DnD's "X card" controversy has a twist...
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лют 2025
- Check out our sponsor, Slay the Dragon! www.kickstarte...
Newsletter: bit.ly/TheGlat...
The original blog post: bit.ly/3WJzMFi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My RPGs (PDF): bit.ly/Questin...
My RPGs (Print): bit.ly/Questin...
Newsletter: bit.ly/TheGlat...
Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon
Amazon recommendations: amzn.to/3RwpZzU
Questing Beast merch: bit.ly/QBMerch
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My blog: bit.ly/Questin...
My favorite OSR books: bit.ly/OSRbooks
Must-read blog posts: bit.ly/OSRposts
The best RPG blogs: bit.ly/OSRblogs
What is the OSR?: bit.ly/PrincipApoc
Send a review copy or advertise: bit.ly/ContactQB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This channel makes use of affiliate links, which help support Questing Beast at no cost to you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUESTING KNIGHT PATRONS
Allen Opperman, Angel of the Dawn, Dan Webb, Doug Vieira, Dwiz, Elliot Heigert, fikle, J. Case Tompkins, James Endres, Jim U, Jose Trujillo, Klozee, Kurtis Bright, LeMorteGames, Paulie, RD, Ricardo Sedan, RollStats
Check out our sponsor, Slay the Dragon! www.kickstarter.com/projects/hexy/slay-the-dragon?ref=e6tdtq
The original blog post: bit.ly/3WJzMFi
My RPGs (PDF): bit.ly/QuestingBeastPDFs
My RPGs (Print): bit.ly/QuestingBeastBooks
Newsletter: bit.ly/TheGlatisant
Patreon: bit.ly/QBPatreon
Amazon recommendations: amzn.to/3RwpZzU
Questing Beast merch: bit.ly/QBMerch
I think Kelsey's 'movie rating' (if combined with genre) suggestion is the best one because what we are really talking about is genre expectations. If I invite friends over to watch movies for 'Sci Fi Saturday' but I instead play non stop rom coms, my friends would have every right to be pissed. That's not what they signed up for.
We all have things we don't want to unearth around others. If someone was sexually assaulted in their past, they have the right to not want to be around content that surfaces that topic. I'm a black guy where this hobby is OVERWHELMINGLY white; I'm not too sure how I'd feel about playing with a bunch of strangers or friends in a Civil War setting where the N-Word would be flying without restraint.
This all gets solved by saying, "Hey I'm running an NC-17 rated (slavery, sexual assault, violence) Civil War game." or, "I'm running a G Rated heroic fantasy game." The problem is this isn't a regular practice of ttrpgers but it should be. It's about genre expectations and the matching the experience everyone signed up for.
I agree with this. I actually usually tell my players what kind of game I'm running based off this. Usually my games straddle the line between PG-13 and R, but every now and again I'll run a much darker setting or a much lighter campaign.
Maybe I'm naive but I absolutely can't imagine any context or situation in which folk say the n word for fictional fun
My 55 years of life have taught me that rules don't fix broken people.
Rules tend to cater to broken people and break helathy systems.
Amen
As an old school gamer (40+ years), we didn't use safety tools because we usually had the good sense to keep certain topics out of our games. Especially true when playing with people we were not familiar with. You didn't want to risk getting a bad reputation for making thing things awkward and uncomfortable for others because it was sure to get you banished from future games. And inevitably, word would get around to others and make it hard to find new people to play with.
I think most people's objection to safety tools is not merely that they are unnecessary or new, it's that the artificiality of them discourages effective communication and gives a false sense of security.
I think this could be true in some cases
This is why my group moved to Pause for a Minute as their communication tool - its much more natural language and does not come with the "stigma" of X-carding something, especially once I started using it more generally as a GM for those moments when you want to draw a scene to a close or move on, or just take a moment to all make Monty Pythan references.
Like with anything involving a wide swath of humans - true in some cases, not in others. For some folks it’s REALLY helpful. For others, I think this is true. Find what works for your table!
I think that's it. I hate all the safety tools I see all over the place and the only reason reason I can think of why is that you can just talk and not be a dick to your friends. You accomplish the same thing without a bunch of unnecessary rules
@@lazerbeams2536yeah but you cant monetize selling basic communication the you can with safety tools.
"Buy my new deck of many safety cards! Get your 'Im a safe DM' badges and pins!"
Having done a couple of horror games, I've spoke to my players that Horror should be uncomfortable. I really should have used the Movie Rating system. That's kind of brilliant.
And if there's anything they don't want, you just have a conversation about it before hand. Easy. (e.g. No r*pe)
Consider that fantasy is a type of horror as well.
@@shinmalestat9272 I like where your mind is headed. [pulls out DCC]
The presumptions behind language use are always interesting.
"Safety tools" seems to imply that you need tools to be safe at an RPG table. This rankles people.
Getting into the topic and understanding that they are communication tools is not that much better, as the way they are often presented and promoted seems to imply that anyone and everyone requires help to communicate in a healthy and grown-up way. This rankles people as well.
Both are frustrating.
I would always prefer to have people talk things out. This is not always easy, but it is preferred. Further, the hardship pays dividends.
Communication tools do not make this easier, as what they help communicate is not deep. In fact, it is often binary. (X-Card)
Also, an X-Card is a very different thing to a veil.
An X-Card is a metagame mechanic to force the storyteller to change (as in: re-direct) the story.
A line or veil is just an agreed upon style or tone of storytelling. Just as not every kind of fantasy book will get into the details of a sex scene, not every fantasy rpg table will play this out.
Having an understanding of what style of storytelling you want at a table is usually the basis for starting a group, or recruiting players into one anyway.
So "safety tools" seem to run the gambit from "let us assume everyone is autistic and/or unable to communicate their thoughts and feelings!" to "let us over-intellectualize and systematize the basics of what an RPG is!". :D
So yeah, to me it feels like infantilization of the playerbase. Everyone is free to communicate their likes and wants. And those who have a hard time in doing so, are in a safe environment to learn.
Lastly, the (mis-)appropriation of many of these mechanics out of the S&M culture is an interesting aspect.
The risk of sexual traumatization is a much better reason to implement such safety tools, as communication is literal safety in that case.
A line should be communicated beforehand in an S&M context, since the point of the whole encounter may be to push things close to that line.
The stakes are not the same in a tabletop RPG^^
Good video!
I've noticed a lot with these types of "culture war" discussions, people are more upset by the terms being used than by the actual thing those terms are describing.
People bristle at the idea that people need to be kept "safe" from a game, but if you say hey I'm bad at communicating my emotions and it helps me to have a system in place to help with that, very few people would object to that.
Yep, a huge part of the controversy is just caused by the terminology being used.
Well said, I wish I could pin your comment to the top
this!!!
You're not wrong, but there is a certain amount of baggage attached to a name. The implied goal of a 'safety tool' is to make a table 'safe', which carries a lot of cultural baggage with it unrelated to gaming specifically. It frames the intention and expectation of the person advocating for it as well. A name is the book cover of the idea, as it were. The exact same content as a tool for communication completely changes the perception of how it'll be used. I'm one of the people that dismissed the idea of a 'safety tool' outright based on the name and a few advocates, but I am also firmly in the camp of setting expectations regarding what a given game is about. Not every kind of game is a good fit for everyone, and that's fine.
Most people struggle with good communication skills, so having a framework to help make it easier is a great idea. I just know far too many people who would use something like an X card as a way to control the game and trying to make anyone who likes things the way they are feel guilty. In all, I do agree that the reframing of the idea is a good thing, as it better communicates what's actually being attempted.
It really is a culture war issue though. Which is a big part of why they are problem. Try saying you are against safety tools in a Paizo group and prepare to get dogpiled by people absolutely losing their mind.
I've seen the x card most in online play, where you can just chat X to the GM to hint you'd like to move on.
If you have a problem, you talk to your DM about it. Thats how we've always done it.
Reasonable
Anything less is cowardice.
@@RPanda3SUnecessary distinction.
It is very different when playing with your friends than it is in a convention setting or other spaces. I have not used the X card, but the "pause for a minute' idea has helped me when my friends and I ran a Ravenloft game. Something came up that was hard to swallow for one of the players and we handled it.
@@RPanda3S There are folks who need communication aids. Not everyone, but I don’t think calling those people cowards is productive.
Totally agree - some tables suit one set of tools, another table might want a different suite. I think either insisting it has to be compulsory or it must be banned is a bit silly. Besides, if someone had been told "we're not using safety tools, and nothing is off the table content wise", they can always still use the ultimate safety tool - and leave.
