your concerns are unfounded, or rather, there is no lesser or greater risk of a bad gaming experience at an "X-Table" than anywhere else. I've had plenty of sucky experiences at non-X tables....

I game to have fun. The presence and potential use of an X-card would limit that fun.

Damn, I guess that means I'm just not woke enough.

If someone has issues with a type of content, you would either respect that or ask them to leave the game, right?

The X-Card does nothing but formalize the process.

The problem wouldn't be the X-Card itself, it would be weaponized use of the X-Card to control a game beyond tolerable limits.  Which is dealt with the same way you would if the X-Card wasn't there:  "Yeah, I don't think this game is for you, I think you should find something you'd be happier playing."

There's a bit of "finality" and unilateral power implied in how the process is described, but I'd see it less as "use of X-Card is absolute and final" and more like "use of X-Card means we're not doing it for now, but will probably discuss what the game is and is not later."  I mean, that's how we usually deal with rules disputes, right?  "Accept this ruling for now, and we'll discuss it later."  I can see how the description of it makes it sound like handing over an inappropriate amount of unilateral power, but I certainly wouldn't use it that way, and I wouldn't tolerate somebody abusing it.

If someone is abusing the X-Card to "control" the game, they'd probably try it with or without the X-Card, so I'd deal with them the same way.  I prefer to have games that work with reasonable people, and mechanisms for reasonable people, and kick out unreasonable people.

To be clear, I'm not an X-Card "fan".  But neither do I see it as some kind of game-destroying thing.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060688Again, for the record, I am the archetypal evil demographic, and I have never felt unwelcome or unentertained at an "X-Table" (nor for that matter at my sole experience at a "ConTessa Table"). And my go-to game is Delta Green, so I'm not some shrinking RPG violet either.

At a Sound of Water  (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/146460/Sound-of-Water--World-of-Dew-Companion)game I sat in on, that had an X-Card, it was a super-tense back-and forth. It absolutely was a mature game for highly-experienced gamers. We never came close to needing the card.

At another table that had an X-card, we did some Fate Accelerated thing. The GM had a theme in mind - re-skinned Mormon Missionaries meets Star Trek basically - but wanted to be sure that everyone at the table would be okay with religious themes, especially in a game that was significantly free-formed as we went along.
We didn't need the X-card, but the GM being open to tweaking stuff was good IMO, religious stuff can cause issues, obviously it can.

I probably wouldn't care, either. However, if someone started being a dick, X-card or not, my outside voice might be used inside (who games outside? There are bugs).

Quote from: robiswrong;1060698If someone has issues with a type of content, you would either respect that or ask them to leave the game, right?

The X-Card does nothing but formalize the process.

The problem wouldn't be the X-Card itself, it would be weaponized use of the X-Card to control a game beyond tolerable limits.  Which is dealt with the same way you would if the X-Card wasn't there:  "Yeah, I don't think this game is for you, I think you should find something you'd be happier playing."

There's a bit of "finality" and unilateral power implied in how the process is described, but I'd see it less as "use of X-Card is absolute and final" and more like "use of X-Card means we're not doing it for now, but will probably discuss what the game is and is not later."  I mean, that's how we usually deal with rules disputes, right?  "Accept this ruling for now, and we'll discuss it later."  I can see how the description of it makes it sound like handing over an inappropriate amount of unilateral power, but I certainly wouldn't use it that way, and I wouldn't tolerate somebody abusing it.

If someone is abusing the X-Card to "control" the game, they'd probably try it with or without the X-Card, so I'd deal with them the same way.  I prefer to have games that work with reasonable people, and mechanisms for reasonable people, and kick out unreasonable people.

To be clear, I'm not an X-Card "fan".  But neither do I see it as some kind of game-destroying thing.

Well-summarised. :)

Quote from: Motorskills;1060695I'm really only referencing conventions, I don't think it applies at home games (or rather I think stronger communication protocols are required there). Store games are a different beast, and I would have to give that some more thought.
 
But for conventions at least, you are being offered eighteen examples suggesting that your concerns are unfounded, or rather, there is no lesser or greater risk of a bad gaming experience at an "X-Table" than anywhere else. I've had plenty of sucky experiences at non-X tables....

Well, to be fair, what is a good gaming experience to one person might be a bad gaming experience to another. I'm not claiming that my experience of convention games using the X-card is definitive for everyone, but some data is better than no data.

I do get the impression that using the X-card correlates to a more liberal politics of the GM or the organizer. So if someone is really bothered by that just in principle, for example, that could be a factor. However, I haven't noticed that there is any noticeable correlation of game content. i.e. There are non-X-card games that are very socialist or otherwise liberal, and there are X-card games that are straight-up Cthulhoid horror.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060698To be clear, I'm not an X-Card "fan".  But neither do I see it as some kind of game-destroying thing.

No not destroying.  It's nothing but a signal after all.  The GM thinks the game will about something rough, thinks that other players might have reservations about it, or is being cautious.  The GM might be correct or incorrect in any of those assessments.

The game (with or without an X-card) might be explicitly about horror or sports or modern commando missions or any number of other things that don't particularly appeal to me.  A game might be strictly played in first person voice or strictly theatrical improvisational rules.  Also doesn't appeal.  

It's certainly possible that I might have fun in any of those games, with a good group, but the chances are much lower than some other options.  If any of those things are signaled, I'm out.  The X-card is another such signal.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060685jhkim and I have given eighteen examples of experience with X-card between us, confirming that any impact that the X-card has is invisible and positive. You've likely never even seen the X-card, but somehow it is worth getting your knickers in a twist about it. Come on, man.

I don't need or want to play with a X-Card because I'm mature and responsible enough to talk with the DM/GM usually at the end of the session. Not during the game where it ruins it for everyone else. Now if the DM/GM is a immature dick throwing rape scenes and descriptions of brutal torture in graphic detail. I respectfully tell the DM/GM it's not something I'm comfortable with. If the person running the table refuses. I get up and leave. That's how well adjusted people act in normal society. I will concede that the X-card has a use and it's place you will never get me to admit to using them or liking them Food for thought maybe just maybe you might be wrong on the subject your talking about.

It's not young gamers who seek this X card bullshit. Millennial SJWs are in their late 20s and 30s now, and as others have pointed out, just broken spoiled children in adult bodies and the next decade is gonna go remarkably badly for them.

BTW, are there such things as blue collar SJWs? The working class Millennials I've met haven't shown any attachment to their stupidity.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;10606252) ConTessa exists because it scores points from people with whom victimhood is a virtue. What's between your legs (and who you let touch it) shouldn't exist in public and girls have always been welcome, they just wanted to be included with caveats. We see this repeatedly in current feminism.

ConTessa didn't begin as a shithole of virtue signalling clowns. It began a good idea and a fun idea (which I supported in those early threads), but its very clear Stacy was not as mentally ill back then. The entire mess is a terrible shame and maybe Stacy will seek recovery in the future.

But in many ways, ConTessa still a good thing as it gives SJW freaks a go-to destination at cons keeping other tables free of their idiocy. In our current era, that filtering is a boon for the rest of us.

Same for the X cards, it's existence at a table tells you key information about that GM, and you are now free to act on that info.  

I'd say its like the bat signal, but bat images were banned on RPG.net because they were triggering. :confused:

Quote from: Motorskills;1060665But is SpinachCat actually a sociopath because he rants and raves about this stuff?

Disagree with Leftist nonsense = rants and raves!

LOL.

But if a NPC considers me a sociopath, that's MADE OF WONDERFUL as I always enjoy the tasty LOLz.

Quote from: jhkim;1060705There are non-X-card games that are very socialist or otherwise liberal, and there are X-card games that are straight-up Cthulhoid horror.

Interesting I would  think the reverse would be true imo. If the campaign is going to be  straight-up Cthulhoid horror having a X-Card for that kind of campaign is strange imo. Having read Lovecraft and if the person running the game is both good at running and in Lovecratian lore it can be a surreal and disturbing yet fun campaign. After all we are talking about the guy who has Mi-Go brain cylinders in one of his stories.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1060715Disagree with Leftist nonsense = rants and raves!

It seems to be Motorskills tried and true mechanism to use against the opposition.

Quote from: jhkim;1060705But if a NPC considers me a sociopath, that's MADE OF WONDERFUL as I always enjoy the tasty LOLz.

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiehfXJq47eAhWIVN8KHeCxAu8QjRx6BAgBEAU&url=https%3A%2F%2Fgifimage.net%2Fsoylent-green-gif%2F&psig=AOvVaw2pUXp_TzyhK_u8xhgwebcF&ust=1539895411118221

Just change people to Spinachcat

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060706No not destroying.  It's nothing but a signal after all.  The GM thinks the game will about something rough, thinks that other players might have reservations about it, or is being cautious.  The GM might be correct or incorrect in any of those assessments.

The game (with or without an X-card) might be explicitly about horror or sports or modern commando missions or any number of other things that don't particularly appeal to me.  A game might be strictly played in first person voice or strictly theatrical improvisational rules.  Also doesn't appeal.  

It's certainly possible that I might have fun in any of those games, with a good group, but the chances are much lower than some other options.  If any of those things are signaled, I'm out.  The X-card is another such signal.

Am I correct in interpreting this as "any game that the GM feels requires an X-Card is likely a game I don't want to play anyway."?

Quote from: jhkimThere are non-X-card games that are very socialist or otherwise liberal, and there are X-card games that are straight-up Cthulhoid horror.

Quote from: sureshot;1060716Interesting I would  think the reverse would be true imo. If the campaign is going to be  straight-up Cthulhoid horror having a X-Card for that kind of campaign is strange imo. Having read Lovecraft and if the person running the game is both good at running and in Lovecratian lore it can be a surreal and disturbing yet fun campaign. After all we are talking about the guy who has Mi-Go brain cylinders in one of his stories.

I think the X-card tends to be used regularly in games with a lot of surreal, disturbing, and horrific content. For example, three years ago I GMed a coordinated run of a con game with another GM who does a lot of Lovecraftian horror and helps run a Lovecraft film festival. I know that he was using the X-card in his game, though I wasn't. (They were coordinated because players were sometimes taken out of the game and blindfolded, winding up in another of the games with a new character sheet - representing unwilling body switching between alternate dimensions.)

I think some people have the impression that if the X-card is used, that means that players constantly touch it and the game never has anything disturbing. That's opposite to my experience.

The point for horror games like this is that the GM puts in a bunch of disturbing content, and the X-card is there just in case it goes too far for someone. The players are there because they *want* to have weird, disturbing content - but still recognize that it could go too far. And again, in practice, my experience is that no one has touched it.

Quote from: jhkim;1060722For example, three years ago I GMed a coordinated run of a con game with another GM who does a lot of Lovecraftian horror and helps run a Lovecraft film festival. I know that he was using the X-card in his game, though I wasn't.

Was the other GM Aaron Vanek?

Quote from: jhkim;1060722I think the X-card tends to be used regularly in games with a lot of surreal, disturbing, and horrific content. For example, three years ago I GMed a coordinated run of a con game with another GM who does a lot of Lovecraftian horror and helps run a Lovecraft film festival. I know that he was using the X-card in his game, though I wasn't. (They were coordinated because players were sometimes taken out of the game and blindfolded, winding up in another of the games with a new character sheet - representing unwilling body switching between alternate dimensions.)

I think some people have the impression that if the X-card is used, that means that players constantly touch it and the game never has anything disturbing. That's opposite to my experience.

The point for horror games like this is that the GM puts in a bunch of disturbing content, and the X-card is there just in case it goes too far for someone. The players are there because they *want* to have weird, disturbing content - but still recognize that it could go too far. And again, in practice, my experience is that no one has touched it.

Why would you want to game with someone who is so psychologically fragile that they get triggered by a tabletop role-playing game?

Quote from: jeff37923;1060726Why would you want to game with someone who is so psychologically fragile that they get triggered by a tabletop role-playing game?

I dunno, man, people are different and have different thresholds.  As I said, I personally don't see any need for one, but as long as it's not abused, no skin off my nose.

*Places his X-card on the table*

*Steeples fingers*

Your move, RPGsite

Quote from: jeff37923;1060726Why would you want to game with someone who is so psychologically fragile that they get triggered by a tabletop role-playing game?

Greetings!

Hey there, Jeff! Totally, spot on, brother. This whole "X-Card" thing seems like a bunch of fucked-in-the-head crybabies to me. I've never had so much bullshit like this stuff at my table. In my campaigns, there are entire cities that are raped. Whole armies slaughtered. Sweet little country villages are burned to the ground, and the people marched off in chains. There are even towns that have had half the population crucified, and the remaining half burned at the stake for heresy. People and creatures get beaten, raped, insulted, and slaughtered. War, death, racism and hatred are normal parts of society, and have been normal parts of our own real-world history. I can't imagine running a campaign without the harsh, brutal edge of history mixed into it. Unless children have been expressly invited to my table--which at times, they have been--I don't run Rated G or PG games.

My campaigns are for cool, mature, reasonably educated adults--not for Barney the Purple Dinosaur!:)

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Azraele;1060729*Places his X-card on the table*

*Steeples fingers*

Your move, RPGsite

*flings poo*

Quote from: jeff37923;1060726Why would you want to game with someone who is so psychologically fragile that they get triggered by a tabletop role-playing game?

As I said, I played in a bunch of games using the X-card, and it was never used. So I don't think that the presence of the X-card means that anyone in the game is more psychologically fragile. It might indicate that the GM is more sympathetic to psychologically fragile people, or perhaps thinks that it is a better way to deal with them - but that's not the same thing.

I have had someone who said they were triggered in one of my convention games, and they made a big scene that disrupted the game. I was put off from gaming with them, but that's pretty darn rare. It's not something I'm very concerned about. In retrospect, things still would have been disrupted if I had had an X-card, but I'm not sure if the disruption would have been better or worse from my point of view.

Quote from: Azraele;1060729*Places his X-card on the table*

*Steeples fingers*

Your move, RPGsite

I see your X-card and raise you a hug.

Your move, sir.

Quote from: SHARK;1060730War, death, racism and hatred are normal parts of society, and have been normal parts of our own real-world history. I can't imagine running a campaign without the harsh, brutal edge of history mixed into it. Unless children have been expressly invited to my table--which at times, they have been--I don't run Rated G or PG games.

This is some sort of disconnect, though, since using the X-card doesn't mean the game is G or PG. Heck, the last game that I was in that used it was probably NC-17 for a number of people. Many of the X-card games I have been in were chock full of war, death, racism, and hatred.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060735I see your X-card and raise you a hug.

Your move, sir.

~vibes.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060719Am I correct in interpreting this as "any game that the GM feels requires an X-Card is likely a game I don't want to play anyway."?

Yes.  With emphasis on the "likely".  I'm aware that there might be outliers and other mitigating factors that make it a bad rule to apply 100%, but as a guideline, I could do worse in screening for games that I might or might not like.

Quote from: Azraele;1060729*Places his X-card on the table*

*Steeples fingers*

Your move, RPGsite

https://www.google.ca/search?q=the+thing+burn+it+gif&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwi47sr7y47eAhVFheAKHeI-A5UQ2-cCegQIABAC&oq=the+thing+burn+it+gif&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-img.12...8154.19438..21291...1.0..0.237.3742.23j9j2......0....1.......5..0j35i39j0i8i30j0i67j30i10.ChAnJtYALo0&ei=68DHW_jMA8WKggfi_YyoCQ&client=ms-android-rogers-ca&prmd=ivsn&biw=360&bih=560#imgrc=O8II_MlgKqrR9M

Quote from: jhkim;1060736This is some sort of disconnect, though, since using the X-card doesn't mean the game is G or PG. Heck, the last game that I was in that used it was probably NC-17 for a number of people. Many of the X-card games I have been in were chock full of war, death, racism, and hatred.

Greetings!

Hello, Jhkim! Well, ok. That may be--and I'm glad your experience wasn't fucked up by it. But it leads me to the conclusion--what the hell is it for, if not to cater to the stuffed animal "I'm so fragile" crowd? If someone is so emotionally and psychologically fragile--then they need to be in a psychologist's office, and not at a gaming table. I know I wouldn't want to play with anyone like that that is so emotionally damaged and fragile. On another note--while certain "adult themes" are absent when playing with kids, in the kids I have played with--10, 12, 14 year olds--they are savage little beasts! LOL. They are all for womping on evil monsters, blood everywhere. LOL. I 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. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people. I don't see what the value or purpose is in having an "X-card." If you don't like war, death, racism and hatred, whatever--in a fantasy game, then run your own game of Barney World, you know?

Where are all of these stuffed animal people coming from? Why are they so emotionally "triggered" by references to stuff *in a game*? What the fuck do they do if a professor mentions something in a lecture? Or some other student in a class, shares a story or something from their own lives in class? Well, I'm offended! Or if you're having lunch in a group at work, and talking, and someone mentions some stuff they have gone through, or their kids have gone through, and you said, Oh my god. I'm offended! They'd tell you you can leave, princess, and go fuck yourself then. Most wouldn't say something like that, LOL--but you know what they *would* do? They'd be quite likely not to ever sit with you again, or invite you to lunch with them, or sit by you in class, or invite you to their study groups--because such a emotional stuffed animal person would be viewed as being hopelessly fragile, and too weird to risk hanging around. What *else* might trigger these people? You know what I'm saying? These whiny, constantly offended babies need to reach down and grow the fuck up. Get hard. Life is full of lots of shit--get used to it. And noone cares about the laundry list of shit that you find "offensive" or "problematic".

I'm not angry with you, Jhkim. I'm just far too tired of seeing all these stuffed animal people--polluting our society, at every level. I don't want to tolerate such bullshit in my *games* too. I think that is a lot of the "pushback" you're seeing with lots of folks here. It isn't necessarily with the technicals--it's the whole principle involved.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1060741I 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. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people.

Well, the imaginary people that you're creating here sound terrible to play with - but they're imaginary, right? Likewise, the example of being triggered by owls is a hypothetical created by nDervish here, right? I think there's a pretty wide range between an invented hypothetical player who is triggered by owls versus a real person who in uncomfortable with their character being raped (of which I know several).

I'll admit to being one of those who may be bothered by having characters raped in the game - particularly depending on how much it is detailed. I know it happens pretty frequently in history and war, but it's one of those uglinesses I would prefer to do without in my entertainment.

Different people have different thresholds, which is the intent of the X-card. Maybe all the players are fine with off-screen NPCs being raped, and Gareth doesn't mind if his character is raped during a session as long as it isn't too graphic - but David absolutely doesn't want that happening. That might be the line to be signaled.

Referees or games where rapes take place and/or are described in detail are games that I would get up and just leave. Doing that adds nothing to the game, at all.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060747Referees or games where rapes take place and/or are described in detail are games that I would get up and just leave. Doing that adds nothing to the game, at all.

Ditto.

If 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.

Unless the players tap the XXX card, eh?

Quote from: SHARK;1060741Greetings!

Hello, Jhkim! Well, ok. That may be--and I'm glad your experience wasn't fucked up by it. But it leads me to the conclusion--what the hell is it for, if not to cater to the stuffed animal "I'm so fragile" crowd? If someone is so emotionally and psychologically fragile--then they need to be in a psychologist's office, and not at a gaming table. I know I wouldn't want to play with anyone like that that is so emotionally damaged and fragile. On another note--while certain "adult themes" are absent when playing with kids, in the kids I have played with--10, 12, 14 year olds--they are savage little beasts! LOL. They are all for womping on evil monsters, blood everywhere. LOL. I 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. Or fucking Hooting Owls? Really? Jhkim, life itself, all around us, is full of "offensive" or "disturbing" things, every day. I can't imagine even playing with a person that was such an emotional basketcase. If your "triggered" about...whatever, then you need to get your medicine, and go get counseling. I am not here to play tabletop phsychologist for all of these so desperately fragile people. Hold up an "X-Card"? What the fuck for? The game world doesn't change because you're fucking "triggered" by HOOTING OWLS for god's sake! The Hooting Owls STAY, bitch. If that person wanted to whine, they are welcome to go play in Barney World. Imagine if you had a group of 8 people playing--four men, and four women. Half of em all are "triggered" and "offended" by something--one thing or another. Maybe they are clutching their stuffed animals all for a *different* reason? LOL. My god, I can't imagine even trying to run a game with these stuffed animal people. I don't see what the value or purpose is in having an "X-card." If you don't like war, death, racism and hatred, whatever--in a fantasy game, then run your own game of Barney World, you know?

