Five wrote:Gonzoron of the FoS wrote:Five wrote:To be fair, dropping the mod while you're in the mix is a ***** move.
You're welcome to your opinion, but we're a small board here, with not a lot of posters. The chances of one of the mods being involved involved in a discussion is high. Sometimes we will have to moderate something we're involved in, it's the nature of the beast. And "please be respectful" isn't a particularly difficult request to abide by, it's a basic expectation of anyone posting here.
For sure. I'm a poster that may need a friendly reminder from time to time, what with my pighead and all. And I respect you mods for the role you play and the manner and patience with which you carry.
Yet respect is a two-way street.
A respectful reminder was my intent. The poster had made a comment that wasn't discussing the subject and was instead making light of the idea of people having trauma at the table. As someone who has gamed with people with PTSD and former troops, this felt like a bad take and a friendly unofficial warning was needed. Opposed to hit the formal "warning" button.
A "
that was the line. Please don't cross that."
When he responded, I didn't reply, ban, or warn and instead forwarded things to another mod to take action because I had been engaging. I gave my opinion and let them decide.
Five wrote:Just as somebody upthread mentioned, table sensitivity is a thing now, whether we like it or not. And as each DM Guide, rulebook, whatever, has to assume that its reader is new to the game it needs to be addressed. Fair enough. But then there are those of us who see things from a different perspective. We never had such a thing when we started (and at a younger age I do belueve) and we (everybody I know of personally) never turned into bigoted, sadistic monsters that had people running from our tables in tears. Exceptions to that rule no doubt exist, but the game grew to what it is today so it can't be a bad thing, an error in judgement, or a moral or ethical wrong. Can it?
To allow one side of that argument and not the other is disrespectful to the whole.
It can't hurt to include those things if that's the current trend, but how much is too much? How much is too little? How did the old hands get on without it? These, and of course other questions, are the things that should be up front in frank conversation.
A comedian I like, Jim Jefferies, did a bit on his latest Netflix special about how the current generation is the most tolerant and enlightened generation in history. Having replaced the previous generation, who was the most tolerant and enlightened generation in history before.
Because that's how it works. The line is always shifting and changing. What is and is not acceptable moves over time. Stuff my parents found acceptable I find horribly offensive. And stuff I find acceptable will be horribly offensive in a decade or two.
Calling out a sentence:
But then there are those of us who see things from a different perspective. We never had such a thing when we started (and at a younger age I do believe) and we (everybody I know of personally) never turned into bigoted, sadistic monsters that had people running from our tables in tears.
Emphasis added. This could apply to so much. Seat belts. Helmets while biking. I never wore a helmet as a kid. Never had a booster seat in the car. And I turned out fine.
But so many kids didn't.
We don't remember the people who tried gaming and left because lines were crossed. Because they left the game and likely didn't say why. We forget the times we were super uncomfortable at the table, because the good times are happier.
If you look, the internet is full of horror stories of bad DMs. (Especially bad DMs to women players.)
95% of the time, a session zero and discussing table rules and boundaries is unnecessary. But you do it for that 5% of the time. It's the seat belt. 95% of the time you're not going to be in a crash. But when you are, you're glad for the seatbelt.
That way when a player says "oh, by the way, I was in a burning building when I was 5 and still have bad dreams of that." You can scrap the adventure where the inn catches fire. Or run it past them.
It's not even just about triggers and trauma. But just dealbreaker behaviour. Touching someone else's dice. Being on a phone. Body contact. Eating peanut butter in a room with someone with a nut allergy. Whatever.
I had a game semi-derailed and almost collapse because there was too much off-turn wisecracking during other character's spotlight time. Everyone was trying to get the laugh too often when one player was trying to have a quick moment. So we had a discussion and set-up a new rule and the game went on.