Here's my personal hot take. I believe the people in favor of safety tools believe that there is a chance they may encounter someone trying to play out there torture or sexual violence fantasy inside of the role-playing game and need a way to stop it as soon as it starts. The people that are against safety tools believe one of two things. Either that players will utilize the safety tools to try to manipulate and control the session and unreasonable ways. Or that they aren't needed because if somebody is trying to act out a torture or sexual violence fantasy then that person shouldn't even be allowed to continue to be at your table thus you still wouldn't need the safety tools you would just be booting them. Or I suppose there's a third option that believes that if you think you need safety tools then you probably shouldn't be playing with the people you're playing with because you don't know them well enough to behave in an appropriate way that is comfortable for you. I'm sure everyone has their own specific opinion safety tools but this is just my personal opinion on where I seem to see the two opposing sides coming from on this issue
I wish my friends would stop asking me to run a game playing out their torture fantasies. (okay, it only happened once, but they were serious)
lol i don't need a card with an X on it to say "hey jack wagon you're making me uncomfortable, get the hell out of my house"
@Grimmlocked That's why I prefer to be the dungeon master. Back in my high school days I would literally do the stereotypical rocks fall your character dies roll up a new one as soon as they started getting perverted. I didn't know anyone else that played D&D back then so I guess it must have just been an instinctual response to punishing bad behavior
@@tyrantkingking exactly the same sentiments
@ Some people, as can be seen in the comments here, are against safety tools because they think it is a political instrument 'to sanitize their hobby'.
Safety tools aren't just to prevent SA stuff in the game. Different people have different issues with different topics. A sad fact of life.
Some people, grown adults who will call people with issues snowflakes, are triggered by the mention of safety tools, getting agitated to the point where they can't enjoy a game...
I run family friendly games only and simply "let's pause for a minute" as a safety tool if I get carried away with the descriptions (again!) 😄
I would just simplify matters and tell players "If you've seen Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian, and Army of Darkness, expect all of that at my table."
An important point of “safety tools” is that their very existence and presence at the table helps normalize communicating that you find a topic or a scene uncomfortable.
Hear hear!
Yes an excellent point! I do think that often times a lot of the conversation about this is steered by extroverts who have just not realized the amount of people they talk over on a day to day basis.
“Why don’t people just speak up?” Well, for *you* that might be easy. But not everyone is as eager to jump into and interrupt an ongoing conversation amongst strangers.
Another on point comment demonstrating how safety tools are actually used and not some conspiracy theory! 👍
Sometimes I wish there were tools like this back in the day. A couple times when I needed one, I just packed up my books and left. Sometimes I could just replace my character, but the damage was already done. You don't always know every issue that's going to effect people beforehand
"Communication tools." That is the correct answer. Needle threaded.
I get that you're trying to be a peacemaker and trying to find an answer everyone can accept, but this really isn't the correct answer. Because they _aren't_ for communication and weren't designed to be. Another comment on this thread correctly dubs them "Communication-Obscuration Tools". The blog post in this vid includes this description of the 'red traffic light' which allows any scene to be changed by any player: "A player never needs to justify their use of the red dot and they get the final say about what solution is deployed" - this is not communication, it's an ultimatum. Others on this thread are saying similar things about 'X cards', they can be used to stop any scene and players never have to justify their use.
They aren't about communication, they can't communicate anything that wouldn't be better communicated by talking. They're about imposing an ideological structure on TTRPG tables. One more thing, proponents are mostly advocating them as a voluntary option for some tables, but if they become more widespread that will change. Already I've seen a comment on this thread by a DM who says his local library mandates them. They will be introduced as 'just an option' and then once they are more widespread they will start to become mandatory, at least at public events. Already on this comment thread we have people describing them as simply a sign of 'respect' for players and using similar language, it's obvious where this is going.
@ I totally agree with your take. They are about political control and not about safety at all. They COULD theoretically be used for communication, but in every case I've even seen them discussed in it was political.
The thing is, is words are communication tools. The best way to communicate and is to just speak about it like grown adults. If you are playing with children that cannot express themselves is a unique situation atypical to standard RPG play.
@@Joseph_G ah, the exact same strategy WOTC used before implementing the Tasha way for creating races.
@@Joseph_G Yes, this tool is designed as an ultima ratio. The rules of this tool empower the user to stop a scene, no explanation required.
But it does communicate something - "I cannot proceed with what is happening and want it to stop right now."
Some people have issues, that is a sad fact of life. Issues they might not want to discuss with fellow players, especially those who are not close friends. Issues they have trouble opening up about to a therapist.
Now, a player using it _can_ explain themselves, but they don't have to. A player could also misuse the tool, of course.
I don't use these tools personally, but if I were and a player would use it, I would offer my ear in private after the session, giving the player a choice to open up about it.
It’s sad. This really shouldn’t be a controversial topic at all. Whether you’re for or against them… you can do that at your own table, but why do people get angry about others that do something different?
Because you need to be able to communicate already to play the game, making the cards and rules for them unnecessary. They don't enable communication.
Well said. “Communication Tools” would have been a much better way to introduce these play concepts. As a Wichita police Sergeant the idea of safety tools for role playing games always made me chuckle.
I’m going to go read the article. The X card concept always bothered me because as a “communication tool” it allowed a single player to disrupt the play of the table (in some rpg books taboo topics subject to the X card could be , spiders, snakes, clowns, killing). I think your comments in regards to this and convention play are spot on.
While I totally get the reasoning behind suggesting the term "communication tool" instead of "safety tool", in the interest of clear communication, I think we should just stick with the established term instead of trying to change it and thereby confuse people even more! ;)
The only tool I ever really took issue with was the “X card”. Partly due to its overuse and complete negation of sensitive or complicated topics, but also because it is a very ineffective tool that requires someone to be reactive instead of proactive.
I prefer to discuss themes and setting and vibes of my games in terms of movies, books, or other popular media. I am currently running a noir themed heist campaign that I sold to my players as Mad Max meets Ocean’s Eleven. This quickly sets the tone and telegraphs what to expect. Occasionally we talk about roses and thorns, but usually that’s about procedure rather than content.
Have done the same with settings and new players, and it works great.
For a world of darkness campaign a few of the players didnt know the movies i recommended, so had them watch se7en, 8mm and first season of true detective. Never had so much character material from players to work with.
And Mad Max meets oceans 11 does sound pretty cool!
the level of infantalism that has been reached in the modern gaming sphere is sad. number 1 is if you have enough sexuality going in a game that people become uncomfortable.....you are a creep blurring gaming and some fetish. and if players cant deal with subjects like slavery, torture , death and gore(age appropriate of course, kids need a filtered experience) well fantasy games probably arent for you. play groups are not your therapy sessions,
Agreed!
there's always been a way to do this, its called "Use your words".
I don't disagree with you. However, it then becomes an argument / discussion about whatever topic made the player uncomfortable to begin with. So instead of putting an end to the discussion it prolongs it. That might be fine amongst a group of friends, but if you're playing with strangers it's quite different.
A card is just too soft, i'm a proponent of the X foghorn
And if everything else fails, press F to flip the table.
*Namor Ult*
Especially if any Stealing or Murder happens!
I've been DM'ing and playing TTRPGs for 40+ years, and I had never considered X cards and Safety Tools until about 2 years ago. I went through some trauma of my own which made me realize, you just don't know what is going on in other people's worlds, and having a level of consideration and empathy for that unknown is worthwhile and healthy for everyone.
See, I agree for the same reasons, and I think the slowing it down for a sec would work a bit. Communication is important, especially when you're outside your normal group.
Life changes, and we adapt to it.
Also, take it one step at a time on the journey. 👍 you never rebuild the same way, just do your best with the changes.
Good on you, mate - strong work
Mike Shea's "Pause for a minute" is my go-to. It's a great way to signal "hey, let's talk out of character for a little bit" and once you've done it once or twice it feels really natural.
I also use movie ratings. I don't really like R rated movies. They don't offend or upset me, but I don't enjoy them, and why bother watching a movie or playing a game you won't enjoy?
@@brettthomas2652 So what if you had a button on the table that had two lines on it arranged like ⏸️ that meant pause for a minute when pressed in case that’s more natural for folks who are shy enough that interrupting and speaking up might be rough for them? Which is exactly what the X-card is.
I have never used these tools. And I only play with new groups all of the time at conventions and at the game stores. I always add a good description if there are problematic issues or whats the appropriate age. I always have a small disclaimer and talk with the players. But I also steer clear of topics like sexual abuse, rascism and close up genocide of all kinds.