Where are all of these stuffed animal people coming from? Why are they so emotionally "triggered" by references to stuff *in a game*? What the fuck do they do if a professor mentions something in a lecture? Or some other student in a class, shares a story or something from their own lives in class? Well, I'm offended! Or if you're having lunch in a group at work, and talking, and someone mentions some stuff they have gone through, or their kids have gone through, and you said, Oh my god. I'm offended! They'd tell you you can leave, princess, and go fuck yourself then. Most wouldn't say something like that, LOL--but you know what they *would* do? They'd be quite likely not to ever sit with you again, or invite you to lunch with them, or sit by you in class, or invite you to their study groups--because such a emotional stuffed animal person would be viewed as being hopelessly fragile, and too weird to risk hanging around. What *else* might trigger these people? You know what I'm saying? These whiny, constantly offended babies need to reach down and grow the fuck up. Get hard. Life is full of lots of shit--get used to it. And noone cares about the laundry list of shit that you find "offensive" or "problematic".

I'm not angry with you, Jhkim. I'm just far too tired of seeing all these stuffed animal people--polluting our society, at every level. I don't want to tolerate such bullshit in my *games* too. I think that is a lot of the "pushback" you're seeing with lots of folks here. It isn't necessarily with the technicals--it's the whole principle involved.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO  (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/fiasco/)at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/carolina-death-crawl/) that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

FIASCO and Carolina Death Crawl are story games, not role-playing games.

Quote from: Altheus;1060278I've just had a thought about X-Cards - are they a middle class phenomenon?

It seems to me that the idea that the world will change shape to suit you is the result of overindulgence as a child, getting what you want and being protected from things you don't like.

Is the rejection of them a function of a working class background?

Knowing that the world doesn't change shape to suit what you want and sometimes you have to live with things you don't like.

Or maybe a lack of adversity while growing up - people have nothing to measure unpleasant things against and so have no sense of proportion.

The quote (from the purple place) "I used a deck of playing cards with images from the television show The Walking Dead for a Savage Worlds campaign until one of my players expressed discomfort over the images." If this was an adult I can imagine my aged mother taking the piss thusly "Awwww, did the nasty pictures scare the little man, there there, all gone".

Or am I wrong?

Democrats raised by baby-boomers, who then raised SJWs, are only in it for the undermining of freedom around the world. They tattoo their bodies to make up for their self-loathing and self-hate when they can't deface others.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060698If someone has issues with a type of content, you would either respect that or ask them to leave the game, right?

The X-Card does nothing but formalize the process.

The problem wouldn't be the X-Card itself, it would be weaponized use of the X-Card to control a game beyond tolerable limits.

That certainly is a potential problem if the X-card is abused.  But there's also the problem that, by design, a properly-used X-card is completely opaque.  It just says "I have a problem with what's going on", but gives no indication of just what it is about the events that causes a problem for you, and nobody else is allowed to ask.  Instead, they have to try to guess what has to be removed from the game.

Granted, in most cases where an X-card might be invoked, there's probably going to be an obvious answer to that question, such as rape or graphic descriptions of gore, but I'm not ready to assume that this will be true in every case, nor to dismiss the possibility that, even if there is an obvious answer, the obvious answer might be incorrect and the player was actually objecting to some other element.

This is my primary objection to X-cards.  Not that they're a way to unilaterally put the brakes on something that's headed into A Bad Place, but that, after you put the brakes on, I'm not allowed to ask what I would have to change to make things better for you, so that we can then determine whether we can work out a compromise that we're both happy with or if it would instead be best for us to not game together in the future.

Quote from: jhkim;1060746Well, the imaginary people that you're creating here sound terrible to play with - but they're imaginary, right? Likewise, the example of being triggered by owls is a hypothetical created by nDervish here, right? I think there's a pretty wide range between an invented hypothetical player who is triggered by owls versus a real person who in uncomfortable with their character being raped (of which I know several).

Yep, the owls were my own half-assed attempt at a hypothetical case of "there's something obvious for the player to be objecting to, but they're actually just fine with the obviously 'objectionable' content and their problem is with some other, completely unrelated, thing".

It wasn't meant as an example of an unreasonable player (which seems to be how most people referring back to it seem to have taken it), but rather as an example of how the opacity of the X-card could cause problems - they tap the X-card, so you take out the obvious problem of cannibal clown rape, but their real issue hasn't been addressed and they're going to have to tap out again the next time the PCs walk through a forest at night.  The "real issue" doesn't have to be something as ridiculous as owl-phobia, it just needs to be something which coincidentally happens at the same time as something else which the rest of the table considers to be a more obvious problem, leading them to make the wrong assumption about why the X-card was invoked.

Quote from: nDervish;1060794That certainly is a potential problem if the X-card is abused.  But there's also the problem that, by design, a properly-used X-card is completely opaque.  It just says "I have a problem with what's going on", but gives no indication of just what it is about the events that causes a problem for you, and nobody else is allowed to ask.  Instead, they have to try to guess what has to be removed from the game.

Granted, in most cases where an X-card might be invoked, there's probably going to be an obvious answer to that question, such as rape or graphic descriptions of gore, but I'm not ready to assume that this will be true in every case, nor to dismiss the possibility that, even if there is an obvious answer, the obvious answer might be incorrect and the player was actually objecting to some other element.

This is my primary objection to X-cards.  Not that they're a way to unilaterally put the brakes on something that's headed into A Bad Place, but that, after you put the brakes on, I'm not allowed to ask what I would have to change to make things better for you, so that we can then determine whether we can work out a compromise that we're both happy with or if it would instead be best for us to not game together in the future.

This is pretty much why I really do not like the concept of a X-Card. No real indication of what is wrong. While wasting time at the game table trying to figure what is wrong. With the added bonus of not being allowed to ask what is wrong. Some here are wondering why we don't like them. I wonder why.

Quote from: nDervish;1060794Yep, the owls were my own half-assed attempt at a hypothetical case of "there's something obvious for the player to be objecting to, but they're actually just fine with the obviously 'objectionable' content and their problem is with some other, completely unrelated, thing".

It wasn't meant as an example of an unreasonable player (which seems to be how most people referring back to it seem to have taken it), but rather as an example of how the opacity of the X-card could cause problems - they tap the X-card, so you take out the obvious problem of cannibal clown rape, but their real issue hasn't been addressed and they're going to have to tap out again the next time the PCs walk through a forest at night.  The "real issue" doesn't have to be something as ridiculous as owl-phobia, it just needs to be something which coincidentally happens at the same time as something else which the rest of the table considers to be a more obvious problem, leading them to make the wrong assumption about why the X-card was invoked.

I was once told on another forum by a fellow player that one of his players cried because a random dog was killed in a module. All because his player liked dogs and she hated seeing even a imaginary one killed off by a imaginary npc. Only to be told not only was she allowed to do that non-stop at the table. we HAD to accept that players behavior no matter how disruptive. Anyone telling her to stop because it was disruptive he would consider a terrible person and a misogynist. All dure respect one is playing a rpg where one kills others other creatures for XP. Busting into tears every time a helpless imaginary animal is killed off in a game of D&D at my tables would get you the three strikes rule then ejected from our table. If the DM was going into graphic detail of the butchering of the dog then by all means raise the X-card because that kind of stuff is disturbing. Raising a X-Card at leas at my table because random animal noc was stabbed by a sword would be ignored by myself at least. So the example of being bothered by the hooting Owl may not be so far fetched after all.

Quote from: Franky;1060749Unless the players tap the XXX card, eh?

I've been waiting for someone to drop that! Well, played! :D

Quote from: Motorskills;1060750Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO  (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/fiasco/)at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/carolina-death-crawl/) that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman. Tell me that shit’s not scary! Eyes all big and ready to swoop in and violate you.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060750Now that I think about it, I did play a game of FIASCO  (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/fiasco/)at BurningCon a few years ago that went completely overboard, totally fucked up stuff.
I actually think I would have used the X-card if it had been an option there.

To be clear this was the same convention where I played an amazing game of Carolina Death Crawl (http://bullypulpitgames.com/games/carolina-death-crawl/) that touched upon possibly the darkest things I have ever come across.

Everyone's twitch points are different of course, but there's a definite difference between dark and downright odious. Fiasco can be super-light, CDC never is. It doesn't mean that they each can't be amazing games.

The thing is FIASCO is designed to be highly freeform. There was no predicting the direction the game would take, by design. Additionally the macho stuff being sold in this thread just wouldn't have applied, not least because these are GM-less games.

I don't think my table could have recreated the same game if we tried. It actually started out light, funny, and fluffy - it was just reverse serendipity that it nosedived so hard.
Or perhaps to put it in terms that might resonate more with you (Shark), it was like a Buffy high-school reunion RPG that devolved into an exploration of one's actions at Haditha and Mahmudiya. I wasn't at either of those places, and I'm guessing you weren't either, semper fidelis or no. Some people might find that kind of emotional rollercoaster the very epitome of entertainment, I can genuinely see how it might be. Everyone's brains, everyone's backgrounds, are different.

But I suspect - I hope - as a proud Marine that you wouldn't enjoy that change in direction. Maybe you would welcome a tool that could allow the game to gently change direction.

I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060818I'm all for what you're saying until the passive-aggressive "macho" comment. Those are the little bits that tune me out. Otherwise, I agree that "rapey owl clowns"* are weird and need to exist only in Hell.

*I realize you never mentioned "rapey owl clowns", I'm just using them as the collective Boogeyman. Tell me that shit's not scary! Eyes all big and ready to swoop in and violate you.

Eh, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with "macho", happy to find another word if you can think of one.

What I was trying to get at is that many posters in this thread seem to think that distaste about the direction a game is taking is immediate and binary, and the options are either to walk away or suck it up.

I've certainly seen both of those, I've certainly done the latter myself (as described above). But absolutely those are not the only two options. Some posters in this thread seem to be arguing that any attempt to provide communication tools is some kind of left-wing conspiracy to shut down creativity.

I'm still bouncing off that hard. To my mind, having an extra tool to communicate to the DM or a fellow player(s) that something isn't having the intended effect just seems like a good thing to me.

As I DM, I want my players to know that they can communicate with me, and maybe that could include a subtle eye contact that draws my attention to the X-card. I adjust my language, tweak the scene, tell another player to back off a bit, whatever.

I do that all the time anyway, every good GM should be prepared to do that. Otherwise what's the point?

"Fuck you, I'm running this game for my enjoyment. If you enjoy yourself that's just a lucky side effect."

Well, the main problem with that is the idea that "more communication" is always a good thing.  Or at least the way most people mean it.  Technically, "communication" is not only a message, but a useful message that is sent and received.  So in the technical sense, more communication is a good thing.  However, what most people mean by communication is something more akin to "I got to express myself."  That can be good, but there is a limit.  One of the things missing, socially, from many people today is the ability to know when to shut up.  Not as in, "don't talk about this topic, ever, in polite society" (the opposite extreme) but rather, "OK, you've said your piece, but now you are just repeating yourself endlessly.  Give it a rest."

That's not "you" personally, but general, and there is no direct correlation to that example of shutting up and X-cards.  It's merely to illustrate the idea that "communication" isn't some automatic positive thing.  That doesn't mean that an X-card is necessarily bad from that line or argument, either--only that you can't say one way or the other from some general idea of valuing communication.

Onto a different slant on the X-card itself:  I think you are misreading the binary stuff.  Almost everyone has said things like, "talk about this stuff like adults," meaning that walk away or suck it up isn't the only option.  I'm walking away (generally) because of the odds.  But I'm an outlier, in that I don't particularly have the taste for many of the things that would even prompt an X-card in the first place.  Moreover, having had personal experience with people that have suffered real trauma, I think that in any case where an X-card is necessary, it is also grossly insufficient.  One of the reasons why I'd walk away from any game with an X-card, is that if someone picked it up, the game would immediately cease being fun for me. I'd go into "help this person retreat" mode until I could evaluate whether they were really in such bad shape that picking up the card was the only outlet.  That's probably not fair to them or the group, either, since the chances are remote that the card was picked up due to trauma, but rather just being pushed a little too far.  I can't help my response, because of past experiences with the real thing.  So I absent myself from the situation.  

As a GM, I certainly talk about such things with the players.  But I'm not plunking an X-card down, because again it is insufficient.  If a player said they needed an X-card, I'm asking them what is the subject that they are worried about.  If it's trivial, then I'm not running a game for them.  If it's serious, then the X is not going to be in the game that I run for them, period--not even if they ask for it.  A game isn't a therapy session. I'm not a qualified therapist, and even if I were, I wouldn't run such a game.

I would be more accepting of X-Card if they were modified to be less disruptive at the gaming table. In their current form they would play havoc at many tables imo.

As NDervish posted:

Quote from: nDervish;1060794This is my primary objection to X-cards.  Not that they're a way to unilaterally put the brakes on something that's headed into A Bad Place, but that, after you put the brakes on, I'm not allowed to ask what I would have to change to make things better for you, so that we can then determine whether we can work out a compromise that we're both happy with or if it would instead be best for us to not game together in the future.

They are too unilateral and the DM is not allowed to ask what is bothering the player. If they would only be allowed for truly despicable elements at the table like Rape, torture, and creepy behavior on the part of the DM and/or another player at the table. Not because player XYZ has a hard time detaching themselves from reality and thinks that killing imaginary animals is the same thing as real animals. Or that a person is told at session zero that the campaign will deal with freeing NPCs from slavers and  says nothing then begins to hold up a X-Card everytime slavery comes up in game.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060830As a GM, I certainly talk about such things with the players.  But I'm not plunking an X-card down, because again it is insufficient.  If a player said they needed an X-card, I'm asking them what is the subject that they are worried about.  If it's trivial, then I'm not running a game for them.  If it's serious, then the X is not going to be in the game that I run for them, period--not even if they ask for it.  A game isn't a therapy session. I'm not a qualified therapist, and even if I were, I wouldn't run such a game.

Apparently the new Woke manifesto is that WE have to run a game for trivial matters at the table. WE will like it and if we do not we are terrible bad people. How dare we not be amateur therapists at the game table. How dare you expect the victim to take care of their own mental health issues.. ( Points accusatory wagging finger ) Your shaming the person!!.

I feel the same way. IF I can work with a person and they have issues with certain elements of the campaign if they are not trivial I will work with them. If not they can find another table. If I'm running a campaign that has elements of Salvery, told the player at session Zero and the majority of the group is good with it in the campaign. The player who is bothered either adapts to the campaign or looks elsewhere imo. Except for one douchebag who wanted to incorporate rape fantasies into his game. OR a few male gamers who were genuinely misogynistic maybe a handful over the years I have played. This so called rash of tables that are populated with rapist, misogynistic trolls is just that a myth perpetuated by the Regressive gamers.

Here's an example of better communication than the X-card.  We have an egg-timer sitting in the middle of the table.  Anyone can flip the timer.  This means that they believe that the game has ceased to be fun--usually because it has bogged down in too much OOC chatter, but could be anything really (too much "shopping", too much planning with insufficient information, etc.)  

The expected outcome is that within 3 minutes, the person(s) speaking will resolve the scene and move on.  Or, they will use the 3 minutes to explain, as players, what they are trying to accomplish.  Then either the rest of the group can now join in to accomplish that, or we wind up the scene.  

We use the timer because it doesn't bring everything to a halt immediately, and it is fairly unobtrusive.  I suppose in the correct circumstances, someone could use it similar to an X-card, if they were mildly freaked out by something that wasn't an immediate "stop" but they just wanted to end soon.  However, the people I play with are more overt about that kind of thing, and would just say it.

Quote from: sureshot;1060833If they would only be allowed for truly despicable elements at the table like Rape, torture, and creepy behavior on the part of the DM and/or another player at the table.

Who gets to decide what elements are "truly despicable"? I mean, people watch movies with rape and torture in them all the time -- some film franchises are literally based on torture as the central element, and the audience for them is plentiful. It sounds like you feel that torture is "despicable", but clearly others take it with a "meh".

Meanwhile, we have SJWs who think everything is "truly despicable".

The point being, defining which topics are appropriate for despising is itself an impossible, if not odious enterprise.

As for "creepy behavior" by actual players in real life at the table being addressed by holding up an "I'm offended" signal ... I don't even know where to begin addressing that one. Maybe women should carry X-cards around everywhere to avoid being raped or something, I dunno, but at the point we start discussing creepy behavior among real people then the arena being discussed  is Real Life, not game content.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060826Eh, I wasn't trying to pick a fight with "macho", happy to find another word if you can think of one.

What I was trying to get at is that many posters in this thread seem to think that distaste about the direction a game is taking is immediate and binary, and the options are either to walk away or suck it up.

I've certainly seen both of those, I've certainly done the latter myself (as described above). But absolutely those are not the only two options. Some posters in this thread seem to be arguing that any attempt to provide communication tools is some kind of left-wing conspiracy to shut down creativity.

I'm still bouncing off that hard. To my mind, having an extra tool to communicate to the DM or a fellow player(s) that something isn't having the intended effect just seems like a good thing to me.

As I DM, I want my players to know that they can communicate with me, and maybe that could include a subtle eye contact that draws my attention to the X-card. I adjust my language, tweak the scene, tell another player to back off a bit, whatever.

I do that all the time anyway, every good GM should be prepared to do that. Otherwise what's the point?

"Fuck you, I'm running this game for my enjoyment. If you enjoy yourself that's just a lucky side effect."

I know you're not picking a fight and I'm probably just being Mr. Poopy Diaper about it. I think you have nuggets of truth in your some of your posts and I think it's crappy for it to be potentially lost on "wrong-rubbing" words. If I look at things more objectively I must admit I find myself realizing that my pushback is often the same vitriol, only from a different angle, which is pretty pointless. Don't ever feel I want you to police your words, I think I was just hyper-critical(/sensitive?) due to some of our past interactions and different views. I do enjoy that I'm seeing some common ground when it comes to certain things.

As far as the general pushback against things like X-cards, I’m hoping you can see it’s largely a reaction to the hardcore control-crazies that says, “No more! Your taken inch is now a bloody mile!”. Do X-cards hurt me? No, as I don’t use them. Do they work? I dunno, but probably, at least for some. Are they a Left-wing tool of hatred? I seriously doubt it. Have there been rampant Left-created group attacks within our nerd hobby that are meant to control others in speech and actions? Absolutely. It’s this final bit I believe is attached to X-cards and why they’re immediately disliked.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060830Well, the main problem with that is the idea that "more communication" is always a good thing.  Or at least the way most people mean it.  Technically, "communication" is not only a message, but a useful message that is sent and received.  So in the technical sense, more communication is a good thing.  However, what most people mean by communication is something more akin to "I got to express myself."  That can be good, but there is a limit.  One of the things missing, socially, from many people today is the ability to know when to shut up.  Not as in, "don't talk about this topic, ever, in polite society" (the opposite extreme) but rather, "OK, you've said your piece, but now you are just repeating yourself endlessly.  Give it a rest."

That's not "you" personally, but general, and there is no direct correlation to that example of shutting up and X-cards.  It's merely to illustrate the idea that "communication" isn't some automatic positive thing.  That doesn't mean that an X-card is necessarily bad from that line or argument, either--only that you can't say one way or the other from some general idea of valuing communication.

Onto a different slant on the X-card itself:  I think you are misreading the binary stuff.  Almost everyone has said things like, "talk about this stuff like adults," meaning that walk away or suck it up isn't the only option.  I'm walking away (generally) because of the odds.  But I'm an outlier, in that I don't particularly have the taste for many of the things that would even prompt an X-card in the first place.  Moreover, having had personal experience with people that have suffered real trauma, I think that in any case where an X-card is necessary, it is also grossly insufficient.  One of the reasons why I'd walk away from any game with an X-card, is that if someone picked it up, the game would immediately cease being fun for me. I'd go into "help this person retreat" mode until I could evaluate whether they were really in such bad shape that picking up the card was the only outlet.  That's probably not fair to them or the group, either, since the chances are remote that the card was picked up due to trauma, but rather just being pushed a little too far.  I can't help my response, because of past experiences with the real thing.  So I absent myself from the situation.  