Based on my own limited experience trying both the X Card and Lines & Veils, I found L&V to be surprisingly useful (though not in the way I expected), whereas the X-Card, after being introduced in session zero, never actually came up during play. The interesting thing I found about Lines and Veils was that the survey let me know that my players were comfortable with a number of topics that I would otherwise have been hesitant to include (the game was a horror-infused fantasy RPG). So L&V actually let me include some interesting dark moments that I otherwise might not have felt comfortable throwing at them.
"Just talk it out" my god, y'all have never played with someone who had such a violent trauma response that they go "Fight, flight or freeze" and can't just be articulate when they are reliving some horrible experience. Just because you don't need it, that doesn't mean that someone else also doesn't. The flip is also true, just because some need it, that doesn't mean you have to have it.
Some people who have gone through things more aweful than the average person can imagine might need a non verbal way to signal a problem. Had a buddy who would take 10 minutes to calm down to the point he could speak when it happened. He could stand a lot of intense things, but any mention of hanging, noses or the Gallows cause problems. Because he watch his sister hang herself when he was 8. Sometimes a non verbal way of communicating a problem is needed for communication to even happen.
Seems like a card isn't really going to make much difference in the case you're describing.
@@manchasdos think for a second. Which takes more effort, Articulately speaking, or touching something on the table?
The X-card signals stop, then they can gather their wits to speak.
Then why aren't so-called 'safety tools' being advocated for in general social settings? All kinds of topics can come up down the pub, at a house party etc. Why aren't people being encouraged to keep an 'X card' in their back pocket? That the 'safety tools' advocates are only promoting them in TTRPGs shows that it isn't really about safety or trauma, because if it was they'd be promoting them everywhere. Talking is almost always the best option. And as for any possible edge case where it _isn't_ the best option, note that on the blog referenced in this vid, the author writes: "I have an actual trauma response to the X-card, as to me, it is a reminder of being barred from acknowledging or talking about real and serious problems". So she claims to be traumatized by the 'X card' itself - so you literally can't account for everything. If there is a tiny handful of people who actually benefit from the 'X cards' or 'traffic lights' rather than just talking, they'll also be a tiny handful who say they're traumatized _by those things._
@@Joseph_G - well said.
On the DM side of things especially, I honestly hate things like cards or artificial signals that something is bothering someone?
There's a few reasons for it:
A big one is just that, I want my players to just talk to me about what the issue is so we can work out a way to deal with it from there, I usually have a few breaks in a session, and we'll pause if someone asks for a bathroom break or to go get drinks/snacks/whatever, so, finding an excuse to request a 5-15 minute break isn't too hard and I've had players talk to me one-on-one during things like that, which, just works a lot better.
I also don't like to put players in a position where they have to announce to the table "This bothers me" in some way - which is what a lot of these systems do, either inadvertantly or by design, because some people don't want the entire table to know that a scene bothers them, or why, and in those cases it's better if they just talk to me during a break or between sessions, so I can deal with it without putting the spotlight on them about it.
If it's about something another player did, sometimes them bringing it up can cause some conflict between them and the other player, and, again, if there's going to be some interpersonal conflict at the table, I'd rather the upset player be upset with me, because I can deal with it and navigate that and try to mitigate how much it negatively impacts the game/group overall. Sometimes the players can work things out between themselves fine, but, that varies wildly group-to-group and player-to-player, a lot of peopel jsut don't handle conflict well, so often it's better if they talk to me I fill the role of 'lightning rod' for whatever clashes and issues come up at the table.
And honestly... usually things like cards, phrases, signals of "this bothers me" just adds extra steps to get to the "talk about what the issue is" part anyway. Adding some odd card or signal when "Hey, can we take a break for a few minutes?" and talking to me about it skips directly to the thing that it will result in anyway, just doesn't fix any actual problem.
That said, they might work fine for other GMs/groups, I've just never had them do anything to solve any sort of problem I have run into during my like 20 years GMing for various groups and games,
I don't like them being added to my games without contributing anything, and I basically never use them, but will usually make a point to be approachable to players, and make sure they have some chances to talk to me one-on-one about the game if they need to, either through DMs or texts, or in an aside or on breaks, or between sessions, etc., and if a player seems upset I'll check in with them ater the session or on a break to make sure they're okay, and so on.
Usually, this jsut works better anyway. The best-case scenario for raising a card to signal that you're upset or bothered by something is just that you move from there into talking about it anyway, so what's the point of adding a card that lets everyone at the table know this thing bothers you, and communicates nothing that you couldn't communicate already anyway?
[As an aside - I did have an autistic player in one of my games where a card like this was actually useful, but, that was jsut because they would go non-verbal sometimes and THAT is a lot harder to communicate through. So, as an accessibility tool for conditions that can impair or impact communication, it's definitely got more potential, but that is a different topic.]
This comment section is really depressing. Is it really that big of a deal that some people use these to make their games more enjoyable and welcoming to other people? Is it really that hard for some people to understand how these could be useful to certain people? Is this really such a political subject? Why is the phrase "culture war" being used so often here?
Because some people who make fun of people who get triggered by certain topics (e.g. calling them snowflakes) get triggered by a certain topic... the irony...
Yeah, I have no idea. I get wanting to discuss the topic but "culture war" or like "taking table hostage" or any of that has no place here. It's just fear mongering from people that are terminally online. Normal people don't talk or think like they do.
The cards aren't any more useful than opening your mouth and voicing your discomfort. They don't enable communication. That has to be there already.
Yes, it is a big deal. You have to be a good fit for the table, or the game won't work. It's your responsibility to find the right table for your needs. The table should not change to fit your needs. Fun is subjective.
@@sleepinggiant4062 It depends. They're communication tools. Some people communicate in different ways. I agree, like you said, they can be a big deal. And I agree that a "good fit" for the table is important. Communication tools are more helpful when you're with a new group/strangers.
@ Communication does not have a regulated outcome. X-Cards with a rule have. Use the x-card, the table ends the situation.
Tell someone you are uncomfortable, and you can't rely on that all players will respect this. There are those who will push the buttons deliberately from then on. The X-card is a table's (or DMs) acknowledgement that they will enforce the hoped outcome.
Will I use x-cards at my table? No, probably not. Not a fan of the concept of giving a player that full stopping power over everything in the game. I would acknowledge that a player could enforce me to throw out the big finale the group worked hard towards to. That I might have spent dozens of hours and $ prepping. (like 3d printing a 30x50x20 cm green dragon and painting it).
I basically use lines and veils by speaking with all players in private and compiling a list for topics to avoid, but once a session has started, the session continues. If a player gets too uncomfortable, there is always an open door policy and the chance to talk later.
I think unfortunately these "safety tools" were a well meaning, if somewhat clumsily implemented, tool that became a casualty of the culture war.
I've had the X card come up in games amongst friends but I also think that these tools are most useful when playing with strangers. Personally, I've found the Lines and Veils method very useful to fast track figuring out what content is on the table or not when playing with new people.
For the people who question "Who actually needs this? Why does this need something so formal" my response would be to say that I have played with a lot of people who are pretty timid and are easily run over, either by personality or even by trauma sometimes. They really don't want to cause a scene and are very much prone to ignoring something, even if it makes them uncomfortable, just to not rock the boat. These tools can help them speak up when they should, but otherwise might not. Now, you might say that it's on them to speak up, which I ultimately agree with, but these tools can help facilitate that, which I think is important.
Ultimately, as with all things in D&D, you do what is best for your table, and for this I think its the same. If you are a DM who thinks these are stupid but have a player ask where they are I'd really encourage you to take a second to ask the player why they feel the need for them, what they are worried about, and then work out something so everyone is happy.
Your middle paragraph makes no sense. If a player is "timid" and "really do[esn't] want to cause a scene", then waving an X card around or tapping on a 'traffic light' makes far more of a scene, and is far more likely to "rock the boat" than simply talking. The tools didn't become a casualty of the culture war, they are a weapon in it. They are about one side of it seizing power in TTRPG spaces.
@@Joseph_G I'm going to be honest, it doesn't sound like you've really played with the personalities that I have. A lot of people have issues being assertive or not wanting to cause conflict, but by giving them a tool that says "This is an appropriate button to push if you are uncomfortable that no one is going to judge you for" can, and has, really helped.
This isn't a tool for all people at all tables. Your assertion that what I said "makes no sense" just doesn't really hold any water because you are talking about a hypothetical and I'm talking about me own table.
I'm just trying to provide an example of how these tools have been useful for me and my table and why they were.
I have tried a lot of these, and the biggest issue i have is they tend not to do what they report they are for. As the author of the article points out, the use of an x card results in a net loss of communication. I do not say one should or should not use x tool or not because that seems very dependent on what the gm is comfortable with, but I have a difficult time seeing a use case.
I do think the conversation around saftey/communication tools is largely based on an intellectual bubble that does not represent reality. It presumes the player is not comfortable saying they are uncomfortable with x topic in an activity that should be based their direct, enthusiactic involvement. It kind of runs with the "d&d horror story" as an assumed base interaction at best.
It kind of assumes one predetermins a conversation before hand, which presumes a game is a liniar, predetermined experiance. That has not been my experiance with table top games in general, and it kind of seems like it is meant for specific games more so than general use.
One thing about these tools, perhaps even more important than the tools themselves, is that they send a clear signal that 1) The DM is aware that these kinds of issues can exist, and 2) They are open to talking about them. Knowing that any concerns I might have will be taken seriously goes a long way towards establishing trust, and trust is what makes these games work.
This is 100% it. This is why the people saying if only you've had the x card are sort of right. Not the x card specifically is the only way to do it, but really what they're saying is, if only you and this group had agreed up front as a condition of playing together that you'd be willing to cure each other out when something makes you uncomfortable and that you'd be willing to adjust the story for everybody else's comfort. In that situation, a player being a jerk is either going to drop before they get to that point because they don't like the rule, or they're going to be a jerk and everyone else is going to recognize that they're breaking the rule.
I don't love the use of the word safety here either, but it's not without merit. It's about giving people the psychological safety of knowing that they are among people who care about their good time and that it's okay to speak up if something in the game catches them off guard as being not okay with them.
I will also say, this is equally useful when playing with friends. Even the PG-13 and R rating thing doesn't really cover it completely for me. If I'm watching a PG-13 TV show and there's a child in danger, I have a reasonable expectation that the writers of that show are going to resolve that situation quickly. The person putting the child in danger is doing so as a narrative device so that I see how evil they are, but I'm not supposed to really worry that the child might be harmed. (Obviously very genre dependent). Whereas if my DM makes an attack roll against a child NPC, the outcome is unknown. Likewise, I might not have trust in my friends as competent storytellers who won't drift into tropes that I find unfun or harmful, Even though I'm more likely to give a popular TV show some more leeway on that front, trusting that it was recommended to me for a reason or it's popular for a reason. It's like a comedian earning the audience's trust, or an improv scene partner supporting their other scene partners. Improv is inherently fraught and can stop being fun pretty quickly if people are concerned about the direction things are going in.
That being said, I don't blame anyone who rolled their eyes at the term safety tools, I just wish people would be willing to give the concept a chance even if they don't like the specific implementation of the x card (I don't either) or the name.
Sorry for typos, I am relying on speech to text right now
Reflexively, i think safety tools are anti-therapeutic because they make trauma central to a person's identity. However, people online can lack social intellegence. I think gauging player interest and getting a list of lines and veils sounds like a good idea. But the X-card doesnt seem like a healthy communication tool.
My issue with safety tools is the belief that somehow if something happens that "triggers" someone or makes them uncomfortable, then you're supposed to change the game to fit them vs having a serious talk with them about whether they should continue playing the game as written. I don't want to exclude anyone. But if only one person at the table has an issue with how the game is going, and uses a safety tool more than once, then that may just lead to resentment from the other players which is also not good.
I would also get slightly annoyed by someone pointing at an X card, and not telling what the exact issue is. Cause leaves everyone in the dark, including the GM with how to proceed long-term in the campaign.
I think the best way is to be 100% upfront from the beginning (like session 0) on what exactly will be in the game. We do upfront content warnings always before we jump into a new game, we all want to try. Flush everything out before hand and so far, we have had no problems.
@@idontevenknow9758 Does that include content warnings for all the players actions that will happen in the up coming game too though?
@@driver3899just so understand what do you mean exactly? Just general actions or actions that are not cool, like harming a player?
@@driver3899we don’t do actions more like general topics and themes. We play a ton of horror ttrpgs so there are definitely things that while are super fun in horror we have to be mindful of. To give an example, we generally avoid horrific torture. We stick to psychological stuff and that has worked well. I would say know your players and set expectations, as well as get any obvious issues just out of the equation. You don’t have too, it’s just adding to the conversation
Renaming safety tools is pretty silly. But so is rawdogging personal preference bias. No tool is perfect but we shouldn't expect a fire extinguisher to prevent fires from starting -- only to put them out. Why would we think safety tools would be any different?
Never used these in my games but in their defense the discussions brought up around the use of said tools did help me realize I should have discussions with new players with what they can or cannot expect in my games. I would say that in my case, it was a positive thing.
If you replace the word "X card" with "time out," suddenly this whole topic shifts and makes sense for everyone.
"I'm going to do X." "Woah, time out. Is everyone okay with him doing X?"
"There's a big scary monster that's eating a baby." "Woah, time out. I didn't know baby eating monsters were on the table. I'm not okay with that."
"There is a big scary monster that's eating *berries*."
no it still doesn't make sense.
It doesn't make sense to those that insist the tools are needed. That's what's baffling to the rest of us that know it's not necessary.
I run and manage TONS of games at conventions. We often use trigger warnings in the description to let people know what kind of things the players can expect to encounter, in as vague a way as possible to not spoil the game but still set some expectations (i.e. Body horror, Fantasy/ horror violence) and often I will have an xcard at the table. More often than not tho if someone says something uncomfortable at a table and I see that kneejerk reaction from other players, I will interject with "Moving right along/ right past that" to let the player know that we are not going in that direction and get the game back on track.
I mirror you're own experience. I even started using them during learning workshops and professional development classes. They we're invaluable during COVID.
It's funny that these tools are controversial in TTRPG scene and not controversial at all in LARP scene.
I don't mind safety tools, I just think they're generally overcomplicate stuff. Like, I just talk to players about if they have any touchy subject. That, and a heads up if your game goes very dark, are generally enough.
Someone said: If you the kind of person who needs an X card to play an RPG, than you have problems that are not solved by an RPG and you should look for professional help.
The irony is that even if you hate these so much that you don't want to play with anyone who advocates for them, they're still fulfilling their purpose in a roundabout way by funneling people away from games they probably wouldn't be well-suited for.
I find it funny that the biggest opposers of safety tools would benefit from "trigger warning: safety tools are going to be discussed for the next minute". They'd froth at the mouth less.
> Anecdotally, I have an actual trauma response to the X-card, as to me, it is a reminder of being barred from acknowledging or talking about real and serious problems. I understand that was not the designer’s intent; trauma responses are not always logical.
I would call an X card an "anti-communication tool" because it replaces the normal method of communication (by talking things out) for a mechanical way to avoid talking about the person's displeasure with the way things are going in the game.
@@poetryalpastor When did I say it was bad?
Liked, watched, commented (obviously), and didn't even know what an X card was, but Good Grief. I know at least 1 PC who'd instantly weaponize this concept to do the opposite. Sure you could argue that he'd be problematic either way but the result would still be the same. The card accomplished Nothing. Could easily be used to censor anyone for any reason, right or wrong. And once you censor, all conversations are over. Useless Bunk. This reminds me of the time our group tried to game with a player who insisted on topics that were off limits, for DMs & other players alike. We capitulated but by the time they were done, so many topics were forbidden that the game self destructed before it began. It's simple. Talk. If you can't get it done with a conversation, you can't get it done with a card.
I will say that pointing to a red or yellow light on a card isn't as good at letting other people understand the problem as just normal talking is. I would refer to these mechanics as Communication-Obscuration Tools.
I think the main advantage of something like that is to gather information quickly from a group of people. I've used similar techniques in teaching to quickly assess if a group of people understands what I'm saying. It's certainly lower-resolution than talking about it though.
It should be noted, that is kind of the point. It's so someone doesn't have to stop and explain why that topic upsets them, since that would defeat the point of trying to skip over it, or feel like having to justify your trauma.
@@EasilyBoredGamer Except the GM won't actually know the topic the player wants to skip over without further clarification.
@@EasilyBoredGamer The point people consistently try to talk around is that if you're so dysfunctional you can't even explain to other people why something upsets you, social activities like role playing just aren't for you. You have to meet a basic level of competence and resilience to interact with other human beings, and it isn't worth everyone else walking on eggshells to cater to the most dysfunctional nerds at the con.
@@Hedgehobbit Most of the time, the group would understand the topic the player wants to skip over. Context, empathy, common sense, etc. Let's not be contrarian.