As a GM, I certainly talk about such things with the players.  But I'm not plunking an X-card down, because again it is insufficient.  If a player said they needed an X-card, I'm asking them what is the subject that they are worried about.  If it's trivial, then I'm not running a game for them.  If it's serious, then the X is not going to be in the game that I run for them, period--not even if they ask for it.  A game isn't a therapy session. I'm not a qualified therapist, and even if I were, I wouldn't run such a game.

So much "Yes! That!" in there.

Your egg timer idea from the other post is really good.

Common sense and my sense of morals tells me that graphic descriptions of rape, torture and murder are despicable subjects. They have no place at the game table. I may says I stab a Goblin. Neither would I go deep into detail as to how I'm doing it.

Quote from: sureshot;1060815I was once told on another forum by a fellow player that one of his players cried because a random dog was killed in a module. All because his player liked dogs and she hated seeing even a imaginary one killed off by a imaginary npc. Only to be told not only was she allowed to do that non-stop at the table. we HAD to accept that players behavior no matter how disruptive. Anyone telling her to stop because it was disruptive he would consider a terrible person and a misogynist. All dure respect one is playing a rpg where one kills others other creatures for XP. Busting into tears every time a helpless imaginary animal is killed off in a game of D&D at my tables would get you the three strikes rule then ejected from our table. If the DM was going into graphic detail of the butchering of the dog then by all means raise the X-card because that kind of stuff is disturbing. Raising a X-Card at leas at my table because random animal noc was stabbed by a sword would be ignored by myself at least. So the example of being bothered by the hooting Owl may not be so far fetched after all.

If someone really can't deal with dogs being killed, okay... I can't remember the last time I had a dog die in a game I've run or played in.  Taking dog death out doesn't seem to be an issue, unless they try to game it by then using dogs for critical tasks (in which case they can basically fuck off).

I don't like dogs dying.  It bugs me.  It bugged me when I played Tomb Raider, and it bugged me when I watched John Wick.  I didn't break down in tears or anything, to be clear, and I wouldn't X-Card it in a game.  But if someone really hated it that much, it seems an easy thing to accommodate.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060842As far as the general pushback against things like X-cards, I'm hoping you can see it's largely a reaction to the hardcore control-crazies that says, "No more! Your taken inch is now a bloody mile!". Do X-cards hurt me? No, as I don't use them. Do they work? I dunno, but probably, at least for some. Are they a Left-wing tool of hatred? I seriously doubt it. Have there been rampant Left-created group attacks within our nerd hobby that are meant to control others in speech and actions? Absolutely. It's this final bit I believe is attached to X-cards and why they're immediately disliked.

Yeah, it clearly seems to be a tribal thing.

Me, I'd have some level of suspicion, but would allow it.  And then if it was used as a way to dictate how the game ran I'd politely discuss things with the player, and then figure out if they're a good fit for the game or not.  Not every game is for every person.

I can zoom in and out of the graphic descriptions of combat, so that's why I blanket games with a rating. If you say NC-17 is your jam and I then describe the pink mist and bloody grey matter painting the wall after you shoot a guy in the head, but you get upset and angry, don't get angry. I am always willing to dial things up or down, but GMing on egg shells isn't fun.

Quote from: robiswrong;1060845I don't like dogs dying.  It bugs me.  It bugged me when I played Tomb Raider, and it bugged me when I watched John Wick.  I didn't break down in tears or anything, to be clear, and I wouldn't X-Card it in a game.  But if someone really hated it that much, it seems an easy thing to accommodate.

I don't like it either. When the person behavior is reasonable on that issue I will try to accommodate that player. Bursting into tears every time a imaginary animal is killed or the person no longer can function at the table is when I ask them to leave. Call me a jerk if you must I see the need for a reasonable amount of accommodation. I'm not going to bend over backwards or we would never game let alone finish one.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060846I can zoom in and out of the graphic descriptions of combat, so that's why I blanket games with a rating. If you say NC-17 is your jam and I then describe the pink mist and bloody grey matter painting the wall after you shoot a guy in the head, but you get upset and angry, don't get angry. I am always willing to dial things up or down, but GMing on egg shells isn't fun.

Doing things the normal way which is to talk to players to gauge what they like/want at the game table is the way to go imo. To use your example if the player says he is good with the above then decides he is not I will tone it down. Yet don't agree to play in a campaign they will not enjoy either. Yes GMing on egg shells is not fun.

I don't think removing dog death was the problem it was the assertion that her feelings trumped the table's fun. Provided the table's fun isn't something awful, she might not need to play in that game. But that's the real issue, isn't it? What's defined as awful is subjective and nowadays, far too wide. Which leads to issues of what's acceptable socially and so on. It becomes this mental and emotional mine field that can be so stressful you might as well not play.

Quote from: sureshot;1060847Call me a jerk if you must...

Jerk.

:D

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060848I don't think removing dog death was the problem it was the assertion that her feelings trumped the table's fun. Provided the table's fun isn't something awful, she might not need to play in that game. But that's the real issue, isn't it? What's defined as awful is subjective and nowadays, far too wide. Which leads to issues of what's acceptable socially and so on. It becomes this mental and emotional mine field that can be so stressful you might as well not play.

Well said and seconded.

With it being no longer the responsibility of the player to tell the person running the game what they are  and are not comfortable with. I'm also not a fan of everything and anything no matter how trivial being a issue. We are playing a game where characters and nocs die expecting only a slect few creatures to die is playing in the wrong game imo.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060849Jerk.

:D

That's it you asked for it. ;)

https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/DifficultHorribleDogfish

Quote from: sureshot;1060851That's it you asked for it. ;)

https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/DifficultHorribleDogfish

https://www.google.com/search?q=x+card&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj5jNWtupDeAhVCh1QKHYaoAiQQ_AUIEigC&biw=1024&bih=643#imgrc=w2s45hy8OLfehM

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1060836Here's an example of better communication than the X-card.  We have an egg-timer sitting in the middle of the table.  Anyone can flip the timer.  This means that they believe that the game has ceased to be fun--usually because it has bogged down in too much OOC chatter, but could be anything really (too much "shopping", too much planning with insufficient information, etc.)  

The expected outcome is that within 3 minutes, the person(s) speaking will resolve the scene and move on.  Or, they will use the 3 minutes to explain, as players, what they are trying to accomplish.  Then either the rest of the group can now join in to accomplish that, or we wind up the scene.  

We use the timer because it doesn't bring everything to a halt immediately, and it is fairly unobtrusive.  I suppose in the correct circumstances, someone could use it similar to an X-card, if they were mildly freaked out by something that wasn't an immediate "stop" but they just wanted to end soon.  However, the people I play with are more overt about that kind of thing, and would just say it.

Firstly I really like the egg-timer thing, I think I might adopt some version of that.

Secondly having a communication tool doesn't mean there will be communication. After all, you should prefer that your egg timer never gets used, right?

If the egg timer keeps getting flipped, your game table is failing. Not necessarily terminally so, but the egg timer doesn't directly fix the root cause, it isn't intended to.
(That said, I'm happy to accept that it might - if the same guy keeps getting the egg timer flipped on him, hopefully he will start to learn to sharpen his play.)

I'd also dispute that the X-card doesn't mean that you can't talk like adults. In fact I would argue the reverse. "I am starting to have an issue, I'd like you to listen to me". I think it immediately focuses the conversation, gives a start point for an adult conversation, distinguishes it from a regular whine. Now the GM can decide that the player should suck it up or leave, the player may make that decision for himself.

I've thinking back at all the tables where there have been bad experiences (not necessarily my own) - the egg timer would have certainly some of mitigated those, some version of an X-card might well have mitigated others. In many cases, no system would have mitigated the issue which was fundamentally interpersonal.

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.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060747Referees or games where rapes take place and/or are described in detail are games that I would get up and just leave. Doing that adds nothing to the game, at all.

Quote from: jeff37923;1060748Ditto.

If 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.

So... different players have different lines about rape. There might even be some in-between cases where it's not enough to walk out, but it's enough to make someone uncomfortable and say "Hey, can we not do this?"  And that can absolutely be done without an X-card.

Still, I think a lot of the pushback has been about imaginary cases where a player is constantly touching the X-card over owls or strong language or whatever. However, from what I've seen, that isn't how these games actually work in practice. I played in horror games with the X-card that had disturbing content and no one touched it, so I think it was there for more serious cases like this.

Have any of you, in your games, not theoretically, but in actual play, ever had rape play a part in the game?


It's never once happened in my decades of gaming.

Quote from: jhkim;1060859Still, I think a lot of the pushback has been about imaginary cases where a player is constantly touching the X-card over owls or strong language or whatever.

To be clear, that isn't the case for me.

An X-card appearing in a game is an indication to me that the person advocating it does not want to resolve what may be troubling them, the just want to stop it without ever telling me what "it" is. The X-card indicates that the person advocating it believes that a role-playing game may cause them psychological distress and that they do not trust the person running the game to be competent enough to understand where common boundaries of good taste exist (which begs the question of "Why are they playing in the first place?"). In short, an X-card is an indicator that fun will likely be spoiled at that table. Regardless, the use of X-cards is a sign that the advocates of them are people that I do not wish to game with.

Quote from: jeff37923;1060868To be clear, that isn't the case for me.

An X-card appearing in a game is an indication to me that the person advocating it does not want to resolve what may be troubling them, the just want to stop it without ever telling me what "it" is. The X-card indicates that the person advocating it believes that a role-playing game may cause them psychological distress and that they do not trust the person running the game to be competent enough to understand where common boundaries of good taste exist (which begs the question of "Why are they playing in the first place?"). In short, an X-card is an indicator that fun will likely be spoiled at that table. Regardless, the use of X-cards is a sign that the advocates of them are people that I do not wish to game with.

Wow, yes. Absolutely this.

It'd take a strong, at-the-table argument to convince me otherwise: paradoxically, they would be persuasively arguing for their inability to communicate.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060854https://www.google.com/search?q=x+card&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj5jNWtupDeAhVCh1QKHYaoAiQQ_AUIEigC&biw=1024&bih=643#imgrc=w2s45hy8OLfehM

I see your either a fan of the X-men, Malcoln X or porn. Either way your a good egg in my book.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060867Have any of you, in your games, not theoretically, but in actual play, ever had rape play a part in the game?

It's never once happened in my decades of gaming.

It's only come up a handful of times, but yeah, it's come up. I can recall a case in Ars Magica when I was a player, and in a dark old west game. And in a superhero game (using mind control). And it's come up in a few larps - though as an important event that happened off-screen rather than an in-game action.

Particularly these days, my preference is like yours. I prefer it not happening in my games at all. In historical games that I run, I've generally said that it's understood that rape happens - like as part of the pillaging in my viking game - but we're not going to mention it at all. In fantasy or sci-fi games, I just don't mention it at all.

Quote from: jeff37923;1060868The X-card indicates that the person advocating it believes that a role-playing game may cause them psychological distress and that they do not trust the person running the game to be competent enough to understand where common boundaries of good taste exist (which begs the question of "Why are they playing in the first place?"). In short, an X-card is an indicator that fun will likely be spoiled at that table. Regardless, the use of X-cards is a sign that the advocates of them are people that I do not wish to game with.

I think people have different ideas about what is good taste. Notably, it seems like Lurtch thinks that rape should never come up at all - whereas you think that it's OK if it comes up but it is faded to black rather than described.

When you say "fun will likely be spoiled"...  Would it matter if it was said that in the last dozen games, the X-card was never used? My impression from the games I played in that used the X-card is that it is considered like having a fire extinguisher - very unlikely to be used, but there just in case.

Quote from: Motorskills;1060855Firstly I really like the egg-timer thing, I think I might adopt some version of that.

Secondly having a communication tool doesn't mean there will be communication. After all, you should prefer that your egg timer never gets used, right?

If the egg timer keeps getting flipped, your game table is failing. Not necessarily terminally so, but the egg timer doesn't directly fix the root cause, it isn't intended to.
(That said, I'm happy to accept that it might - if the same guy keeps getting the egg timer flipped on him, hopefully he will start to learn to sharpen his play.)

I'd also dispute that the X-card doesn't mean that you can't talk like adults. In fact I would argue the reverse. "I am starting to have an issue, I'd like you to listen to me". I think it immediately focuses the conversation, gives a start point for an adult conversation, distinguishes it from a regular whine. Now the GM can decide that the player should suck it up or leave, the player may make that decision for himself.

I've thinking back at all the tables where there have been bad experiences (not necessarily my own) - the egg timer would have certainly some of mitigated those, some version of an X-card might well have mitigated others. In many cases, no system would have mitigated the issue which was fundamentally interpersonal.

There is merit to your points here.  I thought about the egg timer as something analogous to the X-card that we use.  On the surface, it might sound as if I'm being terribly inconsistent with my positions here.  And maybe I am, somewhat.  I went ahead and used it anyway, because I'm not trying to win an argument but to explain where I'm coming from.

In practice, we don't flip the egg timer much.  That's the other thing that prompted the comparison, since you and others had said it didn't get used much in your games.  Here are the difference, in my opinion, in the timer and the X-card:

1. It's not linked to a specific behavior or possible problem.  I suppose that could make it a bigger potential issue with a jerk player, not less, as there is more room to abuse it on those grounds.  That doesn't particularly bother me, because tossing the jerks sooner rather than later is the end result.  Maybe in a game with strangers, that's a relative negative for the timer, positive for the card.  I don't know.

2. In practice, though it doesn't get used much overall, it gets used in spurts.  That is, we only started using it because there were particular issues that kept occurring, but trying to stop the game to fix them was difficult, because it would interrupt the flow of the scenes.  We wanted a way to signal, more or less, "I don't have a problem with what you are doing, but it has run on too long, and I'm ready to do something else."   It's not a veto, hard, soft, or otherwise, or in anyway trying to draw firm line.  Once it gets flipped a couple of times over a particular issue, we don't tend to need it again, because there is something psychological about the 3 minutes of sand running through the timer that flips a switch in peoples' heads.  After that, one person merely glancing at the timer can be enough to get the whole table to unconsciously get on with the scene.  

3. The flip side of the veto issue, the timer has two different ways to acknowledge.  Finish the scene or explain why you need more time to the rest of the group.  Because of the options, the timer itself exerts no control over the scene at all.  Compared to the X-card, I'd still have objections on the "gaming isn't therapy" grounds to using one, but it would be immensely improved as a communication tool with even one more state.  Something like, "touch the X-card to indicate that you are uncomfortable with what is happening but not ready to bail yet and/or would like it to end soon or at least back off a little," versus "pick up the X-card to say that this suddenly went way over the line, and you need it to stop right now."  Only the latter is a hard veto and off limits to discussion.

Also, with the timer this might be particular in our group, and not inherent in the timer itself:  We have never once used the timer for an issue we had not already discussed as a group as a particular thing we collectively wanted to handle.  To mix it with Jeff's point about boundaries of taste, the equivalent in an X-card would be if the group had already set expectations on where those boundaries where, and picking up the X-card was merely a signal that someone thought the boundaries had been crossed.  There is, of course, a great deal of difference between "can't talk about why I picked up the card," versus, "everyone knows exactly why I picked up the card because we talked about it already."

Quote from: sureshot;1060874I see your either a fan of the X-men, Malcoln X or porn. Either way your a good egg in my book.

It's just an X-card. Cuz you hurt muh feels. Like, way bad. I just stopped crying enough to respond.

Back to our regularly scheduled ballyhoo...

I'm not usually one for "Fucked-up Storytime in RPG Land", but in this case I'll make an exception. So, many years ago...about 2004/5...I'm playing D&D with a group of 4 guys (myself included) and 1 girl. All adults over 20. Now, the girl's character is a half-demon succubus whose demon father had raped her mortal mother, creating her. OK, dark but nothing too out-there. A very "Blade-esque" vibe. Then the explanation of how demon-daddy and his court gang-raped her. Couple this with her mannerisms (flirty demeanor, accentuating cleavage, etc.) and it's overall getting uncomfortable. She just gave if this "Uh, oh..." vibe. I smoked at the time, am doing so and she walks out to smoke, too. At some point in the light conversation she explains she was raped and how this is a way to deal with it. There were hints at an almost fetish for it, in her real-world sexuality.

If X-cards had been a thing I would've been flinging them like a pant-less Gambit being chased by the Viagra-addled spawn of Liberace and Juggernaut. Instead what I did was mention that there are probably better ways to deal with things.

That was my last game with her in the group. So yeah, shit gets weird and from weird places.

Quote from: jhkim;1060876I think people have different ideas about what is good taste. Notably, it seems like Lurtch thinks that rape should never come up at all - whereas you think that it's OK if it comes up but it is faded to black rather than described.

This 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.

Quote from: jhkim;1060876When you say "fun will likely be spoiled"...  Would it matter if it was said that in the last dozen games, the X-card was never used? My impression from the games I played in that used the X-card is that it is considered like having a fire extinguisher - very unlikely to be used, but there just in case.

You only need a fire extinguisher to put out a fire. If you do not have oxygen, heat, or fuel then there will be no fire. If you are in a game that happens within the common bounds of good taste, then you will have no need for an emotional support tool like an X-card.

If people do not require an X-card to play Risk, Diplomacy, Monopoly, or Chess then why do they need them for table top role-playing games?

Just because gaming can be therapeutic doesn't mean it should be therapy.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060848I don't think removing dog death was the problem it was the assertion that her feelings trumped the table's fun. Provided the table's fun isn't something awful, she might not need to play in that game. But that's the real issue, isn't it? What's defined as awful is subjective and nowadays, far too wide. Which leads to issues of what's acceptable socially and so on. It becomes this mental and emotional mine field that can be so stressful you might as well not play.

Her feelings don't trump the table's fun.

Her feelings make playing in a game including dog death not tenable.  X-Card or not doesn't change that.  The table that can either accommodate that, or not.  If they don't want to accommodate it, then she shouldn't play at that table.  If they want her to keep playing, they have to accommodate it.  It's like any other thing in a game - if you have a person that does/doesn't want something in a game, and others with the opposite view, you either compromise or don't game together.

Beyond that, it's just a matter of being judgemental about her reaction.  And I usually try not to do that, because I have no idea what that person has been through.  Maybe they put down their dog that day.  Maybe they watched someone kill their dog as a kid.  I don't know.  But their reaction is their reaction, and isn't going to change.

Now, if a person is constantly breaking down at every little thing?  Yeah, then "okay, go deal with your issues, this is not making the game fun for anyone" is the response.  But for that singular issue?  I've never had a game where dogs dying was integral to the table's fun.

Quote from: sureshot;1060815This is pretty much why I really do not like the concept of a X-Card. No real indication of what is wrong. While wasting time at the game table trying to figure what is wrong. With the added bonus of not being allowed to ask what is wrong. Some here are wondering why we don't like them. I wonder why.

Holy crap, I didn't realize they were that extreme. That's like institutionalizing bad communication right there.

Still, that being said, I wouldn't refuse to play at a con game where such a thing is present. That's my time to try new games and play styles with new people, and it's going to take a whole heck of a lot more than that for me to give up on a session. It's not something I'd tolerate in a regular game, though. If you're so childish that you can't even ask to speak to the GM privately about your concerns(no need to bring things up in front of everyone), or you're so "triggered" that the mere mention of something can make you shut down, then you're not ready for this level of social interaction.

Plus there's a big difference between treating sensitive topics with respect(not joking about them, not going into too much detail, fading to black, etc.) and avoiding such things altogether. The former, awesome. The latter, grow up. (Plus total avoidance of sensitive topics is actually against APA advice for people with actual PTSD, which the SJWs always seem to forget to mention when calling for this sort of thing. Being sensitive doesn't require everyone to walk on eggshells.)

Quote from: Motorskills;1060855I'd also dispute that the X-card doesn't mean that you can't talk like adults. In fact I would argue the reverse. "I am starting to have an issue, I'd like you to listen to me". I think it immediately focuses the conversation, gives a start point for an adult conversation, distinguishes it from a regular whine. Now the GM can decide that the player should suck it up or leave, the player may make that decision for himself.

Have you actually read the canonical X-card document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SB0jsx34bWHZWbnNIVVuMjhDkrdFGo1_hSC2BWPlI3A/edit#) by John Stavropoulos, the creator of the X-card?  The initial summary, on page 2 (the first non-cover page), states:

QuoteTo use, at the start of your game, simply say:

"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!"

And page 11:

QuoteWhat's second most important about the X-Card?

When you X-Card something, no explanation is needed.