Great points Ben. One dynamic of Safety Tool that I don’t think came up was just how saying they will be used in your game likely filters people from playing. For example, I think if you emphasize Safety Tools in a games description folks who are very opposed will likely choose to not join that game - and any game that does not mention them or perhaps notes they do not support their use will likely turn away those who see safety tools as mandatory. Long winded way of saying Safety tools might have most of their impact before the game even starts.
Anecdotally I've only ever used safety/communication tools with groups of friends. Sometimes people cross the line and are not reading a room and being able to emphatically say "no really, cut it out" and have people listen immediately has been crucial to some of my groups maintaining friendships outside of game.
Con games certainly had them and in some ways they definitely were appreciated since I felt that some people put on the "brakes" of bad behavior knowing there was a simple way to call them out.
I also run a larp where we instituted an "OK check in system". This is especially useful in LARPs where a large number of people means there is no way that everyone knows each other well and there can be social pressure not to speak up. Having the check in meant people could signal their own comfort level. This also goes on the "go harder" end of the pendulum. I've seen In-Character arguments and heated exchanges ramping up. The parties did hand signals without breaking character and both motioned that they could go bigger and both of them let loose while bystanders could tell that both of them had opted in to an intense exchange and it wasn't about Out Of Character reasons.
TTRPGs are communication games. If you're not communicating, you're not playing the game. I've found that I haven't ever really needed any 'safety tools' because at the tables I play at and DM for, we're very open about the kinds of games we're running and generally assume that everyone has good intentions.
But if safety tools work for you, either because you run games with strangers often or any other reason, you do you. If that's the way you want to run your games, good for you, I've just never seen the need in any of my games.
I don't understand why people would get angry at this. Why get angry at something that helps you be nice to people?
Because it's incredibly patronising to tell people they need help being nice to people; when the vast majority of people don't need to be told?
The vast majority of the comments in this comment section aren't people that are angry. They're baffled and advocating for a good session zero where everyone talks about their expectations.
Adam Koebel, co-creator of Dungeon World and one of the early proponents of "safety tools" got himself canceled for an awkward live stream that he GM'ed. That goes to show that "safety tools" aren't some magic fix. Everyone at the table needs to be an adult, meaning they know how to speak up, read the room as well as forgive. But I can see how "communication tools" could assist some who have trouble speaking up, and maybe that will help for those deficient in reading the room. But they won't make anyone better at forgiving.
That's probably the most famous example of how they don't work as intended. When something uncomfortable is happening, a very common response to to just "freeze". If you freeze, how is it possible to play an X card or do something else safety tool related? You don't. Adam may have thought everything was fine _because_ the safety tools weren't being used. This is one of their flaws.
Perhaps the most important skill of a GM is being able to read your players.
@@poetryalpastor Yeah, that's why I'm specifically referring to active safety tools like the X-Card. Some people will "freeze" when they run into situations they aren't comfortable with. That's why the conversation before playing is more important. I mean, I think it's still good to have tools or an openness in the table to like "pause" when something gets uncomfortable. I'm just pointing out that "freezing" is a very real response.
I was running a dungeon, and one of the random encounters was a bunch of giant centipedes. One of my players really didn't like bugs and stuff, so what i did was take the token out of the field of view of the player (we were using Foundry VTT) and just have the others deal with it. By the next session, all centipedes were replaced with teddy bears (but their stat blocks remained unchanged). This is my personal experience with dealing with something like triggers
Also to note, one of my recurring players is arachnophobic, so I've gone to great lengths to never have giant spiders in any game he's a player in
Exactly what I have been saying. When I was young playing with friends we were each others experiences. We ran around together, played sports together, and played DnD together. We all knew what was happening in all of our lives. So, no problem with "crossing lines," since we already knew them. But, sitting with strangers can be tough, and it may be awkward if you came with one friend and are meeting their other friends. You don't want to just leave, but you may not like where things go. I get it. It seems odd to me, but then I'm the one who would just say "bye" and take off. Not everyone feels that way
Movie ratings I think are the best example of outlining the content of what will be talked about at the table, and the one I use because of it. I'm glad it was mentioned; it's SUPER easy for most adult players to instantly understand "Okay, this is a PG-13 game" and communicate where the lines are.
I also hope this video alters the perception and terminology from "safety tools" to "communication tools." I don't think anybody is against improved communication, and I think framing it as a "safety" device begs for certain actors to pick at it. We get it, it's cool to ride a skateboard without a helmet, and maybe everyone does need to toughen up a bit, but maybe also people don't want to be reminded of the worst day of their lives when they're trying to have fun.
Any move to rename them 'communication tools' would be a lie. They aren't about communication, they communicate nothing that can't simply be spoken. They're about power. Which is why the people who supposedly 'need' them in game don't use them in ordinary life, down the pub or at workplace and in the all the many other places where conversations flow freely and people could hypothetically be reminded of "the worst day of their lives" at any time. In those circumstances, simple words are the only 'communication tool' needed - the same is true of TTRPGs.
@OP, Love this response!
I run many horror games and I think the important part is to have some kind of social contract to make sure everybody is enjoying and nobody feels unwell.
I use a "make a break" rule that either I use to check in but every player is allowed and encouraged to step in and say " I dont feel well with this".
For me, playing rpg is having fun together, so I don't want to tell storied my players dont enjoy.
I think this really boils down to when Ben was talking about how he's never actually seen it in the wild, a lot of these safety tools are theoretical that nobody seems to actually use (and I'm not knocking them if they do to be clear). I think a vast majority of people just talk about things, and people are trying to normalize something with good intent, but that really isn't needed.
I've used the X card a bunch of times. Most times it sits there and nobody uses it because the act of agreeing to have an X card and the conversation about what kinds of things would cause people to touch it, is usually all that's necessary to ensure it's never used.
The idea of having the X card isn't that people are going to reach for it every session. The purpose is to facilitate the conversations that make it so no one ever does. But if you don't have the X card, then you'll never know if someone would have touched it. If you don't have those conversations, then you won't know if they were necessary.
They are used quite often and are helpful at conventions or anywhere else there is an open table that may have different people playing at each session.
Use safety tools if you like, but it's more important to keep your eyes on your players. It's not the DM's job to make sure we are all okay, emotionally, we all have eyes and mouths to check in on each other. Be aware of how your party is responding emotionally to the game.
I was ready to vehemntly disagree but you make some pretty good points.
I usually come at this from the standpoint that a lot people younger than me seem to have a chronic social disability. People too fragile or brittle probably wouldn't get an invitation.
This does appear to have more utility in a convention setting. Because people paid to be there and paid to sit at your table.
My home games are more toward pg13 ish. If a group wants heavier material I will do something else.
It might be worth thinking about these tools as symbolic gestures.
Like when you say "How are you?" as a greeting, you're not actually asking for information about the person's emotional state. You're using a social convention to signal recognition, care and respect.
Announcing that you're using these tools to a table of people you don't usually play with can function in a similar way... It's not that you actually expect the tools to be useful. It's just a way of signalling that you care about your players' emotional comfort.
Just a thought.
That seems valid to me. While on the other hand, there could be long-running friend groups where if you suddenly introduced an X card they might take it as an insult, as it could imply that they weren't able to freely express their thoughts. It's going depend on the context.
100% this.
The debating about it is exhausting. It’s not that effective but the problem it’s trying to address isn’t insignificant either.
@@QuestingBeastThis is a great point - if I went to my regular game that had no safety tools (and it’s game that we doing’ regularly get into x-rated material) it could signal that this is going to be a different experience than normal. That could be good if intended, but bad if not.
@@QuestingBeastseems like an unlikely scenario. Perhaps if one of the players in the group is new or awkward and uncomfortable expressing themselves openly, they establish a code between them and the GM and resolve it that way. I don’t see how a long-running friend group would be offended by an X card any more than they would if the GM brought up the fact that one of the players is uncomfortable with a certain topic / behavior. The distinction would be between addressing it or not addressing it rather than X card or a between-sessions conversation
@@QuestingBeast "While on the other hand, there could be long-running friend groups where if you suddenly introduced an X card they might take it as an insult, as it could imply that they weren't able to freely express their thoughts."
Sure. Yet, that highly depends on how you introduce the tools.
If you introduce them as just codified tools, that allow to adjust the fictional content to the needs of the table, without providing anything (completely) new, there are good chances folks won't be offended.
Especially if you don't force specific tools onto the group, but ask: "How have we been editing content, that's off - what did work and what didn't and do we want to codify it in some way?" The X-Card might serve as an example who others codified things.
Great commentary. Loved the article as well. I thought about this same thing a few days ago and never encountered it myself because of the high level of comfort you have with friends and colleagues. With strangers you might need some kind of system but I think I would also just be a conscientious adult and give heads-up and check-ins like yourself.
I think this is one of those examples where a more niche use dominates the discussion but it's really much more straight-forward and rational, and it's nice to de-escalate the conversation and just ask "What are these things really for? And, do we need them? How/when are they actually helpful".
I've never encountered the use of these but if there's a card someone uses that just absolutely shuts down what is happening, or without discussion, you're supposed to drastically alter what is happening... I would be pretty confused and asking for guidance/information, which probably directly contradicts the point of the tool (as understood by the user) in the first place. It would be much more beneficial to "communicate" before and during to ensure their needs, and the flow of the game, were preserved (very much like you do yourself).
I really do think that a major issue is the name. I think some people perceive that the "need for safety tools" implies that not only is gaming "inherently dangerous", but that THEY'RE inherently dangerous and players need to be "protected" from them. Communication tools is a decent name, or I'd suggest "comfort tools" or "comfort guidelines". Because that's really what its about.
I'd change "inherently dangerous" with "unintentionally uncomfortable" and "having respect for other players experiences". Case and point, I've been a gamer and GM for over 35 years, and I love gritty violence, and horror. I'm also a tall, broad shouldered loud guy to give you the picture. But since becoming a dad a few years ago, I'm extremely squeamish when it comes violence or even threats of violence against kids. Last year, I was playing with a group of friends that I've been playing with for around five years, and one night, during a tense session one of my fellow players decided to use a child npc hostage with a threat to their lives to get what they wanted. In the moment, I felt super uncomfortable, that it took me almost twenty seconds to say "No, we're not doing this!" and asked the player and the GM to retcon the situation so that it was an adult instead of a child. After some back and forth, they did. The player did bring up the usual excuse of "creative censorship", and I countered with "are your ideas worth the discomfort & disrespect that you're causing me?". Safety is just another word for respect or trust.
For me it's not the name, it is that you already have to have communication to play D&D, making the cards/gestures and rules for them unnecessary. Have a session 0. Set expectations up front. Just speak up and say what's bothering you if something comes up.
If I knew a player was going to insist on safety tools, I simply wouldn’t invite that person to my table. That said, in session zero I give a warning about the type of content you should expect to see in the campaign.
As adults, we don't have to play games like "X card" or "traffic light" to be honest. Just say you're uncomfortable. GM's should cover possible topics before playing to ensure players are okay with certain kinds of content, and let them know it's okay to speak up. To the point of people being bad at communicating their feelings, there's only one way to get better at it. Humans are not fixed things, we can change and grow if we have the right mindset.
I professionally GM for both kids and adults, we're upfront about what any campaign or adventure might contain, and I've never had an issue. But I do always say if there's anything uncomfortable, please speak up.
This is a hard issue because people have differing opinions in regards to who the onus is on. People against safety tools generally say the players should just grow up. And sometimes they should. But in other scenarios, the GM should read the room.
The most important part, and the part that avoids the necessity of "safety tools", is communicating up front the themes or possible scenarios. If players are not okay with certain things, and they're understandable, then avoid them. However if certain players are too strict in terms of what they can handle, then they should find a different table or game system.
In my view, if we're talking about adults, we cannot coddle ourselves from the world, and people with triggers need to learn to deal with them. On the other hand, there are many things I'm not willing to GM myself - either because I find them gross or disinteresting. It's about balance. It's never always the players or the GM that's at fault if someone is stopping the game.
Just be respectful of other people, realize that many people have a plethora of different experiences, some of which are bad. Others are just sensitive. However, if a couple of players are controlling the dynamics of the table, and themes/maturity of content were communicated and agreed upon, then that's not fair to the rest of the group. If the GM is going beyond what was communicated, then that is also not fair to the group.
We're all fallible, no one is perfect at communicating. But that's really all it takes. Give people the benefit of the doubt, player or GM. As a GM, be honest about themes. As a player, be honest when you're uncomfortable. Have a conversation, and move on.
Very well stated.
First, I agree with Meguey: they are communication tools. Second, if you feel they are not needed, it is very likely that you do not play with complete strangers very often AND (more importantly) the games you play might not need them as much. It's one thing to play a game about getting loot and killing monsters, another thing altogether is to play a game like Bluebeard's Bride. The latter definitely needs more clear communication guidelines and tools.
I agree with you as well.
I have found that the film certificate system works VERY well during session zero (alongside other discussions of content) to give your players a good idea of whats on the table. Movies have refined this system for years, and they are actually very comprehensive and explicit about what is generally on the table.
Except that a film rating doesn't really tell you what's included. I think most adults would be ok with some r rated graphic violence but not with graphic rape scenes which are also found in r rated movies. I know I personally don't want to see any graphic rape scenes or listen to them described in my rpg. At least that's my personal opinion
@@tyrantkingking that makes sense, but often, that's included in the byline of a film rating.
@@tyrantkingkingwell, Netflix is pretty explicit with its warnings, to the point where it can sometimes become a spoiler
@@drillerdev4624 yes that would be much more helpful, much better than a standard film rating
Agreed. The easiest, most common sense solution. Genre also plays into this, helping to determine the overall tone of the film or game. Action-Adventure films don’t typically swerve into gore and disturbing body horror for example.
What games are you playing if you need "stop words"? I don't think even Dark Sun is dark enough for this kind of things...
Probably a game with complete strangers where the DM is using it as an excuse for some wacky fetish stuff without informing the players of it ahead of time. These tools should be largely pointless if you're playing with friends, and probably completely ineffective if the DM and other players are strangers and bastards
@@alexeyoganezov bad stuff happens to people, and plenty of people don’t want to deal with that crap in a game they’re playing for fun.
To use a concrete and fairly common example, weird Far Realm influences or chaos magic side effects that involve tumors sprouting on your body might just be wacky hijinx to the DM but something a player actually dealing with a tumor doesn’t find funny in the least.
Granted it’s an open question whether “safety tools” are helpful versus normal open communication and saying “tumors aren’t funny, dude, can we not do this?”
Pretty much my feelings on the tools from the beginning. Never used them in 40 years of gaming, but at conventions where you're not playing with friends probably useful. That said, some basic people handling skills can go a long way to alleviate such conflicts as well. The movie ratings thing I do use, as it tells everyone upfront what the expectation is, and what the limits are. At a convention, explicitly stating what players can expect from the scenario also goes a long way to setting limits, and preventing a player from joining something they aren't comfortable with.
One of the things I've noticed over the last 15 years or so is that the focus of RPGs has moved from a group of friends playing a game to a more convention-focused activity. This isn't just true with safety rules, but with general RPG rules as well. Often games focusing on convention play will feature all sorts of crazy activities and wild swings in narrative. These things are great for a single 3-4 hour session but just don't work if you intend the game to be part of a long-lasting campaign.
IMO, this is why there is so much disagreement on these safety tools as well as numerous narrative-focused designs. These features work great at conventions and a game's creator will use a player's convention experience as a selling tool.
This is a really good point that I hadn't considered. I do think you are right that the presumption of a game being a regular group that knows each other (well) and lasts over an extended time is no longer the norm. I don't know if that presumption is invalid, or if the hobby has been flooded with people who cannot find those types of games, or if the newcomers don't want a long term game. Food for thought, but our hobby may now be two separate and distinct hobbies in that respect.
That's an interesting point.
I definitely agree with your overall point. I don't know about convention based play specifically, but certainly playing with strangers online, at conventions, and at game stores. The player group I am in who are all my age are all IRL friends, even if we don't live in the same towns now. The other player group I am in, where everyone else is 20 to 30 years younger than me, most of them have never met in person with anyone in the group except me. And, frankly, they don't expect to have a local group of people that they play with. And I've been playing with these people for 10 years, so it isn't like it is just a coincidence. Because they all play in other groups also that are equally not in person communities.
Agree, and also the last 15 years have seen a massive uptick in the amount of people playing TTRPGs and I think its fair to say most of them are playing online. At conventions, at least you can read strangers body language to see if someone is uncomfortable.
I'de say Safety/Communication tools are very important for a huge demographic of new players that are online with anonymous strangers, who (in the worst case scenario) lack any kind of accountability for their actions.
Even if: as we all know, the internet is only full of reasonable, rational people, that never indent ill will, and understand sarcasm.
yeah the first time I every even played a TTRPG was a con. If lets say the DM had no tools or anything and we had a communication breakdown (which can totally happen in a con with strangers), there is a good chance I would be like well this hobby kinda stinks, I'm out. First impressions are super important for any community hobby.
I've had an X-card used one time at my table.