And page 15:

QuoteWhat if you don't know what was X-Carded?

Call 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.

Now, yes, I did misremember slightly, in that discussing the reason why the X-card was invoked isn't actually prohibited, but the person is explicitly at liberty to tap it and say "stop the game, I have a problem, but I'm not going to tell you what the problem is".

And perhaps my owl-phobe wasn't so far out there after all.  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.

Quote from: Lurtch;1060867Have any of you, in your games, not theoretically, but in actual play, ever had rape play a part in the game?

Yes, twice, when I was in college, 1990-91 timeframe.

The first was more implied than in play.  Some of the players in a Shadowrun game thought it would by funny if one of the female PCs got pregnant, so they summoned an air elemental and bound it to the task of making that happen.  They didn't specify how, so the character ended up with a side job as a mind-controlled cyber-prostitute.

The second was playing WFRP and a female PC (played by a female player) went down to the city docks in the middle of the night and kept pushing her luck with the sailors until the scene faded to black.  The player seemed happy enough with this outcome that I believe it was intentional, although, with how she played her characters in later games, it's likely that she may have been looking for sex in general, not rape specifically.

Quote from: nDervish;1060947Have you actually read the canonical X-card document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SB0jsx34bWHZWbnNIVVuMjhDkrdFGo1_hSC2BWPlI3A/edit#) 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.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061156I'm tweaking jhkim's nose.

Oh, I figured it was sarcasm. I was attempting the same. Gives new meaning to the term "bottomfeeder", eh?

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061163Oh, I figured it was sarcasm. I was attempting the same. Gives new meaning to the term "bottomfeeder", eh?

OK, that made me laugh. :)

Quote from: Zalman;1061161My 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.

I'd suggest the reverse actually. TheRPGsite has an unhealthy (IMO) affinity for discussions about rape, but it's clearly not the only thing that could cause a player to start to not enjoy a game. But even if it was, the point is to alert the GM (or another player) as early as possible that the direction the game is taking is undesirable. That's a good thing, it gives the GM or player time to redirect / adjust / veil.

As for rats, the only game I think they are possibly integral to is WFRP. You think someone should be excluded from our hobby, D&D in particular, because of some trauma they suffered, likely as a child? Fuck that noise.

If a player had that averse a reaction to a game I was running, I'd want to find some way to accommodate the player. Of course I would. Because I'm not a heartless dick, and because I have fun when my players are having fun.

Do I think there should be some onus on the player to brief the GM in advance of things to avoid? Honestly, no. Too many ways that could go wrong.

And while I don't think I would promote the use of the X-card (or the egg-timer for that matter) in the way that the creator suggested, by making its use so prevalent that it was simply seen as part of the routine game mechanics, I do understand the argument. If there was a middle way, I'd be very interested in exploring that option.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061164OK, that made me laugh. :)

I gladly take that compliment, sir!

Motorskills, rape probably comes up so often as it’s a go-to social bludgeon that’s very much been used for nefarious purposes, especially recently. Rape is one of the worst things a person can endure and still be alive and that the very definition has been subverted for political gains, is abhorrent. Taking it from all angles a perfect issue for illustrating the complexities of things like the X-card and how messy things can get.

There’s a scene in The Office that wouldn’t fly nowadays where Kelly says “I was raped!” as an excuse for why she did something wrong. Michael mentions how she can’t keep using it as an excuse (I forget the exact quote), leading us to believe she’s done it before, if not several times. It’s funny in the show but when seen through the lense of current Leftist demagoguery, it’s a scary and unfunny thing that’s ruining lives.

This entire issue of X-cards should be summed up with, “We play games to have fun. Fun is subjective. Don’t be a dick”.

Another example of stupidity, this being in 2003: A fellow gamer’s girlfriend stops by to bring her boyfriend lunch. Cool. While on break another player describes a battle scene as “tight”, as in, “That fight was tight, man!”. She...very bitchily...scolds him for saying “tight” because, according to her, the word comes from 60s sexploitation films where “tight” means “rape”. My response was, “So, was it rape-tight?”. She loses it, I pretty much tell her to chill the fuck out and she leaves in a huff.

Today, I would be branded as a rape-apologist (or actual rapist) for making such a sarcastic response to an absolutely ignorant, rude statement. At worst, I was a jerk. The level of social inoculation needs to rise and soon or else the NPCs will glitch into the proverbial wall and ruin the game even more.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166As for rats, the only game I think they are possibly integral to is WFRP. You think someone should be excluded from our hobby, D&D in particular, because of some trauma they suffered, likely as a child?

Have to admit, I laughed out loud at this one.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166I'd suggest the reverse actually. TheRPGsite has an unhealthy (IMO) affinity for discussions about rape,

You keep clutching those pearls like that you'll break your necklace.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166But even if it was, the point is to alert the GM (or another player) as early as possible that the direction the game is taking is undesirable.

Easy enough to do and something that has been done for years in the hobby. Be responsible and talk it over with the DM and/or group. You make it seem like the X_card is the only viable option.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166As for rats, the only game I think they are possibly integral to is WFRP. You think someone should be excluded from our hobby, D&D in particular, because of some trauma they suffered, likely as a child? Fuck that noise.

I do not think he should be excluded from the hobby. He would not be welcome at my table. What do players think are the usual resident of abandoned dungeons and other such places unicorns and care bears.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166If a player had that averse a reaction to a game I was running, I'd want to find some way to accommodate the player. Of course I would. Because I'm not a heartless dick, and because I have fun when my players are having fun.

That's why it's hard to have a discussion with you. Everyone who does things differently are made out to be jerks. I believe in a reasonable amount of accommodation. I'm not bending over backwards and neither will most groups to do so. If a compromise and accommodation can be made I will do it. If not the player is free to find another table.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166Do I think there should be some onus on the player to brief the GM in advance of things to avoid? Honestly, no. Too many ways that could go wrong.

It kind of is on the player to tell the DM and the group. It worked well in most cases at least at my gaming table for years. No graphic descriptions of torture. Done. No descriptions of rape. Done. The X-card if anything makes the situation worse. The player has a problem. Is not obliged in anyway to even remotely tell the DM and group why it is a problem. WE are not mind-readers. Nor is a rpg table a session of Where Waldo with everyone else guessing what is wrong. Yet somehow talking like mature adults is more problematic

Quote from: Motorskills;1061166If there was a middle way, I'd be very interested in exploring that option.

Their is talking with the group and/or the DM. Again it worked many years before the existence of a X-Card for most if not all topics. It still does. Everything else to me at least seems a excuse to assume responsibility from doing so.

Quote from: Zalman;1061168Have to admit, I laughed out loud at this one.

Quote from: sureshot;1061193I do not think he should be excluded from the hobby. He would not be welcome at my table. What do players think are the usual resident of abandoned dungeons and other such places unicorns and care bears.

In case I wasn't clear (and I likely wasn't), my point is that players likely won't know the content of a particular scene / adventure / campaign before they are in the middle of it. That's almost always the reason we play RPGs in the first place - the excitement of the unknown unfolding in front of us as a group.

That's true for both GM-ed and GM-less games. It's also true when I am the DM, sure I know the plot, but I don't know what crazy shenanigans my players are going to pull this time. Ultimately while there are preventive tools that are very powerful, we also need tools for navigating discomfort that can are able to be applied in vivo.

It's not that I think people who don't like the X-card are jerks. I've got one foot in that camp myself, as I've said above, indeed in the post that you quoted.

My issue with [your] position Sureshot is that you decided that the solutions that you have successfully used in your situations must surely apply universally. I - and others in this thread - have shown that simply isn't true.  

But even if it was, let's be honest here, the efficacy of the tool is not your real objection.

ISTM that your problem is with the type of person that came up with the tool - presumably because his experiences of using [your] solutions proved to be inadequately effective for his own games - and with the type of person that might benefit from the tool.

You don't like the people.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194In case I wasn't clear (and I likely wasn't), my point is that players likely won't know the content of a particular scene / adventure / campaign before they are in the middle of it. That's almost always the reason we play RPGs in the first place - the excitement of the unknown unfolding in front of us as a group.

I will concede that if the person playing is new to rpgs they may not know what many fantasy locales look or what animals inhabit them. Experienced players have some kind of idea. Dungeons I figure what have rats among other creatures. Forests should have deer, owls etc. It's not to say they will always be the same yet unless a DM makes a huge design change usually many fantasy locales are the same imo.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194That's true for both GM-ed and GM-less games. It's also true when I am the DM, sure I know the plot, but I don't know what crazy shenanigans my players are going to pull this time. Ultimately while there are preventive tools that are very powerful, we also need tools for navigating discomfort that can are able to be applied in vivo.

I'm not totally against the X-card. As they are currently designed I find them too disruptive at average table. A player can use them. They bring the game to a complete halt. Without the player telling the DM and the rest of the table why. If they revise the guidelines to include one that a player needs to tell the reason behind the use of the card. My stance on them will change. Otherwise as I said too disruptive. The average player at the table will not imo take kindly to the campaign stopping every time a X-card is used without the reason behind it's use imo.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194My issue with [your] position Sureshot is that you decided that the solutions that you have successfully used in your situations must surely apply universally. I - and others in this thread - have shown that simply isn't true.  

I concede that not every topic can be brought up with the entire table. One HAS to tell the DM if they don't want to see something at the game table. Your one to talk though. It seems only X-cards are the solution to you. Talking like mature adults is no even an option.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194But even if it was, let's be honest here, the efficacy of the tool is not your real objection.

The very nature of the X-card while useful is too broad and too disruptive imo. You may play with absolute paragons of virtue. I play with real people and we are flawed. An X-card every two seconds would get the person(s) using them ejected from most tables. Used when it's absolutely needed are a good tool. As it is a tool that stops play continually for no reason will never become a accepted method at many tables. Not unless it's passed into law or forced on a group.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194ISTM that your problem is with the type of person that came up with the tool - presumably because his experiences of using [your] solutions proved to be inadequately effective for his own games - and with the type of person that might benefit from the tool.

My solution is talking to the person either in private or public. if you don't have the stones to do so is not my problem. Something that is told to me in confidence I don't share with the group. I will not force anyone to play or divulge anything they do not want to do. I will reasonably make a accommodation to a player. I also am a majority rules kind of person. If the rest of the group ha no problems with rats in dungeons the rats will be in the dungeons.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061194You don't like the people.

And your back to being a disingenuous fuck. Not doing things the Motorskills way = not liking the people. You realize making a accommodation for a player is a choice I am under no obligation to do so. I can easily say to find another table. i work with my players to try and work and resolve and make sure they are comfortable at the table. I do not always succeed. Neither am I forced to make it succeed.

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.

Well, when you have to feed on people who's heads are so far up their own asses, you have to adapt.

Quote from: sureshot;1061199And your back to being a disingenuous fuck. Not doing things the Motorskills way = not liking the people.

I'm taking this from your many posts over many weeks and months. You tell me I'm wrong - and I'd like to be - but your rhetoric doesn't match. OMMV.

Your other points look interesting, I need to read them properly first.

Hi. First time poster here. Nice to meet everyone. I've lurked for a while but decided to take the plunge and post, simply because...I tried GMing a game where I used the X card. I have first-hand experience with it.

I'm honestly not even sure who this card is supposed to benefit. It didn't benefit anyone in my gaming group.

It ruined my game. It ruined it for literally everyone, including the person who used the X card. The reason it did that? Because the X Card mentions when using it: "You don't have to explain why. It doesn't matter why"

Now, I don't try to steamroll my players or make them participate in content they don't want. I never do that. But....yes. Explanations matter. It does matter why. I want to know if I did something that upset a player. I cannot fix what I am not told directly about.

I always give my players a rundown of any mature or complicated topics that could be controversial before the game starts. If they don't like a topic, I encourage them to tell me before a game session. Or after. Or hell they can throw a fucking pretzel and me and be like "don't include you asshole, it's upsetting" during the game session, I don't care.

I've gotten pretty good at telling players what might be included without spoiling the adventure. Personally, I think players need to be mature enough to have dialogues when uncomfortable. This is a hobby that inherently requires some form of socialization; if a person can't do that when they run into an issue, that screws with me. If they get so traumatized or can't handle something that they must stop the entire game and cannot tell me why, that's....a problem. I can't game that way. It doesn't mean they aren't welcome at my table, but in the case of the X card person in my group, I asked them after the game session if they were willing to explain why they held up the card since it was unclear what topic I'd talked about upset them, and they literally said "I don't have to say."

But another part of the text for X Card instructions was "If you aren't sure what was X-Carded, call for a break and talk with the person in private." I wasn't sure. I tried to follow this direction. But this literally contradicts what the X card user gets told because they are getting told they don't have to say.

Okay, fine. No player has to tell me jack shit. But if they don't tell me, I can't fix the issue, and they might run into the same problem-topic again. I can't just ban every single possible thing I think might have been what they held up the X card for. I explained my dilemma and asked them if they could help me work to a solution, and the person just plain did not want to talk about it.

Which is fine, but I had to ask them to excuse themselves from my group until they felt ready to communicate with me in a healthy way. I need to trust people at my table to be functioning adults. I'm sorry if they've been through something traumatic or whatever. I'm not a dick; I don't want to make 'em deal with shit that makes 'em have like, flashbacks or something. But I can't read fucking minds. If someone is currently so incapacitated that they are invoking the 'I don't have to explain' part of the X card, I have no idea how I am supposed to progress the game from there without screwing it up. So I couldn't progress the game because I didn't know the reason they held up the card (it could have been violence, it could have been a gore description, it could have been something I never even thought about).

I told the group this and asked for solutions. No one could think of what to do from there, because the scene was literally the 'big bad evil guy' reveal, and there was no way to skip it. I couldn't edit it if I didn't know what to edit. And the X-card player did not want to leave the table, claiming that use of the X card meant that it was supposed to help me to help them avoid a trigger.

They eventually excused themselves from the group altogether. They know there's no hard feelings, but they also know they are welcome back whenever they feel comfortable talking to me about whatever content was the problem. My other players are still salty it ruined the session, though they are trying to be nice about it. This happened about a month ago.

At the end of the day, all I want as a GM is for my players to be up front and direct with me. I do not think it is unreasonable to require someone actually talk to me if they are having a problem rather than just X card at me vaguely.

X card: interesting in theory. Rubbish in practice. Actual healthy communication is much better than just shutting shit down. The X card just essentially punishes the whole group at times.

Well said and seconded Forge and welcome to the forum.

Welcome to the forum, Forge. You make one Hell of a good entrance.

Quote from: sureshot;1061210Well said and seconded Forge and welcome to the forum.

Thank you very much!

Quote from: jeff37923;1061212Welcome to the forum, Forge. You make one Hell of a good entrance.

Thanks! I'd been thinking about posting here for a long time and finally felt like today was just the right day since some topics here caught my attention, like the X-card thread here today since I had experience with it.

(Plus, a bit off-topic, but I have been getting more interested in OSR products and this seems like a good place to talk about OSR games)

Expect to be told your not trying hard enough Forge to implement the X-Card. That your mistaken in your opinion on it not working. That your supposed to bend over backwards to accommodate the person that left your game. That you don't like the people who use them.

Hey Forge*,

thanks for the posts, interesting feedback. Can I ask what (or whom) prompted you to use the X-card in the first place?


*that's a bold username to use round here by the way. :D

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061203Well, when you have to feed on people who's heads are so far up their own asses, you have to adapt.

Yes! I needed a laugh! Awesome!

Quote from: sureshot;1061221Expect to be told your not trying hard enough Forge to implement the X-Card. That your mistaken in your opinion on it not working. That your supposed to bend over backwards to accommodate the person that left your game. That you don't like the people who use them.

I haven't had too bad of luck in real life with how I was perceived over it. Mostly the worst reaction I had was resentment on everyone's part that the game stalled over the X-card complication. But my gaming group is a mature bunch so we'll get over it and get back to what does work for us.

But if folks on the internet tell me that stuff? Eh. I don't care. They can think what they like about me. I've got thick skin and don't care if they think I'm wrong. My gaming group is okay with me and that's what matters.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061223Hey Forge*,

thanks for the posts, interesting feedback. Can I ask what (or whom) prompted you to use the X-card in the first place?


*that's a bold username to use round here by the way. :D

I had a player that encountered it that asked if our group could try it out. He said he'd been going through some stuff, didn't want to get into the details, wanted an easy way to opt out if something came up that upset him. I'm generally a pretty open person and will try to accommodate players if I can, so I agreed to give the x-card a trial run.

As for my username...I really want to change it. I had picked it before I remembered the connotations it has and have been kicking myself for picking it ever since. I'm sure I'll ask for a name change whenever I think of something else I like better that is a bit more reflective of me as a person, if I end up posting enough on the site to justify asking for a change.

Quote from: Forge;1061209Hi. First time poster here. Nice to meet everyone. I've lurked for a while but decided to take the plunge and post, simply because...I tried GMing a game where I used the X card. I have first-hand experience with it.

I'm honestly not even sure who this card is supposed to benefit. It didn't benefit anyone in my gaming group.

It ruined my game. It ruined it for literally everyone, including the person who used the X card. The reason it did that? Because the X Card mentions when using it: "You don't have to explain why. It doesn't matter why"

Now, I don't try to steamroll my players or make them participate in content they don't want. I never do that. But....yes. Explanations matter. It does matter why. I want to know if I did something that upset a player. I cannot fix what I am not told directly about.

I always give my players a rundown of any mature or complicated topics that could be controversial before the game starts. If they don't like a topic, I encourage them to tell me before a game session. Or after. Or hell they can throw a fucking pretzel and me and be like "don't include you asshole, it's upsetting" during the game session, I don't care.

I've gotten pretty good at telling players what might be included without spoiling the adventure. Personally, I think players need to be mature enough to have dialogues when uncomfortable. This is a hobby that inherently requires some form of socialization; if a person can't do that when they run into an issue, that screws with me. If they get so traumatized or can't handle something that they must stop the entire game and cannot tell me why, that's....a problem. I can't game that way. It doesn't mean they aren't welcome at my table, but in the case of the X card person in my group, I asked them after the game session if they were willing to explain why they held up the card since it was unclear what topic I'd talked about upset them, and they literally said "I don't have to say."

But another part of the text for X Card instructions was "If you aren't sure what was X-Carded, call for a break and talk with the person in private." I wasn't sure. I tried to follow this direction. But this literally contradicts what the X card user gets told because they are getting told they don't have to say.

Okay, fine. No player has to tell me jack shit. But if they don't tell me, I can't fix the issue, and they might run into the same problem-topic again. I can't just ban every single possible thing I think might have been what they held up the X card for. I explained my dilemma and asked them if they could help me work to a solution, and the person just plain did not want to talk about it.

Which is fine, but I had to ask them to excuse themselves from my group until they felt ready to communicate with me in a healthy way. I need to trust people at my table to be functioning adults. I'm sorry if they've been through something traumatic or whatever. I'm not a dick; I don't want to make 'em deal with shit that makes 'em have like, flashbacks or something. But I can't read fucking minds. If someone is currently so incapacitated that they are invoking the 'I don't have to explain' part of the X card, I have no idea how I am supposed to progress the game from there without screwing it up. So I couldn't progress the game because I didn't know the reason they held up the card (it could have been violence, it could have been a gore description, it could have been something I never even thought about).

I told the group this and asked for solutions. No one could think of what to do from there, because the scene was literally the 'big bad evil guy' reveal, and there was no way to skip it. I couldn't edit it if I didn't know what to edit. And the X-card player did not want to leave the table, claiming that use of the X card meant that it was supposed to help me to help them avoid a trigger.

They eventually excused themselves from the group altogether. They know there's no hard feelings, but they also know they are welcome back whenever they feel comfortable talking to me about whatever content was the problem. My other players are still salty it ruined the session, though they are trying to be nice about it. This happened about a month ago.

At the end of the day, all I want as a GM is for my players to be up front and direct with me. I do not think it is unreasonable to require someone actually talk to me if they are having a problem rather than just X card at me vaguely.

X card: interesting in theory. Rubbish in practice. Actual healthy communication is much better than just shutting shit down. The X card just essentially punishes the whole group at times.

Isn't this what most of us have been saying? Mother fucker, it's annoying to see the same truths bashed against the beachhead of stupidity...

Oh...hi, Forge. Good post and welcome.