Context: I (and a handful of other DMs) run a monthly game for beginning players at the local library. Being a public event, the Library requires we use safety tools and players that sign up are encouraged to list any topics to avoid. This is done anonymously and most players don't submit a checklist, but we have had a few requests such as "no animal cruelty" and "no cannibalism".
I was running a basic dungeon crawl scenario and the PCs encountered a band of goblins. One player says to the others "the goblins will eat us if they capture us", to which the player beside him says "stop, I don't want to hear about that". The first player takes that as a queue to push some button and starts to get into it, at which point the second player grabs the X-card off the table and waves it in front of his face and tells him again to stop. The first player was confused and starts to try and explain, at which point I (the DM) jumped in and firmly told him "we know. Just stop. Just let it go." This all happened within about 15 seconds.
We all took a deep breath and continued the session.
IMO, this backs up the idea that when you are playing with strangers you just don't know what may "trigger" them. Now, I wouldn't consider using an X-card in my home game, but I would also expect to be playing with people that I know ~ at least well enough to be comfortable communicating directly with them rather than relying on a "safety tool" to do the talking for me.
So:
1. The move from safety tools being justified as a purely voluntary measure to be decided by the DM and players is already shifting into a mandatory requirement, starting at that library. It will be conventions next. The logical conclusion of the argument for the tools is that they will be made mandatory, at least at public events.
2. The safety tool added nothing to the communication. The player who used it had already communicated discomfort verbally. And the use of the tool didn't stop the other player from talking about the topic that was making the uncomfortable player uncomfortable.
Safety tools aren't about enabling players to communicate their discomfort, they're about imposing an ideology on the TTRPG space.
I mean a public community space like a library requiring safety tools for their TTRPG nights is completely fair, it’s their space, they set the baseline for how they want it to run and if a DM isn’t cool with that, then they probably wouldn’t sign up to be involved.
Also from what the above commenter said, the X card was the last resort after other attempts at communication had been ignored and it told the DM that a line had been crossed and they shut it down, that feels like an effective usage
@@Joseph_G Here, the X card was useful because, by using an X card system, the players had all agreed to move on from anything that made someone feel uncomfortable. So when an issue came up, instead of getting into a big argument about what's OK and derailing the game (and also increasing someone's discomfort), the DM was able to move on with the game within 15 seconds.
Slippery slope arguments like the one you're making aren't about useful discussion, they're about imposing a culture war on all social spaces.
that was pretty ridiculous. One player controlling another roleplay with a comment that's not extreme. Plenty of monsters consume their kill. If you cant handle common play incidents, don't play. No communication was enhanced, the tool just allows players to assume control of others or games under the guide of comfort.
@@Joseph_G 1. You and your players will always be able to decide what is best for your group. Public events have always been responsible for the safety of their patrons, and making the customer feel comfortable. Don't like it, don't play in public. Conventions have already implemented stuff like that. My understanding is that even GenCon has had pronouns on their badges for a few years now. Y'know, for "safety".
2. It was brought out when verbal communication was ignored, as a physical reinforcement of the verbal statements. It also got the DM's attention that we weren't just chumming around and goofing on someone who didn't want their character eaten by goblins. The player was uncomfortable with the topic. Not a big deal, IMO.
Each table is different. But a good DM knows its audience. Playing with kids is not the same as playing with adults and playing with friends certainly entails a different approach than with total strangers. I no longer play with strangers as I have little time to DM more than one group, but when I was more active, I would have a conversation with people and would explain that my games are usually grim dark but on the 18+ side. Death will certainly happen to characters, especially with new characters. Only once have seen one person leaving and that was 35 years ago. That person was replaced immediately and that group went on for 4 years! A good talk at the begining will dispel any doubts and possible misunderstanding.
I mostly play and run dungeon crawls. No such tools needed, because traumatic things don't tend to happen, and we work things out in play.
However, I was once in a campaign based on the GM's extremely dark fantasy novel. One PC got raped. The GM railroaded us into getting trapped into an real dungeon (the kind where you get tortured by a torturer, and we did... for 3 sessions... not where you navigate mazes). Every time we tried to escape, he fixed things so we couldn't, and the tortures got worse. In our final fight with the bad guys, it was almost a TPK, and the bad guys won. I would have liked communication tools in that campaign, but I don't think the GM was mature enough to have used them. Instead, we had to confront this toxic guy afterwards.
Language is such a hugely important part of communication. What we choose to call things can impart so many subversive ideas that we may not realize. I think the breakdown of language here was great. I also think the point that this sort of thing tends to be useful with strangers, but maybe not so much with people you know, was spot on. I haven't ever felt the need to talk through content warnings with my players, because we've all played together for so long. The movie rating system seems really good though, I'll probably steal that. Not only for the intensity of the content, but possibly for how light-hearted or silly the game can be as well.
To me, the best way to approach this at a convention is to provide a movie rating… and then remind people that they can speak up if something it too much for them. If that isn’t good enough they are free to do what people in a movie theater can do and leave the movie/game.
I fear that QB has a fundamental misunderstanding about safety tools. It's not for when you expect there might be a problem, it's for when you don't think there's going to be a problem. My own story of when I completely screwed up as a DM wasn't when I was running something edgy or running something with a group of players I didn't know. It was running a completely vanilla D&D campaign, maybe a dozen sessions in when the party got jumped by a giant spider. What I didn't know was one of the players was a massive arachnophobe. That was not a good experience and when I found out later I was mortified. Even since then, I've used a similar system to the X card, I could easily have swapped out that encounter for another CR4 encounter to keep the game being fun for all players, it wasn't important to the plot that it was a spider. That's not the same as a player demanding that the Vampire game you're running doesn't involve any blood.
Since becoming a parent I can no longer do child-endangerment plotlines, so when I run I just establish a rule of magic that says that old/tough/experienced/leveled sacrifices are the best and children make fell rites sputter rather than roar. In Pathfinder there's a demon/goddess called Lamashtu who demands that children be taught her lore. I imagine that any cultist who hurts any of the kids (during the creepy gonna-teach-you cantrips cutscene) will be skinned alive by the goddess. Yeah, tldr: I don't like the 'fridging' technique of killing vulnerable NPCs to establish the stakes. It's more interesting to have the pro-child demon you were hunting be discovered to have rescued the missing kids from the giant spiders, then demand assurances that it's safe to leave them with the party.
A pro child demon, huh.
I'm a parent and there are some things that bother me (scene in Sleepy Hollow with Johnny Depp) but I also teach my kids that the world isn't all lollipop and rainbows so that they don't grow up needing safety blankets and can stomach discomfort.
If it's too dark. I just don't do it. It's not for me but trying to dance around discomfort just doesn't make sense.
Why happened to "Sticks and Stones..." This Concept seems to have faded from our culture? What happened to Stoicism? If you need to establish a boundary, then speak up.
👁👁
"something thoughtful and respectful."
For my table I made better experience with an open session zero. Players can send me sensible topics they don’t want to be included anonymously with online surveys or paper.
Most of the time my horror adventures include cannibalism, body horror and hopelessness. I make it very clear at the beginning, with examples.
I would also differentiate between x can happen on game world to x can happen to my character.
There’s so many other skills, techniques and etiquette that we can talk about and spend our entire lives practicing and people out here debating whether having an X card at the table for the tiny off chance that it isn’t forgotten and is actually used and _succeeds_ is bad practice…
You can use similar tools to communicate between players and GM whether either of them wants to move on or linger, be it a scene, a 20 minute tangent about some door, or to leave something aside for a different time
I agree that the most important skill in RPGs is just normal communication!
I've been playing for nigh-on 5 decades. We didn't have them as kids. But we pushed some games harder than we probably should have.
Having the concept of some degree of checks and balances around might have made us kinder when we were being deliberately brutal. Just to see how far we could go.
We survived. But I genuinely think that these tools - by whatever name - would have improved some games.
Now we're not kids, we're WAY kinder and sensitive. So, maybe, for noobs and young-uns, a safety net by any name is good?
As an old player like yourself (40+ years here...) I'd say no, it's not good. The real world doesn't have any safety nets. Why should a game stop them from learning?
Boundry pushing in a safe place sounds completely appropriate for adolescents/young adults from childhood development standpoint.
Yaaah, both valid points. Tricksy innit.
I like the change in language to communication tools. It sets the precedent that talking provides everything needed to feel comfortable and safe at the table.
All dude groups who know each other might not need safety tools, if they know each other and can read each other well. Otherwise use them, look up the statistics on SA, if you have two women at your table calculate the odds using the current statistics, if they have been victims of SA. D&D players should understand odds and those odds are pretty high. So maybe have those conversations first before making someone relive terrible experiences in their life.