Quote from: Forge;1061226I had a player that encountered it that asked if our group could try it out. He said he'd been going through some stuff, didn't want to get into the details, wanted an easy way to opt out if something came up that upset him. I'm generally a pretty open person and will try to accommodate players if I can, so I agreed to give the x-card a trial run.

I guess that fits my initial "civvie" assessment of your OP - sounded like there was some very bad shit in the background, it may not even have been anything specific you or any other player did or said, X-card or no, that gasket was going to blow sooner or later. I give the player credit for coming to you to try to find a path forward, I give you credit for accommodating him in the way you did. Sorry it didn't work out.

QuoteAs for my username...I really want to change it. I had picked it before I remembered the connotations it has and have been kicking myself for picking it ever since. I'm sure I'll ask for a name change whenever I think of something else I like better that is a bit more reflective of me as a person, if I end up posting enough on the site to justify asking for a change.

Eh, I was joshing, change it or not for your preference, not anyone else's.

Welcome Forge!

Quote from: Forge;1061209This is a hobby that inherently requires some form of socialization

For me this is the big thing. It's a hobby mostly played by geeks and nerds who often have below average social skills, but it's a social hobby that requires people to interact with and get along with other people. Encouraging "The Needs of the One (Me) Outway the Needs of the Many (Them)" thinking is absolutely poisonous to the game, and it's a sort of thinking that the X-card encourages. A group needs to have a shared standard, which is why community norms of decency such as film/video age ratings work much better. We can all have a reasonable idea what fits and what doesn't, and that in a 12 or PG-13 type game (which I think is a typical standard for mass market RPGs) there may be spiders, there may be dogs getting killed, there may be the thing that triggers me - and if I have a problem with stuff within community norms then it is appropriate for me to deal with it, not impose myself on the group.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061183You keep clutching those pearls like that you'll break your necklace.

I think it was just an SJW-style Shaming attack from Motorskills, I doubt he genuinely believed it. I saw far more talk about **** on RPGnet than ever happens here.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061229I give the player credit for coming to you to try to find a path forward

As I read Forge's post, "trying to find a path forward" is exactly what the player refused to do, which is what caused the whole situation to go bad for everyone.  How do you work out a way to proceed when literally the only thing you know is "I have a problem, but I'm not going to tell you what it is"?

I fully agree with not needing to know the underlying reasons behind why the X-card was used, but you absolutely have to be able to find out what it was used in response to, otherwise you can't edit out the relevant content.  In other words, the player doesn't need to tell the table "my mother's face was gnawed off by rats", but they do need to say "I don't want rats to appear in the game".

Quote from: Forge;1061226I haven't had too bad of luck in real life with how I was perceived over it. Mostly the worst reaction I had was resentment on everyone's part that the game stalled over the X-card complication. But my gaming group is a mature bunch so we'll get over it and get back to what does work for us.

But if folks on the internet tell me that stuff? Eh. I don't care. They can think what they like about me. I've got thick skin and don't care if they think I'm wrong. My gaming group is okay with me and that's what matters.

My main issue is not so much caring so much as the regressives such as Motorskills being disingenuous. Yet with such people it's all about the narrative. They like X-cards so NOTHING can be wrong with something they like imo. A tool that is supposed to reduce issues at the table instead makes it worse. It's one thing to not tell the table. Yet not even tell the DM.

Imagine

player XYZ raises a X-card

DM: "what wrong? "

XYZ "I rather not say"

DM " I need to know what's bothering you"

XYZ " I don't want to tell you or anyone else hear"

DM "Fair enough how about we talk about it after the game in private so I can fix the issue"

XYZ " No I'd rather not"

Increasingly frustrated DM " So you have a issue which you won't tell me about. Expect me and the others here at the table to guess what it is. You also expect the game to stop completely until we figure it out"

XYZ " Yes! "

I don't see in my example how that would go over well with most groups. As someone pointed out in this thread. We don't need to know if a person significant other used to intimidate them with words and hit them. The group or at least the DM needs to know not to go to much into detail when it comes to player and npc skill checks related to intimidation. X-cards remove that. I'm not going to pause a game for hours and go over a mental or written checklist of what will bother player XYZ until myself and the rest of the group figures it out.

The other side being disingenuous and not willing to argue in good faith. Makes us out to be the enemy as intolerant, misogynistic for not willing to bend over backwards to accommodate player XYZ. I will try to work with a player to resolve any ossues. I'm not going to spend a entire session or more doing so. Yet apparently that means you and I hate people

Quote from: S'mon;1061235Welcome Forge!



For me this is the big thing. It's a hobby mostly played by geeks and nerds who often have below average social skills, but it's a social hobby that requires people to interact with and get along with other people. Encouraging "The Needs of the One (Me) Outway the Needs of the Many (Them)" thinking is absolutely poisonous to the game, and it's a sort of thinking that the X-card encourages. A group needs to have a shared standard, which is why community norms of decency such as film/video age ratings work much better. We can all have a reasonable idea what fits and what doesn't, and that in a 12 or PG-13 type game (which I think is a typical standard for mass market RPGs) there may be spiders, there may be dogs getting killed, there may be the thing that triggers me - and if I have a problem with stuff within community norms then it is appropriate for me to deal with it, not impose myself on the group.

I think the "shared standard" thing is a bit over-sold. You don't even have a perfect shared standard in this thread among the people that disagree with me!

I've been gaming since forever, and I enjoy all formats and genres pretty much. For me, convention games versus home games is not an either / or. My home group runs long-term campaigns that aim to run for a year or so, we rotate GMs. Great group, with one guy that didn't fit. He didn't get an invite when the next campaign started up, probably wouldn't have accepted it even if it had been offered. No shouting, no drama, he just wanted a very different experience from everybody else. (I think he would love one-shot DDALs instead for example).

I've seen much more permanently-divisive behaviour at long-term home games than at conventions over the years. Store games are their own beast, I suspect they have the potential to suffer the worst aspects of both, but I don't have enough experience to judge. (The few store games I have attended have varied wildly in their quality).

There's several reasons for why home games are more likely to explode bigger, not necessarily more often. I don't think the reasons are controversial, but interested in other opinions. Firstly, niggling issues are given time to brew. Secondly, people are more invested in everything.
That annoying trait that player has, you can tolerate it for a few hours...but weeks and months? That character, "Blackleaf", that you had gotten emotionally attached to over the past four months? It was complete bullshit DMing that caused her death. The first few sessions of the campaign were fresh and exciting, now it's just a tiresome slog. Who the fuck invited Jimmy, we had a great group before then.

Now I'm not saying that I don't get invested in convention one-shots, absolutely I do. DDAL modules tend to be a bit crunchy, but that's more a reflection of D&D / 5e than anything else. I tend to play games other than D&D at conventions whenever I can. At Gen Con for example, I actively seek out games I've never heard of, or games that I'm already intrigued by, but wouldn't otherwise get a chance to play at smaller events. In 2018 I actively sought out games featuring the new Delta Green and Fall of Delta Green rulesets because I wanted to experience those games from the other side of the screen, I never want to never stop learning.

Playing with different rulesets, different settings, different GMs, different players.....it can be amazing, exhilarating when folks that don't know each other just click, when you see a Bard being creative with a standard spell in a way you've never seen before, when a Delta Green GM brings new "real-world" tradecraft to the table, when a player portrays a standard template character in a way that is a first for you. I find it also makes me need to step up my game, and that's a shocking experience, in a good way.

Are convention tables always so wonderful, absolutely not. But the issues that arise are different - in my case, usually boredom, because what the GM thinks is exciting simply isn't. (c.f. at boardgame events, I've seen shouting, chairs thrown, people banned from the event and their local hobby - not yet seen that at RPG conventions). But the hit rate is 90%+ and that's plenty good enough for me.

But because the likelihood is that no-one knows each other at a one-shot convention, and you don't have the same time to resolve issues that arise during those types of games, different communication tool sets are required than for home games. I'm not convinced X-cards are necessarily the answer, but I still see the potential. I'm sorry for Forge's experience, but it's not been my (nor jhkim's) experience in eighteen other situations. Ultimately the X-card is just a tool, one of many that a GM or a multi-table host can choose, or not, to include in their toolbox. It doesn't remove other obligations from the players involved, nothing ever will.

I just read the X-card rules to see what it actually says. It's slightly ambiguous. "You don't have to explain why" can be interpreted two ways.

You use the x-card to indicate that something bothers you.
Option 1: You don't have to explain what made you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't have to say!"
Option 2: You don't have to explain why the thing you carded makes you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't like the way that NPC keeps putting his hands on my shoulders." "What's so bad about that? He's just trying to be friendly." "I don't want to talk about it."

Option 2 makes more sense. Option 1 is fucking moronic and defeats the whole point of using the card in the first place. Interpreting it that way is just deliberately obtuse because you want it to be a stupid thing from stupid swine who do stupidly swinish things. In order for the X-card to make any sense, you have to explain what makes you uncomfortable, but you don't have to explain why it makes you uncomfortable.

It doesn't matter why. I don't use the X-card, but if I did, I wouldn't want to know why, because it's not something that is going to be fixed at the game table anyway so talking about it would just waste game time. If the problem is something inconsequential like "there are rats in the sewer", I could skip it. Honestly, I most often wouldn't even think of mentioning rats in a dungeon because that is the kind of thing that is more conspicuous by its absence.

I'm having hard time thinking of any central game elements that couldn't be skipped that the player wouldn't know before joining the game. If you don't like rats, I can skip them in D&D, but you probably shouldn't join a WFRP game focused on skaven. If you don't like cannibalism, the ewoks don't really have to try to barbecue you in a Star Wars game but you wouldn't want to sign up for a game of All Flesh Must Be Eaten. If you don't like the sight of blood, then I can say that everyone just gets scorch marks when hit by a blaster in a sci-fi game, but Vampire is probably not the game for you.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061272I think the "shared standard" thing is a bit over-sold. You don't even have a perfect shared standard in this thread among the people that disagree with me!

I meant that there is a pretty good shared standard of what a particular cinema-derived or similar age rating represents. Obviously there is lots of variation as to what kind of rating people want in their game.

I don't see a need for an X-card, but then I only game with my friends and we're all on the same page. But the egg-timer, I see a good use for that, when the players need to make a decision, use the egg timer and that's how long you have to discuss it and then you make a decision or we have a random encounter.

I'm not sold on the X-card for my own games, but I also don't think it's an automatic signal that the game will be terrible as some people characterize.

Welcome to theRPGsite, Forge. Thanks for your example.

Quote from: Forge;1061209They eventually excused themselves from the group altogether. They know there's no hard feelings, but they also know they are welcome back whenever they feel comfortable talking to me about whatever content was the problem. My other players are still salty it ruined the session, though they are trying to be nice about it. This happened about a month ago.

At the end of the day, all I want as a GM is for my players to be up front and direct with me. I do not think it is unreasonable to require someone actually talk to me if they are having a problem rather than just X card at me vaguely.

X card: interesting in theory. Rubbish in practice. Actual healthy communication is much better than just shutting shit down. The X card just essentially punishes the whole group at times.

I would say that as people, everyone at the table is responsible for actual healthy communication. "That's the rules" - regardless of whether it is the X-card or anything else - isn't an excuse not to engage in healthy communication. Like if the game you're playing has a badly-worded rule, then you as human beings can override that and fix things rather than let your game be ruined.

I have played in games with the X-card, but I don't have any personal experience in it being activated since it was never touched in the games I played. I also know people who have used it actively, and apparently had positive experiences. This could be because they still had healthy communication in combination with using the X-card.

The new Powder Mage setting for Savage Worlds (which is terrific) has a extensive section on the importance of using the X-Card, which struck me as weird at the time because it's 100% a Military Fantasy game that would probably only be played by people who read the books and are therefore into Military Fantasy, so unless you're some weirdo GM I don't know why it's so vital in this situation.

Can GM's use the "x-card" if they're creeped out by a player?

Robin Laws new Yellow King  RPG, which is terrific and a must buy if you're at all into Cthulhu, Campaign Play, and Gumeshoe, spends a lot of time on the X-Card and is very prescriptive (e.g., if "your group" decides that they don't need it, then if you get a new player the "group" has to decide again not to use it.

Am I the only one who has considered that X-cards are a godsend to a disruptive player?

"I don't like that my character didn't get the best bit of treasure or has been killed, so I throw down an X-card!"

Quote from: PencilBoy99;1061308Can GM's use the "x-card" if they're creeped out by a player?

Robin Laws new Yellow King  RPG, which is terrific and a must buy if you're at all into Cthulhu, Campaign Play, and Gumeshoe, spends a lot of time on the X-Card and is very prescriptive (e.g., if "your group" decides that they don't need it, then if you get a new player the "group" has to decide again not to use it.

I think that's a really interesting example, and the fact that Robin Laws is an advocate certainly makes me give it more credence. I don't own Yellow King - I need to rectify that asap - but I'm guessing it is all up and about inflicting teh Carcosan mindfucks. It's a horror genre, so I think people need to have some tolerance for creepy, but the X-card could be a great tool to waive a player or a GM off before a particular element impinged on someone's enjoyment too much.

(As for Powder Mage, no idea, other than maybe creators that are sold on the concept want to promote it.)

Quote from: PencilBoy99;1061308Can GM's use the "x-card" if they're creeped out by a player?

Yes.  Most iterations of X-card rules I've seen do explicitly state that the GM can use it, too.  Also, in the document I linked earlier, the "inventor" of the X-card states that he's used it as a GM several times himself.

Can you use an X-card to object to the use of an X-card?

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061338Can you use an X-card to object to the use of an X-card?

That would be X-ceptional....

Quote from: jeff37923;1061348That would be X-ceptional....

I'm sad because this made me laugh. :D

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061338Can you use an X-card to object to the use of an X-card?

Hard to say because as per RAW your not supposed to voice let alone tell anyone about the objection to the X-card.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061279I just read the X-card rules to see what it actually says. It's slightly ambiguous. "You don't have to explain why" can be interpreted two ways.

You use the x-card to indicate that something bothers you.
Option 1: You don't have to explain what made you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't have to say!"
Option 2: You don't have to explain why the thing you carded makes you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't like the way that NPC keeps putting his hands on my shoulders." "What's so bad about that? He's just trying to be friendly." "I don't want to talk about it."

Option 2 makes more sense. Option 1 is fucking moronic and defeats the whole point of using the card in the first place. Interpreting it that way is just deliberately obtuse because you want it to be a stupid thing from stupid swine who do stupidly swinish things. In order for the X-card to make any sense, you have to explain what makes you uncomfortable, but you don't have to explain why it makes you uncomfortable.

I agree that it is unclear. From the document, the assumption seems to be that when the X-card is touched, the group will generally understand what the problem is just from the player's reaction and the timing of the touch, without needing a verbal explanation. Needing an explanation about what the problem is a special case considered separate, with its own answer. From the X-card Google document,

QuoteWhat's most important about the X-Card?

The X-Card talk is more important than the X-Card itself.
Some play RPGs because, "RPGs are like video games except you can do anything limited by your imagination."
 But that's not true, RPGs are a group activity, not a solo one. If the group isn't into randomly killing everything and anything, including murdering prostitutes, ala a more open version of Grand Theft Auto... it is going to be a socially dysfunctional experience.
My friend Martha, who is a psychiatrist, said, "RPGs are limited by the tolerance of the people you play with."
The X-Card talk is a good way to communicate... this is not a solo activity. The people here matter more than the game we are playing. Help us make this fun for everyone.

What's second most important about the X-Card?
When you X-Card something, no explanation is needed.

QuoteWhat if you don't know what was X-Carded?
Call 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.

Source: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SB0jsx34bWHZWbnNIVVuMjhDkrdFGo1_hSC2BWPlI3A/mobilebasic

The times when I've played with an X-card, it's never been touched - so I don't have experience in any of these. But I've had cases where a player was upset over something in the game, and it generally hasn't been some bizarre association that no one can understand or predict, and that they refused to talk about.

Well, it depends on whether it is being played as an Interrupt with old school rules, such as during the time of Mana Burn, or whether using new school timing mechanics where everything goes on The Stack for resolution... :eek: :o Ohhh! You guys are not talking about Magic the Gathering. :o

Have Motorskills and jhkim considered that maybe the X-card has never been used when they have seen it present in actual play is because the gamers at that table each decided that it was a flawed tool and just talked to the people sitting at the table with them?

Quote from: jeff37923;1061391Have Motorskills and jhkim considered that maybe the X-card has never been used when they have seen it present in actual play is because the gamers at that table each decided that it was a flawed tool and just talked to the people sitting at the table with them?

Or that the fact that it's never used indicates that there isn't really any problem to be solved with it, and that its sole purpose is actually nothing more than virtual signaling?

Quote from: Zalman;1061394Or that the fact that it's never used indicates that there isn't really any problem to be solved with it, and that its sole purpose is actually nothing more than virtual signaling?

Pretty sure these days that Robin D Laws (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Laws) doesn't need to include anything in his books other than his name on the cover to be successful, so that's a rather weak counter, though granted I have not yet read Yellow King, so I can't comment on his individual take on it.

As for the "virtue signalling", well we discussed my sig earlier, maybe you missed it. ;)

Quote from: Zalman;1061394Or that the fact that it's never used indicates that there isn't really any problem to be solved with it, and that its sole purpose is actually nothing more than virtual signaling?

I've never crashed my car, so what's the point of having seat belts? They're a marketing gimmick installed by car manufacturers who want to get virtue signaling points for talking about how they care about their customers' safety.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061391Have Motorskills and jhkim considered that maybe the X-card has never been used when they have seen it present in actual play is because the gamers at that table each decided that it was a flawed tool and just talked to the people sitting at the table with them?

I've played tons of game back before the X-card was a thing, and my experience was that most people aren't being made uncomfortable by game content. For the most part, they have been fine with all the in-game material that is happening. It does happen that there are uncomfortable material, but it's rare enough that even in convention games it would be easy to go a dozen games without anyone feeling the urge to edit material out.

As far as I can tell, that is still true in the X-card games. If someone signs up for a Call of Cthulhu game, they're comfortable with most Cthulhu-esque horror stuff and usually aren't feeling any need to X-card anything out.

I'm not saying there can't be problems with particular groups and players - I'm just saying I don't think it's a train wreck that is a sure sign for a game full of problems.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061410I've never crashed my car, so what's the point of having seat belts? They're a marketing gimmick installed by car manufacturers who want to get virtue signaling points for talking about how they care about their customers' safety.

Brutal. :D

Quote from: Motorskills;1061423Brutal. :D

Only in its stupidity. What a moronic comparison and typically dissonant of the NPC mindset. Seatbelts have been proven to save lives. There is no political agenda to that. X-cards haven't proven to make gaming "safer", especially since Leftist mantra dictates ever-shifting rules of conduct not even they can adhere to.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061432Only in its stupidity. What a moronic comparison and typically dissonant of the NPC mindset. Seatbelts have been proven to save lives. There is no political agenda to that. X-cards haven't proven to make gaming "safer", especially since Leftist mantra dictates ever-shifting rules of conduct not even they can adhere to.

Given how the X-Cards currently work imo make it worse. Since we have to place Where Waldo and guess what the issue is. Which brings the game to a complete halt. With most players getting annoyed with the -Card using players not actually addressing the issue. It's just too me at least virtue signalling at it's worst. Apparently that means you and I are sociopaths.

The rules governing their use would need a major revision before they were to be used at my table.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061279I just read the X-card rules to see what it actually says. It's slightly ambiguous. "You don't have to explain why" can be interpreted two ways.

You use the x-card to indicate that something bothers you.
Option 1: You don't have to explain what made you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't have to say!"
Option 2: You don't have to explain why the thing you carded makes you uncomfortable. "What's wrong?" "I don't like the way that NPC keeps putting his hands on my shoulders." "What's so bad about that? He's just trying to be friendly." "I don't want to talk about it."

Option 2 makes more sense. Option 1 is fucking moronic and defeats the whole point of using the card in the first place.

You make a good point. I honestly felt like that happened to me was Option 2 with my player. He wasn't a bad person. But sometimes I have to be mindful that this is a hobby with a higher percentage than normal of rules-lawyers, so...the existence of people that are going to interpret the x-card wording about explaining as Option 2 is a thing I have to be mindful of now.

Quote from: jhkim;1061288I'm not sold on the X-card for my own games, but I also don't think it's an automatic signal that the game will be terrible as some people characterize.

Welcome to theRPGsite, Forge. Thanks for your example.


I would say that as people, everyone at the table is responsible for actual healthy communication. "That's the rules" - regardless of whether it is the X-card or anything else - isn't an excuse not to engage in healthy communication. Like if the game you're playing has a badly-worded rule, then you as human beings can override that and fix things rather than let your game be ruined.

I have played in games with the X-card, but I don't have any personal experience in it being activated since it was never touched in the games I played. I also know people who have used it actively, and apparently had positive experiences. This could be because they still had healthy communication in combination with using the X-card.

Thank you--and I think I agree. If your group used it and they had positive healthy communication on top of it, I'd honestly hazard it's not really the x-card itself that helped; it was the healthy communication. The x-card was just a tool to facilitate that communication--but there's a lot of ways to facilitate healthy communication, so I don't think the x-card provides anything unique or noteworthy in this regard and comes with downsides that might not make it particularly the best tool to use.

I have no problem with other groups using X-cards if they can make them work, though I just really don't think they work as well as the hype they get suggests they do. (I don't really care to tell other people how to game--if I don't like how someone else is gaming, I just don't game with them--problem solved for me.)

For my group, though, it just ruined the whole game. Though I do hope my player comes back one of these days. He is not a bad person, but I think he freaked out and went rules-lawyery with me about the x-card probably because whatever he's going through in his life was probably more serious than he was willing to let on. I hope he'll come back and talk to me in a healthy way. Maybe some time will get my group back to its old groove and participants again.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061410I've never crashed my car, so what's the point of having seat belts? They're a marketing gimmick installed by car manufacturers who want to get virtue signaling points for talking about how they care about their customers' safety.

But you certainly have heard of lots of other people who have used their seatbelts to advantage. I've yet to hear anyone say "thank goodness there were X-cards in that game, or I'd be a goner!". No doubt must you know of many such people yourself, to put their use in the same category as an invention attributed with literally saving 15,000 lives every year. The actual proven value of seatbelts is exactly what makes their inclusion more than mere virtue signaling. The belief that X-cards are somehow important enough to anyone to be more than a progressive badge, I see no evidence of.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061432What a moronic comparison and typically dissonant of the NPC mindset. Seatbelts have been proven to save lives. There is no political agenda to that. X-cards haven't proven to make gaming "safer", especially since Leftist mantra dictates ever-shifting rules of conduct not even they can adhere to.

Yep, and conversation of those specifics stifled on pain of excoriation. In the case of X-cards, it's even literal dogma, not even trying to disguise the agenda of control.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061432Only in its stupidity. What a moronic comparison and typically dissonant of the NPC mindset. Seatbelts have been proven to save lives. There is no political agenda to that. X-cards haven't proven to make gaming "safer", especially since Leftist mantra dictates ever-shifting rules of conduct not even they can adhere to.

There were plenty of people that objected to the introduction of seatbelts, for various reasons, including restriction of personal freedom. I don't credit those guys with a lot of sense, even if they had the courage of their convictions.

The thing was that it wasn't just themselves that they were harming with their manly manliness. That's the comparison, if one is to be made.



(P.S. I'm guessing that NPC reference is something to do with that new meme from the same social cesspits that GamerGate came out of?)

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061410I've never crashed my car, so what's the point of having seat belts? They're a marketing gimmick installed by car manufacturers who want to get virtue signaling points for talking about how they care about their customers' safety.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061423Brutal. :D

Moronic is more accurate, but you're an NPC.

Quote from: Xuc Xac;1061410I've never crashed my car, so what's the point of having seat belts? They're a marketing gimmick installed by car manufacturers who want to get virtue signaling points for talking about how they care about their customers' safety.

Exactly.  I never used them until my State started fining me.  
I can see a future where Game Conventions require event runners to use the X-card.

Quote from: Forge;1061435For my group, though, it just ruined the whole game. Though I do hope my player comes back one of these days. He is not a bad person, but I think he freaked out and went rules-lawyery with me about the x-card probably because whatever he's going through in his life was probably more serious than he was willing to let on. I hope he'll come back and talk to me in a healthy way. Maybe some time will get my group back to its old groove and participants again.

OK, but in situations outside of the X-card - if I had a rules-lawyery player who ignored good human communication and stuck to the letter of the rules that they insisted on, then I wouldn't say "Oh, these rules ruined my game". I would say "This player abused the rules, which ruined the game." In my experience, nearly all RPG rules will cause problems if players are sufficiently rules-lawyery and ignore good communication.

Quote from: sureshot;1061433Given how the X-Cards currently work imo make it worse. Since we have to place Where Waldo and guess what the issue is. Which brings the game to a complete halt. With most players getting annoyed with the -Card using players not actually addressing the issue. It's just too me at least virtue signalling at it's worst. Apparently that means you and I are sociopaths.

The rules governing their use would need a major revision before they were to be used at my table.

The rules don't require "Where is Waldo" - they just don't explicitly rule it out. If you have rules-lawyery players insist that if something is technically legal, then they should do it - then yes, this can cause problems. However, I think there's some doubt as to where to place the blame in those cases.

Greetings!

Yeah.:) I'm struck by the fact that if--according to Motorskills and Jhkim--that the "X-Card" was present in so many games, (and yet, so rarely used)--then again, what is the point? Like Zalman said, this whole "X-card" nonsense is nothing more than "Virtue Signaling". Furthermore, as someone also mentioned--and echoing my own suspicions--this X-card nonsense is yet another tentacle that the Leftist SJW stuffed animal people are trying to use to influence the hobby more, and gain more social control. That is ultimately what all of this nonsense is. In any good group I have been in, for years and years, simple adult communication works to solve problems. Like someone else also said, if some person is so mentally or emotionally fucked that they can't engage the group--and most importantly, the DM--in some kind of reasonable discussion, like an adult--then such a person isn't somebody you want at your game table. That whining, clutching the stuffed animal sentimentality--is a huge red flag that this person isn't a good fit for the group, and isn't ever going to be. They are just a harbinger of more whining bullshit to come. So, at my game table, ale and good cigars are available all around--but the X-Card can go back to the moron that came up with such a stupid thing.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Motorskills;1061441There were plenty of people that objected to the introduction of seatbelts, for various reasons, including restriction of personal freedom. I don't credit those guys with a lot of sense, even if they had the courage of their convictions.

This is hilarious: here we have someone who can't tell the difference between objecting to a thing and objecting to being forced to use the thing ... making judgments about other peoples' "sense". NPC indeed.

Still, it's fun to hear the convolutions people have to go through to justify the use of X-cards. If only mental gymnastics were an Olympic sport.

Quote from: Zalman;1061462This is hilarious: here we have someone who can't tell the difference between objecting to a thing and objecting to being forced to use the thing ... making judgments about other peoples' "sense". NPC indeed.

Still, it's fun to hear the convolutions people have to go through to justify the use of X-cards. If only mental gymnastics were an Olympic sport.

I'm not so much advocating the use of the X-card as much as knocking down the ideological arguments against it.

Personally I've not seen it do harm, and I can see how it might potentially be useful. Even Forge - who has experienced a problem with the X-card in vivo - concedes that there was likely more going on in the background than he was aware of.

But the direct experiences of Forge, jhkim and myself are irrelevant, the usual suspects here have decided that the very concept is something offensive to them. Along with non-harassment rules at conventions and the like.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061432Only in its stupidity. What a moronic comparison and typically dissonant of the NPC mindset. Seatbelts have been proven to save lives. There is no political agenda to that. X-cards haven't proven to make gaming "safer", especially since Leftist mantra dictates ever-shifting rules of conduct not even they can adhere to.

Indeed. A more accurate automotive analogy for using X-cards would be banning racing stripes for safety purposes.  

Though even that one isn't perfect, since it's possible for a poorly used X-card to do some harm.  I have a difficult time seeing a ban on racing stripes doing anything more than annoying a few people.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061441There were plenty of people that objected to the introduction of seatbelts, for various reasons, including restriction of personal freedom. I don't credit those guys with a lot of sense, even if they had the courage of their convictions.

The thing was that it wasn't just themselves that they were harming with their manly manliness. That's the comparison, if one is to be made.



(P.S. I'm guessing that NPC reference is something to do with that new meme from the same social cesspits that GamerGate came out of?)

"Manly manliness"? Jumpin' Jesus on a Junebug, the Soy is strong with you. As far as the social cesspits you mention...nevermind, every time I think you're reasonable you poop on my expectations, so there's no point in trying to explain how wrong you are about a great many things.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061467I'm not so much advocating the use of the X-card as much as knocking down the ideological arguments against it.

Personally I've not seen it do harm, and I can see how it might potentially be useful. Even Forge - who has experienced a problem with the X-card in vivo - concedes that there was likely more going on in the background than he was aware of.

But the direct experiences of Forge, jhkim and myself are irrelevant, the usual suspects here have decided that the very concept is something offensive to them. Along with non-harassment rules at conventions and the like.

The X-cards aren't the real issue as they're so easily avoidable. It's the ideology that makes them a safety net that's the problem.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061467I'm not so much advocating the use of the X-card as much as knocking down the ideological arguments against it.

Personally I've not seen it do harm, and I can see how it might potentially be useful. Even Forge - who has experienced a problem with the X-card in vivo - concedes that there was likely more going on in the background than he was aware of.

But the direct experiences of Forge, jhkim and myself are irrelevant, the usual suspects here have decided that the very concept is something offensive to them. Along with non-harassment rules at conventions and the like.

The X-cards aren't the real issue as they're so easily avoidable. It's the ideology that makes them a safety net that's the problem.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061467But the direct experiences of Forge, jhkim and myself are irrelevant, the usual suspects here have decided that the very concept is something offensive to them.

As usual when you can't win the debate on something you lash out at those who disagree with you by insulting them. Then you pretend to wonder why your called disingenuous and regressive on this site. If you can't or more likely won't see why the non disclosure clause on a X-Card is a bad thing then your just ignoring that to further the narrative.

Or to use the stupid seat belt example imagine trying to explain to a police officer why a person choose not to use the seat belt. Yet refuse to tell him why because it makes the person being asked the question uncomfortable. While refusing to give a reason why. Then again why do I bother because you will ignore this example as it does not fit the narrative.

Quote from: sureshot;1061518As usual when you can't win the debate on something you lash out at those who disagree with you by insulting them. Then you pretend to wonder why your called disingenuous and regressive on this site. If you can't or more likely won't see why the non disclosure clause on a X-Card is a bad thing then your just ignoring that to further the narrative.

Or to use the stupid seat belt example imagine trying to explain to a police officer why a person choose not to use the seat belt. Yet refuse to tell him why because it makes the person being asked the question uncomfortable. While refusing to give a reason why. Then again why do I bother because you will ignore this example as it does not fit the narrative.

And yet you have steamrollered past the agreed conclusion that the X-card isn't about restricting communication, rather it provides a route to initiate it. Maybe the wording on the governing document could be clearer, but the intent is clearly to allow someone uncomfortable to indicate that they have an issue with an element of the game without having to provide (unnecessary) background as to why. We can debate the functionality of the tool itself, but you are blinkeredly refusing to even engage with that, on ideological grounds.


(And for the love of Pete: of you = your; you are = you're)

Quote from: Motorskills;1061528And yet you have steamrollered past the agreed conclusion that the X-card isn't about restricting communication, rather it provides a route to initiate it. Maybe the wording on the governing document could be clearer, but the intent is clearly to allow someone uncomfortable to indicate that they have an issue with an element of the game without having to provide (unnecessary) background as to why. We can debate the functionality of the tool itself, but you are blinkeredly refusing to even engage with that, on ideological grounds.

How are we supposed to figure out the problem when the rules as written give the person using the X-card away out to not communicate what is wrong. Turning it into a guessing game. It's one thing if the person using the card had to speak at least to the person running the game. They don't have to communicate in any manner. So explain to me how given how they work how that makes it easier to communicate. Maybe in SJW fairieland people can read minds. In reality where real people live if I ask a person what is bothering and they don't tell me it's not making it easier to find out. It does not make communication easier imo. Yes it may put more peer pressure on the person using the card. I'm not going to play a endless guessing game with one person or multiple players. Or bring the game to a virtual halt because I have to learn to read minds or become amateur psychologist.

The X-Card is flawed yet your refusing to see any major flaws because it's all about how good the X-card are as your narrative. Typical SJW behavior anything that goes against the carefully constructed personal narrative is wrong and is not to be acknowledged in any way shape or form. Fix the major issues of the X-card and I will concede they have a use at gaming tables. Not mine yet I will not prevent others from using them. Yet I'm sure somehow this will be once again a issue on my end.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061528(And for the love of Pete: of you = your; you are = you're)

Your not my robot Grammar Nazi Supervisor and I'm not getting paid to do so no I will continue to write in my grammatically challenged style because I want too.

I see your X-card and I raise with my Y-card. As in "Y are you not using your words?". :p

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061551I see your X-card and I raise with my Y-card. As in "Y are you not using your words?". :p

:D


I have been giving some thought about a modified card / approach that would handle some of the issues being raised in this thread. I think anything that promotes constructive feedback to ensure everyone at the table has a fun time has to be a good thing, but I also appreciate different folks have different expectations.

Quote from: sureshot;1061547How are we supposed to figure out the problem when the rules as written give the person using the X-card away out to not communicate what is wrong. Turning it into a guessing game. It's one thing if the person using the card had to speak at least to the person running the game. They don't have to communicate in any manner. So explain to me how given how they work how that makes it easier to communicate.

Again, I think the most common cases are: (a) the other players can tell what is being X-carded easily by the timing and reaction of the player, or (b) the player is willing to explain what the problem is.

However, let's assume the edge case of (c) a player who is upset by something in the game and wants it edited out, but for whatever reason, they can't verbalize it. In this case, the options are:

1) Using the X-card. The player signals using the X-card, and everyone else now at least knows they have a specific problem.

2) Not using the X-card. The player is still upset, but they don't have that signals.

I'd say that #1 has at least marginally better communication. Now, your reaction might be "That player is fucked up and I don't give a shit about communicating with them." But if that's the case, then say so instead of pretending that you care about communicating with them.

Personally, it seems like a very rare edge case to me. It doesn't bear much on my decision on whether to use the X-card or not. In general, I tailor my rules and practices around the sort of players I generally deal with - not with rare edge cases of problem players or abusive players. If there is a rare problem, I can deal with it on a case-by-case basis rather than restructuring my game because of it.

Quote from: jhkim;1061560Again, I think the most common cases are: (a) the other players can tell what is being X-carded easily by the timing and reaction of the player, or (b) the player is willing to explain what the problem is.

However, let's assume the edge case of (c) a player who is upset by something in the game and wants it edited out, but for whatever reason, they can't verbalize it. In this case, the options are:

1) Using the X-card. The player signals using the X-card, and everyone else now at least knows they have a specific problem.

2) Not using the X-card. The player is still upset, but they don't have that signals.

I'd say that #1 has at least marginally better communication. Now, your reaction might be "That player is fucked up and I don't give a shit about communicating with them." But if that's the case, then say so instead of pretending that you care about communicating with them.

Personally, it seems like a very rare edge case to me. It doesn't bear much on my decision on whether to use the X-card or not. In general, I tailor my rules and practices around the sort of players I generally deal with - not with rare edge cases of problem players or abusive players. If there is a rare problem, I can deal with it on a case-by-case basis rather than restructuring my game because of it.

From where do you derive the statistics regarding which uses of the X-card are "common" and which are "rare edge cases"?

Quote from: jhkim;10615601) Using the X-card. The player signals using the X-card, and everyone else now at least knows they have a specific problem.

2) Not using the X-card. The player is still upset, but they don't have that signals.

I'd say that #1 has at least marginally better communication.

No, it's really not. It's more information, but it's not useful information. An indicator that someone is upset without giving the GM what they need to edit the current scene and avoid the alleged problem in the future isn't communication - it's noise.

If you're absolutely unwilling to provide the bare minimum to the GM in order to correct the problem now and avoid it going forward, then you should keep your mouth shut. Letting people know that something upset you in these conditions does nothing to fix the problem, and it just makes things crappy for everyone else. It's exceedingly selfish.

Quote from: Zalman;1061565From where do you derive the statistics regarding which uses of the X-card are "common" and which are "rare edge cases"?

It's a fair point. I'm extrapolating based on personal experience. I've played a lot of games with a lot of people, and in general, we were able to communicate at least in some way if someone was upset about something in the game. It seems to me like a very low bar to ask someone "What are you bothered by here?" and discuss the issue.

On the one hand, some would cite this as evidence that the X-card isn't necessary. I certainly agree that the X-card isn't necessary. I haven't used it in the games that I run.

But it also is counter to people's projection that if they used the X-card, then players would suddenly turn into stonewalling enigmas.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061528We can debate the functionality of the tool itself

The functionality being the only important thing to debate at all about the X-card.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061528but you are blinkeredly refusing to even engage with that, on ideological grounds.

And you say this only because you are being disagreed with.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061558I also appreciate different folks have different expectations.

Only if they agree with you and aren't "whitebread".

Quote from: sureshot;1061547Maybe in SJW fairieland people can read minds.

There's no need to guess (or communicate) when everyone thinks the same approved thoughts, and we are all supposed to be thinking the same approved thoughts, right comrade?

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061551I see your X-card and I raise with my Y-card. As in "Y are you not using your words?". :p

Rule 134.5: If you XY-card has a white face and prefers to be played on XX-cards, it will lose to non-white XX cards played on the same.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1060507My first ever foray into online gaming was over Discord, with strangers I met online, to run Blades in the Dark, which is a pretty grim and potentially violent and adult setting. I simply asked the group, one of which was a woman, "What rating do people want?". "Game of Thrones" is apparently now considered a rating, but it worked. ;) .

There's been some useful discussion in this thread, but I love this, definitely going to use it (and probably some variant of the egg-timer). Maybe instead of a X-card I will have a Dinklage marker. :)

"This game is being played at Game of Thrones level of sex, gore, and violence, but with no sexual violence, no incest, no child poisoning, and the like. Did I miss anything on the HBO list?
So it's mostly PG, with some 15, and the occasional R. If there's some ground that is really touchy for you, let's chat on the side before we begin, I'll do my best to accommodate.
Should I or another player start to veer away from those groundrules, please discreetly draw my attention discreetly to Mr Dinklage, and I'll figure out how to resolve the issue."

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061586Rule 134.5: If you XY-card has a white face and prefers to be played on XX-cards, it will lose to non-white XX cards played on the same.

My brain now hurts...

Quote from: Motorskills;1061593There's been some useful discussion in this thread, but I love this, definitely going to use it (and probably some variant of the egg-timer). Maybe instead of a X-card I will have a Dinklage marker. :)

"This game is being played at Game of Thrones level of sex, gore, and violence, but with no sexual violence, no incest, no child poisoning, and the like. Did I miss anything on the HBO list?
So it's mostly PG, with some 15, and the occasional R. If there's some ground that is really touchy for you, let's chat on the side before we begin, I'll do my best to accommodate.
Should I or another player start to veer away from those groundrules, please discreetly draw my attention discreetly to Mr Dinklage, and I'll figure out how to resolve the issue."

That's very well said! If I was at your table and you started with that, I would agree. Then I would take you aside and admit that I need at least one graphically sexual scene with a gnome (of any gender), a black pudding and a mindflayer. The logistics of insertion would be up to you and it could be bluebooked.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061528We can debate the functionality of the tool itself, but you are blinkeredly refusing to even engage with that, on ideological grounds.

Quote from: jeff37923;1061575And you say this only because you are being disagreed with.

I don't much see eye-to-eye with Motorskills, but he did use the word "blinkeredly", so I give him points there, especially since I don't know what it means and it sounds like something Watson would use to insult Sherlock Holmes. He's also a good sport about being the ideological minority here, which keeps holes in our potential echo chamber.

I don't like X cards because it's further enabling a cultural trend of fragility, and prevents conversations taking place between mature adults. Discuss the game with your players before hand and gauge what they do, or do not want and run accordingly.

A player who feels they need the use of X cards at a table, is a player I would not want at my table in the first place. I don't want psychologically fragile people gaming with me. I've ran dark games before (I had a very successful and long running Sabbat vampire game) where my players were all on board because we discussed it ahead of time. Said games were also in the privacy of mine or someone else's home. For private home games, I expect mature conversation about the type of game we're going to play ahead of time, so X cards are never necessary.

When I run a public game, I keep it PG-13, there will be no detailed graphic descriptions of sex or gratuitous overly indulged violence... so again, an X card will not be necessary. If a player insists they'll need an X card "Just in case", then I have to assume that player is too psychologically fragile to be engaging in pretend games anyway.

The X card is just a continuation of safe space culture, a culture which has been shown to promote further psychological damage, not prevent it.

Anybody notice that the people who've encountered X cards at game tables have been saying the X cards weren't actually used?

Yet X-cards keep showing up at tables run by certain people. How very Chekhov's Gun!

But as it's not used, it's as useless as D30.

So then why is the X-card which will not be used sitting so prominently on those tables?

To signal the virtues of the GM to fellow travelers of the SJW cult.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061641Anybody notice that the people who've encountered X cards at game tables have been saying the X cards weren't actually used?

Yet X-cards keep showing up at tables run by certain people. How very Chekhov's Gun!

But as it's not used, it's as useless as D30.

So then why is the X-card which will not be used sitting so prominently on those tables?

To signal the virtues of the GM to fellow travelers of the SJW cult.

Anti-harassment rules are prominently displayed at many conventions. I'm glad that they are almost never used either.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061654Anti-harassment rules are prominently displayed at many conventions. I'm glad that they are almost never used either.

You passed up an opportunity to point out that legally carried handguns rarely need to be used.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061656You passed up an opportunity to point out that legally carried handguns rarely need to be used.

30,000 deaths per year versus whatever the latest thing is making Orphan an "angry videogame nerd" doesn't seem to be a useful direction to take this discussion.

I've already suggested one hybrid approach (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?39707-X-Cards-and-things&p=1061593&viewfull=1#post1061593) (N.B. still a thought experiment for me at this stage), why not tackle that instead?

Quote from: Motorskills;1061654Anti-harassment rules are prominently displayed at many conventions. I'm glad that they are almost never used either.

Prior to rules being prominently displayed, were there occasions on which some offender, on being removed from the con, cried out, "But nobody said it was wrong to just go round grabbing people's genitals! How was I supposed to know?!"?

I mean, were they advised by the Nuremberg legal defenders? "Vot iz zis "laws of war"? Is wrong to machinegun unarmed zivilians into zer ditch? Nobody haff told us! Ve did not know! Iz not zer fair!"

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1061661Prior to rules being prominently displayed, were there occasions on which some offender, on being removed from the con, cried out, "But nobody said it was wrong to just go round grabbing people's genitals! How was I supposed to know?!"?

I mean, were they advised by the Nuremberg legal defenders? "Vot iz zis "laws of war"? Is wrong to machinegun unarmed zivilians into zer ditch? Nobody haff told us! Ve did not know! Iz not zer fair!"

I think the rules give a structure to expected behaviour, and it gives organizers (who might not necessarily be wanting to get confrontational) a tool to point at. "You can't say you weren't warned".

Beyond that, I think it is part of the series of changes that has lead to a lot of new blood in the hobby, especially the increase of women at conventions. I think that's great, YMMV.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061641Anybody notice that the people who've encountered X cards at game tables have been saying the X cards weren't actually used?

Yet X-cards keep showing up at tables run by certain people. How very Chekhov's Gun!

But as it's not used, it's as useless as D30.

So then why is the X-card which will not be used sitting so prominently on those tables?

To signal the virtues of the GM to fellow travelers of the SJW cult.

I have been considering that aspect, but I begin to suspect that an X-card doesn't even rise to the level of a virtue signal.  It is worse than that.  It is a way to pretend to help people without doing anything useful.  I'm back to my main thought:  In any situation in which an X-card is needed, it is grossly insufficient.

To wit, a player who is not suffering from some past trauma that has been blown up by the situation is capable of handling it, if they will.  If nothing else, they can get up and walk away.  A player who is suffering from some past trauma, and inadvertently stumbles into a situation that suddenly blows all out of control, perhaps even despite precautions, is in a much more precarious state than the rules of the X-card can handle.  

A still inadequate but more reasonable X-card policy would go like this:

1. If you are uncomfortable with something that is happening, say something.  If you feel unable to say anything, leave the table.  No questions are asked, but you can volunteer any information if you so choose.  You may want to talk to the GM later.  In a game with multiple sessions, doing so may affect whether you are invited back to the table, but perhaps in that case the table is not a good fit for you?

2. If you sense that the game is out of control, pick up the X-card.  The session immediately ends.  Render aid as appropriate.  In the case of a false alarm, discuss briefly, then resume the session if time permits.

As with the fabled committee meeting, the arguments over the current X-card policy are so strong because the stakes are so low.

Quote from: Motorskills;106165830,000 deaths per year versus whatever the latest thing is making Orphan an "angry videogame nerd" doesn't seem to be a useful direction to take this discussion.

Loot Boxes, Microtransactions, and saying the game only costs 60$ when to get the "real" version with all the true content you need to pay 100+$

As a side note, excluding suicides, last year around 15,549 people were killed by Firearms in 2017.
Heart Disease killed 800,000+ people in 2017.
Auto Accidents caused 40,000+ deaths in 2017.

This is all for the United States whose current population sits at 325.7 Million people.
.004% of the population was killed by someone else using firearms
It raises to about .01% when you include the suicides.

Edit
Further Statistics! NPR, i.e. National Public Radio, i.e. on of the most Leftist Institutions in the United States (I'm an NPR listener myself) conducted their own thorough study on the number of school shootings that took place across the United States. They investigated the claim made that 239 school shootings took place last year, and discovered many many faults with that particular studied...followed up with the schools in question, put forward their own study and investigations and discovered....

The actual number of school shootings in the U.S. last year, when a shooting took place, at the school, with students in the building.... was 12.

12 total. The United States has an estimated total of 98,817 public schools.
.012% of schools suffered an actual school shooting.

Of course we always hope for no school shootings and no deaths from murder or violence period...but the actual numbers that take place across the U.S. are very, very small....falling in lines with the general trend of violent crime beginning to fall steadily downward since the early 90s/late 80s.

Quote from: Orphan81;1061698Of course we always hope for no school shootings and no deaths from murder or violence period...but the actual numbers that take place across the U.S. are very, very small....falling in lines with the general trend of violent crime beginning to fall steadily downward since the early 90s/late 80s.

People often forget just how massive the US is, both in land mass and population, compared to most other countries. If you go by raw numbers, the US is going to come out ahead of most other countries for most things. If you do what a good statistician would do and correct for population differences in order to get the "per capita" numbers, . . . not so much.

Quote from: Orphan81;1061698Loot Boxes, Microtransactions, and saying the game only costs 60$ when to get the "real" version with all the true content you need to pay 100+$

As a side note, excluding suicides, last year around 15,549 people were killed by Firearms in 2017.
Heart Disease killed 800,000+ people in 2017.
Auto Accidents caused 40,000+ deaths in 2017.

This is all for the United States whose current population sits at 325.7 Million people.
.004% of the population was killed by someone else using firearms
It raises to about .01% when you include the suicides.

Edit
Further Statistics! NPR, i.e. National Public Radio, i.e. on of the most Leftist Institutions in the United States (I'm an NPR listener myself) conducted their own thorough study on the number of school shootings that took place across the United States. They investigated the claim made that 239 school shootings took place last year, and discovered many many faults with that particular studied...followed up with the schools in question, put forward their own study and investigations and discovered....

The actual number of school shootings in the U.S. last year, when a shooting took place, at the school, with students in the building.... was 12.

12 total. The United States has an estimated total of 98,817 public schools.
.012% of schools suffered an actual school shooting.

Of course we always hope for no school shootings and no deaths from murder or violence period...but the actual numbers that take place across the U.S. are very, very small....falling in lines with the general trend of violent crime beginning to fall steadily downward since the early 90s/late 80s.

Please stop using logic and facts. It makes it remarkably hard to counter with emotions.

Just remember to be positive the mothership is here before drinking the koolaid.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061641Anybody notice that the people who've encountered X cards at game tables have been saying the X cards weren't actually used?

Yet X-cards keep showing up at tables run by certain people. How very Chekhov's Gun!

But as it's not used, it's as useless as D30.

To people who like it, the X-card is reassuring as knowing they have it as an option. Conversely, I'm pretty sure that some people here would be philosophically bothered by the X-card, which would negatively affect their gaming even if it wasn't used. Both of these suggest that it has a real effect even if it is not used. Likewise, 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: Steven Mitchell;1061683I'm back to my main thought:  In any situation in which an X-card is needed, it is grossly insufficient.

To wit, a player who is not suffering from some past trauma that has been blown up by the situation is capable of handling it, if they will.  If nothing else, they can get up and walk away.  A player who is suffering from some past trauma, and inadvertently stumbles into a situation that suddenly blows all out of control, perhaps even despite precautions, is in a much more precarious state than the rules of the X-card can handle.

Personally, I really have no idea what is best for someone who is suffering from some past trauma. I am skeptical of a lot of psychology, and haven't made any particular study of it. If some people feel better for having the X-card there, then I think that's a good enough reason to use it. If they don't like it, then don't use it. Groups shouldn't be forced to use the X-card if they don't want to, and conversely, groups that want to use the X-card should feel free to do so.

Quote from: Orphan81;1061698As a side note, excluding suicides, last year around 15,549 people were killed by Firearms in 2017.
Heart Disease killed 800,000+ people in 2017.
Auto Accidents caused 40,000+ deaths in 2017.

This is all for the United States whose current population sits at 325.7 Million people.
.004% of the population was killed by someone else using firearms
It raises to about .01% when you include the suicides.

I agree about that - but would you also agree that terrorist attacks and antifa violence are even more rare and insignificant within the U.S.?

Quote from: jhkim;1061708I agree about that - but would you also agree that terrorist attacks and antifa violence are even more rare and insignificant within the U.S.?

Those are both political acts intended to affect behaviour.

What we need are "that fucking rocked" cards around the table for players to hold up when they want more of that.

Quote from: EOTB;1061711What we need are "that fucking rocked" cards around the table for players to hold up when they want more of that.

Fuck it. Lock the thread. We have a winner. This plus this and a little more of this.

Quote from: EOTB;1061711What we need are "that fucking rocked" cards around the table for players to hold up when they want more of that.

It's a thing. From the X-card document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SB0jsx34bWHZWbnNIVVuMjhDkrdFGo1_hSC2BWPlI3A/edit#heading=h.jdwp29u4irym):

QuoteThe O-Card is an X-Card with an X on one side and an O on the other!

The O-Card was invented by Kira Scott so that players who want more of specific content can tap the O instead of the X to tell the other players, "more of this!"

Read more about the O-Card here:
http://www.gamingaswomen.com/posts/2013/01/finding-my-o-with-the-x-card/

So an O(rgasm)-Card?! :confused:

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061717So an O(rgasm)-Card?! :confused:

Who needs an O-Card when you have an O-Face?

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1061722Who needs an O-Card when you have an O-Face?

I want you to picture Josh Macintosh's O-face...

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061728I want you to picture Josh Macintosh's O-face...

Judging from his personality, I doubt he's ever had one that wasn't self induced.

I had no idea it was this complex:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2982[/ATTACH]


http://www.contessa.rocks/blog/a-printable-safety-card-for-your-table

Quote from: Motorskills;1061677Beyond that, I think it is part of the series of changes that has lead to a lot of new blood in the hobby, especially the increase of women at conventions. I think that's great, YMMV.

There are a lot of women at my local game stores now. There are no signs up about harassment. The women came the same way the men came: someone invited them, or had an open game table for them to come to. It's not about policies and procedures, it's about being open, friendly and welcoming. The decline in popularity of rpgs in the 1990s was a good thing in this respect: it broke the chain of older players mentoring younger players, so a new generation could come along with no preconceptions about who was supposed to play. Gamers in their 20s today don't know the hobby is supposed to be one for fat neckbeards.

Australia has a sensible content rating system now. Rather than just PG-13 or whatever, they add, "contains cartoon violence and adult themes" or whatever. So if you are particularly sensitive about something, or you are in the mood for "sexual themes", or you have children with you watching or the like, you can adjust accordingly. At most a game session should have that kind of warning.

In my games, the players lead the way and determine the themes and style of play. I don't put much in there that the players didn't put in first. So this is the difficulty with any rating system, X-cards or whatever: the game isn't scripted, so the GM might not have put something in there, but the players do. Thus, no rating or card system can take away from the need for people to be grownups and sometimes say, "dude, come on."

ConTessa pushing X-card nonsense? How not shocking.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061677Beyond that, I think it is part of the series of changes that has lead to a lot of new blood in the hobby, especially the increase of women at conventions.

It's amazing. HOW did women ever walk out of their house before the white knights saved them???

LOL. The kind of people who would show to an event because of an "anti harassment policy" being posted are NOT the kind of people anyone needs in a healthy hobby. It's for a hobby that wants to attract freakshows.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;1061705Just remember to be positive the mothership is here before drinking the koolaid.

Fuck that. If they see a cloud shaped as their mothership, drink motherfuckers drink!

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1061741There are a lot of women at my local game stores now. There are no signs up about harassment.

Those poor Australian women just don't know how unsafe they are without a white knight to guide their every action!!

Quote from: jhkim;1061708Likewise, 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.

Chekhov'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.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061677I think the rules give a structure to expected behaviour, and it gives organizers (who might not necessarily be wanting to get confrontational) a tool to point at. "You can't say you weren't warned".

Beyond that, I think it is part of the series of changes that has lead to a lot of new blood in the hobby, especially the increase of women at conventions. I think that's great, YMMV.

So women are so weak they haven't been gaming because of shit like X-cards?

Quote from: Aglondir;1061740I had no idea it was this complex:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2982[/ATTACH]


http://www.contessa.rocks/blog/a-printable-safety-card-for-your-table

Those are absolutely stupid and probably created (and needed) by the same kinds of people who think coloring books and Playdough will save crying adults in college from scary President Trump.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061755So women are so weak they haven't been gaming because of shit like X-cards?



Those are absolutely stupid and probably created (and needed) by the same kinds of people who think coloring books and Playdough will save crying adults in college from scary President Trump.

Greetings!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! I'm *speechless*. My god, the stupid train just doesn't stop with these people. Fucking "safe and inclusive?" Oh, geesus. Go grab your fucking stuffed animal, you whiny fucking crybabies!

Just too much, Alderaan.:) God, that shit makes me want to smoke a good cigar and laugh at their stupidity train!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061753ConTessa pushing X-card nonsense? How not shocking.

Not just using it, but doubling down on "don't tell anyone why you used the X-card, the GM will just magically know what the problem is".

(From the posted image: "Without needing anymore clarification, the GM/Storyteller will move on.")

Quote from: Aglondir;1061740I had no idea it was this complex:

Now that I think about it, I don't think the ConTessa table I was at actually had a X-card, for whatever's that worth. :) (The table was covered with stuff, so it's totally possible it was there).

The X-cards I did see (elsewhere) were just big Xs. Those were mostly on freer-form tables so less paper involved.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061473"Manly manliness"? Jumpin' Jesus on a Junebug, the Soy is strong with you.

But "psychologically fragile" and "freakshows" are just dandy with you?

Fuck that noise. I've seen many more problems at gaming over decades with socially aggressive behaviour.

Quote from: SHARK;1061759Greetings!

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!! I'm *speechless*. My god, the stupid train just doesn't stop with these people. Fucking "safe and inclusive?" Oh, geesus. Go grab your fucking stuffed animal, you whiny fucking crybabies!

Just too much, Alderaan.:) God, that shit makes me want to smoke a good cigar and laugh at their stupidity train!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Glad I could entertain, brother! It's an annoying part of our hobby now, but how can anyone get truly angry at a mindset so fragile a Beanie Baby could hold it together? ;)

Quote from: Motorskills;1061766But "psychologically fragile" and "freakshows" are just dandy with you?

Fuck that noise. I've seen many more problems at gaming over decades with socially aggressive behaviour.

Please remind me where I said any of that was good behavoir? My issue isn't with people with problems. My issue is with those people bringing those problems to an inappropriate venue, then disrupting others with them instead of being responsible for their problems in a mature way. Or worse, exploiting their self-awarded badge of victimhood to score points in a "game" nobody should be playing instead of enjoying the actual games people gathered to play.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061768Please remind me where I said any of that was good behavoir? My issue isn't with people with problems. My issue is with those people bringing those problems to an inappropriate venue, then disrupting others with them instead of being responsible for their problems in a mature way. Or worse, exploiting their self-awarded badge of victimhood to score points in a "game" nobody should be playing instead of enjoying the actual games people gathered to play.

I think my point is that people who hold views like that would be bringing problems to any venues outside of a home game, and you should consider that as well. [They] don't like the warnings, because they suspect they will be subject to [them].

And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061755So women are so weak they haven't been gaming because of shit like X-cards?

Typical SJW Regressive nonsense. Statements like that are a slap in the face to first and second wave feminists who fought for equality for women and that women can stand on their own. We live in a bizzaro world where women are both equal to men and can stand on their own yet not without the help of men or a special set of rules implying that women can't handle themselves. As that's not insulting and condescending to women at all

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061755Those are absolutely stupid and probably created (and needed) by the same kinds of people who think coloring books and Playdough will save crying adults in college from scary President Trump.

Agreed and seconded. Those rules pretty much obliterated any and every desire I had to go to a Contessa sponsored convention let alone table. I though the X-Card was disruptive. These rules are 1000 times worse imo. Imagine if one plays with a bunch of easily offended, triggered players. Nothing would get done. Imagine how dumb that would look and sound. " consent light, pause, rewind, fast forward, script change". It would look like plain insanity to me.

Quote from: nDervish;1061760Not just using it, but doubling down on "don't tell anyone why you used the X-card, the GM will just magically know what the problem is".

(From the posted image: "Without needing anymore clarification, the GM/Storyteller will move on.")

Don't you know where terrible people for even calling out that the X-card is highly flawed. We are supposed to be mind readers. Waste 3-4 hours of game time and ruing the game for everyone and anyone else because a mechanism that should help a person avoid issues at the table. Also forces them to hide behind them and be disruptive.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061771And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

I 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.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061767Glad I could entertain, brother! It's an annoying part of our hobby now, but how can anyone get truly angry at a mindset so fragile a Beanie Baby could hold it together? ;)

Not anger yet I have and will lose any respect for a grown-up who can't handle the real world and all it's issues. I understand if the person was victim of some kind of physical and/or mental trauma. If leaving one's home and being offended that a non-Italian dressed up like Super Mario ruins for Halloween or a costume party is quite frankly a man child whose parents should have been sent to parenting 101. Or forced to read Parenting for dummies. Call me an asshole for doing so yet why would I want to feel anything but embarrassment for a special snowflake who can't handle the real world and all it's various issues.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061771I think my point is that people who hold views like that would be bringing problems to any venues outside of a home game, and you should consider that as well. [They] don't like the warnings, because they suspect they will be subject to [them].

And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

You don't know really know anyone that has suffered real trauma, do you?  Or at best, one or two outliers?  Because I can tell you that many people that have would disagree with your statements.  Specifically, what they want are structures that help.  

But the whole sleight of hand of the X-card is to move willy-nilly back and forth between possible people that may have trauma and those that don't, as if there was no distinction between them.  This sleight of hand is so those that don't can get the little thrill of pretending that they do.  If they knew the real thing, it would be less of a thrill.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061766Fuck that noise. I've seen many more problems at gaming over decades with socially aggressive behaviour.

I think that's true/fits my experience. But (again IME) GMs generally have no qualms dealing with aggressive players. Passive aggressive socjus type stuff by contrast is much harder to deal with effectively.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061771And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

Do you think therpgsite fails to provide a Safe Space for women?

BTW what RPG bulletin board you know does have a high proportion of biologically female posters?

Many forums are "hostile" to most people.  Which is why there are a lot of gamers that don't participate on any forums.  For example, in my 20 odd players at the moment (nearly exactly 50/50 male/female, same as has been for over 30 years), I'm the only person that even lurks on a gaming forum of any kind.  My wife does participate in a crafting forum, but even that gets "hostile" enough to drive her away at times--and it is mostly women.

The contessa image outlining X-cards, traffic light colours, rewinding to redo things, fast forwards and so on is exactly the kind of thing I would have written to caricature this whole idea.

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.

You said it before I could.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061771I think my point is that people who hold views like that would be bringing problems to any venues outside of a home game, and you should consider that as well. [They] don't like the warnings, because they suspect they will be subject to [them].

And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

And/or...emotionally fragile/immature people who can't or won't deal with their shouldn't expect strangers to tiptoe around their problems. As far as women in the hobby I have two things to say: 1) sureshot's reply covers it well and 2) you can't say more women are in the hobby because gender is a social contruct you can't say who identifies as female. What's a little sad is that while my second point is a joke, it's not far from how many people view the world.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061771I think my point is that people who hold views like that would be bringing problems to any venues outside of a home game, and you should consider that as well. [They] don't like the warnings, because they suspect they will be subject to [them].

And again I'm called out for pointing out the significant increase in women in our hobby is in part due because the hobby as a whole is more welcoming - and yet that increase has not been matched by a proportionate increase on this forum. Funny that.

And/or...emotionally fragile/immature people who can't or won't deal with their shouldn't expect strangers to tiptoe around their problems. As far as women in the hobby I have two things to say: 1) sureshot's reply covers it well and 2) you can't say more women are in the hobby because gender is a social contruct you can't say who identifies as female. What's a little sad is that while my second point is a joke, it's not far from how many people view the world.

What should be addressed, if anything, isn't X-cards or such, it's what's proper at a gaming table with strangers at a public venue. With strangers at a public venue. I repeated it because none of these broad stroke "rules" should apply to a private group. Their dynamic is personal and private.

As has been mentioned several times before...which bears repeating...is to prevent odious issues from happening in the first place. Don't insert inappropriate things into a game. If a game is by its nature potentially odious, determine the "rating" beforehand and even then, leave the odious out. I don't care if you're running Kult for Slipknot, keep rape and molestation and child abuse and graphic violence out of it. It's that simple.

The reason I believe this won't happen is that it requires responsibility and maturity, which defangs the stupidity of potential narcissistic-victimhood. This, the perpetual victim, cannot allow. The salt must flow.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061792And/or...emotionally fragile/immature people who can't or won't deal with their shouldn't expect strangers to tiptoe around their problems. As far as women in the hobby I have two things to say: 1) sureshot's reply covers it well and 2) you can't say more women are in the hobby because gender is a social contruct you can't say who identifies as female. What's a little sad is that while my second point is a joke, it's not far from how many people view the world.

To 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.

Quote from: S'mon;1061786BTW what RPG bulletin board you know does have a high proportion of biologically female posters?

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.

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. :p

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. :p

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

Quote from: Opaopajr;1061899spicy pickles

What kind do you like?

I love spicy food and pickles, but I've not seen spicy pickles. Eaten lots of spicy pickled peppers and carrots, but not spicy cucumbers.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1061899... 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. :p

If the RPG combat is effectively pre-ordained that the PCs are going to win, then I'm bored to death if that combat drags out.

I wouldn't blame anyone wanting to FF through those.

I knew a GM during D&D 4e who ran combat theater of the mind and just used Extended Contests rules. It actually worked fine.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061903I knew a GM during D&D 4e who ran combat theater of the mind and just used Extended Contests rules. It actually worked fine.

That's quite funny considering how combat-centric the 4e rules are, but makes a lot of sense especially for the kind of fights 4e doesn't handle well, like large scale pitched battles or trivial fights.

Playing Savage Worlds 'War of the Dead' I think it would have worked a lot better with combat as skill check, not tactical minis battle.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828What 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.

People who worry about "being triggered" are not mentally well.

And based on the social media of people promoting X-cards, these people wear wallowing in their (real or imagined) illness as some kind of badge of honor which is extra mentally unwell.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828What I find in actual practice is that games with the X-card have been roughly the same as games without the X-card.

I believe you and Motorskills regarding your experiences with games involving X-cards.

But here's what I hear: What I find in actual practice is that games with players wearing diapers and sucking pacifiers have been roughly the same as games without players wearing diapers and sucking pacifiers.

Because players wearing diapers and sucking pacifiers isn't healthy adult behavior.

We don't want gamers who refuse basic hygiene. We don't want gamers wallowing in mental illness either.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828So it sounds like you are agreeing with me and disagreeing with Spinachcat, right?

Dude, I disagree with Spinachcat on a regular basis.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828His 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.

If unused, its effect is simply virtue signalling.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828As 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.

If a GM puts an X-card on the table, they are doing so either to virtue signal or they genuinely believe its needed by the players.

If you think an X-card is needed by your players, you think your players are basket cases who can't play make believe safely.

Quote from: GeekEclectic;1061843Like 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 no issue with storygames. They're just not RPGs. I love lots of boardgames, card games, war games, LARPS and video games which are also not RPGs. Not being a RPG isn't a bad thing. Plenty of great games aren't RPGs.

Back before the rise of the SJW nonsense during the early days of the Forge, I played several storygames (as it was a new thing and I love new types of games) and I really enjoyed Luke Crane's Burning Empires.

But that was back then with a good crew and even then we noticed how at the local cons, the kinds of people showing up at the Forge-favorite games sessions.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061908I have no issue with storygames. They're just not RPGs. I love lots of boardgames, card games, war games, LARPS and video games which are also not RPGs.

I've never been clear why LARPs are not RPGs? I thought it was just a different format, like tabletop vs online?

Did carrying a gun for self-defense and using X-cards really get compared to each other?

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061908People who worry about "being triggered" are not mentally well.

And based on the social media of people promoting X-cards, these people wear wallowing in their (real or imagined) illness as some kind of badge of honor which is extra mentally unwell.

Being triggered can be real, but people have got to learn to deal with their shit themselves.

I personally worry about being triggered by barking dogs. Not the "barking in the back yard for fun" or "excited you're home" or "hey someone's at the door" barks, but aggressive dogs that are about to attack (or fight among themselves). I tend to respond through hypervigilance and becoming aggressive back towards them. Afterwards, it can take me 30-60 min to get back into a calm state of mind. It's unseemly and not a badge of honor for me by any means. As a result, I tend to avoid being anywhere near aggressive dogs whenever I can. That said, having dog attacks discussed in an RPG does not even remotely cause me anxiety because I know it's not real.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061917Did carrying a gun for self-defense and using X-cards really get compared to each other?

Only when trying to take it to Level 11 absurdity.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061919Only when trying to take it to Level 11 absurdity.

Nothing this absurd should ever receive the honor of Going to 11...

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061918Being triggered can be real, but people have got to learn to deal with their shit themselves.

I personally worry about being triggered by barking dogs. Not the "barking in the back yard for fun" or "excited you're home" or "hey someone's at the door" barks, but aggressive dogs that are about to attack (or fight among themselves). I tend to respond through hypervigilance and becoming aggressive back towards them. Afterwards, it can take me 30-60 min to get back into a calm state of mind. It's unseemly and not a badge of honor for me by any means. As a result, I tend to avoid being anywhere near aggressive dogs whenever I can. That said, having dog attacks discussed in an RPG does not even remotely cause me anxiety because I know it's not real.

So many words have been ruined by NPC dipshittery.

I'm going here again, but what if you're triggered by X-cards?

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061901Absolutely 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

I think you are reaching a little here. There's a gulf between physical assault and the protections of a day-care centre. General etiquette rules aim to serve to address that gulf.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1061810I 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.

Thanks for saying that.  It makes so much sense that I wish I'd thought of it myself.

"RPGs are telling stories, therefore they should conform to three-act structures, narrative beats, etc."

"RPGs are improvisational, therefore they should follow the rules of theatrical improv (Say Yes, etc.)"

"RPGs are role-playing, therefore they should incorporate the same safeguards as therapeutic role-playing exercises"

It's all just different flavors of the same BS.

Quote from: nDervish;1061926Thanks for saying that.  It makes so much sense that I wish I'd thought of it myself.

"RPGs are telling stories, therefore they should conform to three-act structures, narrative beats, etc."

"RPGs are improvisational, therefore they should follow the rules of theatrical improv (Say Yes, etc.)"

"RPGs are role-playing, therefore they should incorporate the same safeguards as therapeutic role-playing exercises"

It's all just different flavors of the same BS.

Thanks for this. It has opened my eyes!

Quote from: Motorskills;1061924I think you are reaching a little here. There's a gulf between physical assault and the protections of a day-care centre. General etiquette rules aim to serve to address that gulf.

You were the one reaching when you demanded a Safe Space and conflated physical threat with emotional trauma - the latter being what SS is supposed to prevent.

This armchair psychology is fascinating - and bears zero relation to any of the very many FTF gaming experiences I have had.

Quote from: S'mon;1061932You were the one reaching when you demanded a Safe Space and conflated physical threat with emotional trauma - the latter being what SS is supposed to prevent.

I did? That doesn't sound right, but it's early and I'm otherwise occupied, so I won't push back on that.


Here's where I am. I want conventions (and the hobby as a whole really) to be really warm and welcoming. That doesn't really speak to what games are played, or what horror rating they are played at. I think displayed etiquette rules are good, they serve to address a number of issues. I don't think a gaming convention and a mall are the same thing, and convention organizers have a responsibility to present a warm and welcoming environment. Even so, everyone (including parents) has a duty of care to themselves and those in their charge. I don't have an issue with (the principle of) people using tools to make the gaming experience at an individual table more warm and welcoming to everyone, regardless of the game, mechanics, or tone.

Quote from: jhkim;1061828When 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.

The way the rules for X-cards and something like Contessa are and would be extremely disruptive too many tables imo. I'm not against the concept of a X-card or anything similar. I would never use them if someone else wants to they can.  Though I maintain that adults playing with adults should act like adults and talk it out with the table. It's the implementation and how too broad they are in. With removing any obligation of personal responsibility from a player to provide any reason why a issue, topic or subject is bothering them at the table. While everyone else has to guess what it is. Disrupts the entire game for everyone else and instead of helping the issue may increase resentment at the table. If a X-card is played no reason given and it ruins the game. Chances are very good I will ask the player not to come back. As a player I will tell the DM to not ask that player to come back. If their is a way to salvage the situation for both sides we will as a group. Sometimes their is no salvaging it and the player finds another table. Not to mention I refuse to be nanny, parent and amateur psychologist to players with mental illness. For one I'm not a professional nor is usually the other members of the group. we may end up doing more harm than good. To overcome something one must face it head on not hide away from it. A rpg session is for gaming not the equivalent of a psychologist chair. we have to empathize and sympathize to be sure. It's not our job to try and fix the person.

Quote from: Motorskills;1061857I 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.

I'm not disputing that at all. What I do take issue with the the revisionist element SJWs try to push with the narrative being that women where kept out of the hobby because men forced them out. Yes some idiots did try to keep women out. Up until the last ten years or so many women were simply not that interested in tabletop rpgs. Again one cannot force interest on the target group if no interest is to be had nor force them to play.

Quote from: Motorskills;10618575e 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.

Which awesome and proves that a rpg that is easy to get into, teach and run is going to have new players interested in learning. You-tube is a great way to showcase rpgs to the young people of today. Even if too many old gamers insist on remaining stubborn anti-tech Luddites in the hobby. Like it or hate onbline videos is the way to market and promote now.  

Quote from: Motorskills;1061857Are 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.

I'm not saying a new or older players cannot have any kind of mental issues. We all are imperfect to some degree. I do take issue with rules removing and absolving player responsibility to inform the group of a information that would explain why some topics, subjects etc could be a issue. I hate spiders. I can't stand Daddy longlegs in particular. I would tell the DM I have issues with spiders as creatures used against the party. So if I seem uncomfortable to keep going because it's not enough of a issue to make the dM rework the encounters or make the game come to a stop. The X-card makes it so I don't have to say anything nor explain why I called for a stop at the game table. I can understand not having to tell the players. Not even telling the DM the issue. The Contessa rules would just drive me nuts. I may fast forward a scene where a npc or pc is being tortured. I'm not going to fast forward a scene every time I'm asked. It is done on a case by case basis.

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

I don't like the concept of a safe space because it's not reality. Life is not a safe space. Unless it's part of the job description a job is not a safe space. Protecting people too much especially younger children does not prepare them for life. One of my friends who works wit younger people. Some of them expect to just show up and do their jobs and not be told when they make mistakes because they can't handle that kind of feedback. Some crying and in some cases two steps from rolling into a ball because unlike schools who give out dumb participation trophies just for showing up to a event. One is expected to perform to the levels of the company not what they think they should be doing. No one says anything when children act up then they grow up to be disrespectful, big mouthed little shits then they wonder why outside of their safe spaces they get the shit kicked out of them. Safe spaces like Communism is good on paper in reality it's not imo

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1061917Did carrying a gun for self-defense and using X-cards really get compared to each other?

I must have missed that?

Quote from: Motorskills;1061933This armchair psychology is fascinating - and bears zero relation to any of the very many FTF gaming experiences I have had.

Well, it should be, since armchair psychology is all you have been doing in this topic. Here's some more.  The quoted post is a great example of your usual throwaway deflection response when you don't have an answer to the point made.  In a few weeks or months, the topic will come up again.  Eventually, you'll annoy someone enough to make the same point.  You'll ignore it again.  

Oh wait, that's not armchair psychology.  That's merely a description of repeated, observed behavior.  It would be armchair psychology to speculate on why you repeatedly do this behavior.  I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

Quote from: nDervish;1061926Thanks for saying that.  It makes so much sense that I wish I'd thought of it myself.

"RPGs are telling stories, therefore they should conform to three-act structures, narrative beats, etc."

"RPGs are improvisational, therefore they should follow the rules of theatrical improv (Say Yes, etc.)"

"RPGs are role-playing, therefore they should incorporate the same safeguards as therapeutic role-playing exercises"

It's all just different flavors of the same BS.

Yes, with the same pitfalls, too.  On a surface scan, you might gain some analogous techniques that would be fine in an RPG.  Push it too far, or misunderstand the thing you are pulling from, or apply it in a way that doesn't fit RPGs, and you'll do more harm than good.  In all the cases you listed.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1061903What kind do you like?

I love spicy food and pickles, but I've not seen spicy pickles. Eaten lots of spicy pickled peppers and carrots, but not spicy cucumbers.

Actually I don't think of pickles as strictly cucumbers anymore. :) So yeah, kimchi, indian pickle (gree mango w/ chilis), pepperonchini, etc. is all in my mind when I think of it.

Unfortunately the cruel I.B.S. Gods have decreed a moratorium on my mortifications... :(


If the RPG combat is effectively pre-ordained that the PCs are going to win, then I'm bored to death if that combat drags out.

I wouldn't blame anyone wanting to FF through those.

I knew a GM during D&D 4e who ran combat theater of the mind and just used Extended Contests rules. It actually worked fine.

Death to the Encounter Budget! Death to the Challenge Rating! D&D is Great! lalalalalalala! :p

Quote from: S'mon;1061912I've never been clear why LARPs are not RPGs? I thought it was just a different format, like tabletop vs online?

Different rules, different play experiences, different forms of immersion, and often different goals for the game.

PvP is much more accepted in LARPS and the one-shot is the most common form of LARP by far. Often LARPS are entirely focused on PvP maneuvering to where its a social version of Diplomacy.

Also, costuming, set design and sound design can often be major parts of the LARP experience. XP and chargen are rarely issues, but there are boffer LARPS where those matter greatly.

Overall, its closer to improv theater than to RPGs.

I'm a fan of Fading Suns, both the RPG and the LARPs. The RPGs were mostly about adventures on various worlds, often with lots of gunfire, whereas the LARPS were mostly about the interplay between the Church / Nobles / Guilds.

Both were great fun, but each explored different aspects of the setting.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1061918That said, having dog attacks discussed in an RPG does not even remotely cause me anxiety because I know it's not real.

I suspect most of the X-card crowd is acting up because in their circle its chic to be a basket case and not because they've truly lost touch with reality when they play elf games. But it's probably they have a percentage of real deal nutcakes.

We've just become such a soft society of weaklings that the slightest twinge of not-happy sets these people into a tizzy...especially when they have an audience to coddle them and applaud their "courage".

Quote from: Motorskills;1061924I think you are reaching a little here. There's a gulf between physical assault and the protections of a day-care centre. General etiquette rules aim to serve to address that gulf.

No. Etiquette rules do nothing to protect a child in a public place.

It's akin to how "this is a gun free area" posters don't stop shootings.

Quote from: Opaopajr;1062031Unfortunately the cruel I.B.S. Gods have decreed a moratorium on my mortifications...

Research kimchi & sauerkraut for IBS. A buddy of mine swears by kefir and kimchi...and the occasional sonic ass boom.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1062047Research kimchi & sauerkraut for IBS. A buddy of mine swears by kefir and kimchi...and the occasional sonic ass boom.

Yes indeed, great for Old Guy's Acid Stomach too. It's all about the probiotics, so make sure the get the right kind of Kraut (hint: it's in the fridge section, not the shelf).

Thanks guys! I actually have been making my own lactic pickles (over standard vinegar pickles) for years now. Even got the kefir baccilus culture for when I wanna make kefir, (it is too dangerous to make your own milk culture mother outside lab conditions, btw. however, you can reuse a safe mother culture... so go ahead and pour some leftover kefir into some spare milk!). It works, but a good deal of the response is especially strong from extra vinegars, and chili peppers -- which includes pepperoni at times. The I.B.S. Gods are cruel... :(

But I can make a killer gochujang-free kimchi with Vietnamese fish sauce! :)

And X-Cards are still stupid passive-aggressive enabling, to avoid handling social negotiation with maturity. ;) Time to stop infantilizing adults from their public etiquette responsibilities.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1062044Different rules, different play experiences, different forms of immersion, and often different goals for the game.

PvP is much more accepted in LARPS and the one-shot is the most common form of LARP by far. Often LARPS are entirely focused on PvP maneuvering to where its a social version of Diplomacy.

Also, costuming, set design and sound design can often be major parts of the LARP experience. XP and chargen are rarely issues, but there are boffer LARPS where those matter greatly.

Overall, its closer to improv theater than to RPGs.

I'm a fan of Fading Suns, both the RPG and the LARPs. The RPGs were mostly about adventures on various worlds, often with lots of gunfire, whereas the LARPS were mostly about the interplay between the Church / Nobles / Guilds.

Both were great fun, but each explored different aspects of the setting.




I suspect most of the X-card crowd is acting up because in their circle its chic to be a basket case and not because they've truly lost touch with reality when they play elf games. But it's probably they have a percentage of real deal nutcakes.

We've just become such a soft society of weaklings that the slightest twinge of not-happy sets these people into a tizzy...especially when they have an audience to coddle them and applaud their "courage".




No. Etiquette rules do nothing to protect a child in a public place.

It's akin to how "this is a gun free area" posters don't stop shootings.

Well I don't think etiquette rules are there for child protection per se, but they help set a welcoming tone, one that is easier to enforce if someone refuses to conduct themselves in a civilized manner. Everyone benefits from that, regardless of age.

Quote from: Zalman;1062057Yes indeed, great for Old Guy's Acid Stomach too. It's all about the probiotics, so make sure the get the right kind of Kraut (hint: it's in the fridge section, not the shelf).

I've heard the best sauerkraut is either canned or in the jars on the shelves.  Too many other things added to the refrigerated stuff... Really, it should be salt, (very little) water and cabbage, and nothing else.

Quote from: Franky;1062083Really, it should be salt, (very little) water and cabbage, and nothing else.

You're right about the ingredients, that's the stuff you'll find refrigerated.

X-Cards aren't about safety, they're about CONTROL. They allow people (as long as they're the right victimhood demographic) to STOP the entire game or threaten to do so whenever they want. And therefore, to hold the game hostage for them to censor at their whim.

Players have one right at the table: to walk the fuck away.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1062803X-Cards aren't about safety, they're about CONTROL. They allow people (as long as they're the right victimhood demographic) to STOP the entire game or threaten to do so whenever they want. And therefore, to hold the game hostage for them to censor at their whim.

Players have one right at the table: to walk the fuck away.

Agreed and seconded on both points. I will also add even the DM can walk away. Nothing remotely about a X-card means the dM has to stay behind.

Quote from: sureshot;1062864Agreed and seconded on both points. I will also add even the DM can walk away. Nothing remotely about a X-card means the dM has to stay behind.

True, but obviously this points out the fact that the X card is a toxic addition to a gaming table. It invites the destruction of the group.