But it is just one communication tool, I check the oil in my car, I don't wait for a problem to happen. Same as I check in with my players make to sure they know lines of communication are open and that they can talk to me.
X cards use in the wild is mainly as virtue signaling. Having a basic session zero eliminates the need for them, as you can just use your words, and communicate with your group or DM.
Agree on a session zero.akes for a better game no matter what, played in a group once where four people wanted political and court intrigue and one just wanted to beat up stuff. Not fun for any one.
Can be a bit harder for oneshots at conventions, but before signing up for a game you should read the intro to it be enough of an adult if you think you cannot stomach it.
That’s one of my favourite Fry and Laurie sketches 👌
I've been DMing for 30+ years, never used communication tools. Don't think I would either. Mostly because I am unable to run a game where everyone is not laughing and cracking jokes. I have tried, horror turns into Army of Darkness. I am a big believer that RPGs help teach people to communicate better, having a tool to shut down a conversation is not helping anyone. In saying that when people get close to a line, I have pulled them up. Unless its funny.
_"The X card is a card with a X on it."_ - Plato, during The Great Emu War (circa 1,150 AD)
Jokes aside, although the arguments for and against _safety_ tools are very nuanced - and there are valid arguments on both sides! -, I think the whole focus of this topic is being misplaced. I'm not saying I disagree with Ben. I just think we are talking too much about _seatbelts_ and too little about _safe driving._ (is that how you English-speaking people call it?) Seatbelts prevent no crashes. Instead, they mitigate the damage caused by recklessness or distraction. (or poorly maintained highways, but that's beside the point)
Badly designed roads and intersections too, a lot of injuries and deaths have been prevented by digging up a road and moving it a bit, or cutting down a bush slightly down the road from the corner, causing a blind spot in a very bad, but more difficult to recognise place.
Safety cards are a second seatbelt. You already have your communication to play D&D. Speak up and say you are bothered and need to pause the game. There is no need for a second way to say stop.
The movie rating suggestion has its uses, but one potential issue (especially if you play online with people from different countries, or just have an international group of friends) is that the standards of ratings film boards can vary between countries. Even within the same film board, standards can be arbitrary and inconsistent (often contradictory) and problematic in its own ways. The American film rating system is particularly egregious.
1. LGBT content is rated more strictly than straight content. But I'm a Cheerleader (1999) was given an R rating for no other reason than that it depicted lesbian romance.
2. America film ratings are infamous for being absurdly permissive towards violence while also being draconian towards sexual content.
3. Many countries apply very different standards towards their film ratings.
If you are going to apply film ratings to your game, be aware of the cultural biases within your country's film ratings system, and be aware of your audience. You will find that not everyone has the same standards for what constitutes R18 content and what can be considered appropriate for all ages.
TTRPGs are inherently a high trust activity, and these problems come from low trust groups (con games and increasingly online with strangers). At the end of the day nothing can stop the GM from behaving badly or enabling/excusing bad behavior from other players. This is the issue with the X-card as a means to opt-out, and why procedures that allow players to opt-in (lines & veils, movie ratings, or your system of doing "OK" checks) are better. Opt-in procedures are useful for all tables, whereas opt-out systems like the X-card only work in this magical limbo where tables will be ok with you being uncomfortable but also totally respect the opt-out.
Ive never used an "official" safety tool. But i tell any folks at my table that i am wanting the game to be fun, so they need to talk to me.
Once, when i was a player i knew that iur party was going up against a pack of wolves soon. My kiddo had just been attacked by some dogs and i didn't want to play a game where there would be descriptions of dog attacks. The GM changed it up to where it was a different beast which did bludgeoning damage instead.
A few years later when that GM was at my table, he called me the day befoe a game and said his week had been really hard and he was feeling powerless and would really like to smash some goblin heads. Wouldn't you know it, their camp was raided by goblins with comically large heads.
Thank you for this measured take on this heated topic. Considering both sides of the argument is rarely done on YT or Reddit, from what I've experienced. This topic can get very "bad DM didn't use safety tools" VERY quickly. Sometimes people come to the expectation that safety tools require the DM to have to undo vast parts of their game design because one person is uncomfortable with a topic in play (examples ranging from animals, insects, spiders to blood, horror, seggs... just off the top of my head). The inclusion of these tools (officially) in the last 5 years is a bit of whiplash, especially the longer someone has played without them or being *aware* of them (It's me, I was unaware). Then there's terminology used, and how much explanation it takes to on-board someone to what those terms mean (I struggled a LOT with Lines & Veils, but Soft Limit/Hard Limit was 100% clarity right away).
I feel *educated* without being *lectured* and I have heard a nuanced, measured take on this, here today.
No one's going to call them Communication Tools. Sounds awkward, too many syllables, and there's nothing at all wrong with the term Safety Tools.
This reeks of pedantry, to me. And/or people trying to compromise with pedants. They are meant to help people feel safer, or to avoid bad/toxic social situations in TTRPGs. Seems like a matter of safety to me.
Safety tools are totally optional, and I think are a good thing to have _as_ an option. If you wkend up not needing them, awesome! Also, you can pick and choose what and how you use them -- there's no single "correct" set. An X card may not fit, but there are many others. So I really don't see any good reason whatsoever to be anti-Safety Tools. And if nothing else, they start the conversation, which is the most important part. And anyone who reacts quite negatively to the idea or is constantly trying to get them to be ignore or removed... those people kind of our themselves as the problem. Because really, a good group would consider such tools, maybe use them a couple times and discover "we actually are really good at listening to one another an not needlessly pushing people's buttons or crossing boundaries." And then you don't use them because you don't _need_ to.
In my experience, those who are the most against safety tools are the very reason they need to exist.
So you're an advocate for 'safety tools' in general socializing too then? After all, everything said in their favour for TTRPG tables applies at least equally to going down the pub, house parties etc. Do you keep an 'X card' in your back pocket when you go out, and urge your friends to do the same? After all "a good group would consider such tools, maybe use them a couple times and discover "we actually are really good at listening to one another an not needlessly pushing people's buttons or crossing boundaries." And then you don't use them because you don't need to".
That the use of these tools outside TTRPGs is never even brought up shows that they're about imposing an ideological structure on tables, which is what making people 'feel safer' actually means in this context. This is the 'safety' of the university 'safe space': safety from ideological nonconformity. And honestly, 'safety tool' proponents are really revealing far more than they mean to about the dire state of their own relationships when they suggest that waving a card around is a better way to communicate with friends than just _talking with them._
My method of broaching potentially sensitive topics at my table to new people is to just to straight up tell people what’s gonna happen and what might be involved if they continue on.
Theres no judgement if they really do not want to get into that and if someone tries belittling them I will tell them to leave.
On the one hand, holding up a card to stop a conversation is kind of awkward and not something most of us are used to. On the other hand, I can see how someone may not want to go into a deep explanation of why a certain topic if off limits for them, especially if they are playing with strangers. Maybe a better way is to invite players to privately send the GM a list of topics that they don't want to see covered. Then the GM can avoid those subjects, and if a player starts to bring one up, the GM can redirect or cut the scene. That would feel less awkward to me.
I know of a great "communication tool". It's called "words". People have been using this tool to communicate for a very long time, quite successfully, I might add.
But in all seriousness, if for some reason you cannot use your words to communicate that you are uncomfortable with a certain topic, maybe you should seek professional help before engaging in this hobby with strangers.
Or, maybe play with your close friends, first. Play with people who are aware of your issues. When you've adjusted enough to talk about them, move on to playing with strangers.
I'm saying this with all the empathy in the world. TTRPGs are not therapy, especially the ones dealing with darker stuff. Know your limits, seek help, be well.
What I don't like about it is how BDSM-y it feels. I'm fine if my friend who hates spiders says to me "hey, you paint really good minis but don't bring that spider mini that's the size of a truck to my house because i'll freak out" because it's their house, they're being respectful to me, i am happy to reciprocate. I don't like playing with strangers, and I don't have much that would be considered outside the realm of normally accepted tropes for fantasy. I have no idea what these people could be running that would warrant a warning like that, but if someone in general isn't capable of separating fantasy from reality, or handling scenarios that aren't real, they probably shouldn't be playing RPGs (or reading books for that matter).
Not everyone is running a typical fantasy game. Some people are running a game that explores mature subjects--for example, a dystopian cyberpunk game may involve nudity, strippers, alcohol, drug use, or systematic oppression. All things that might hit home for someone and they might not want to explore in the game.
I mean, you directly answer the need for having the communication tools when playing with strangers there - your friend knows you and can talk about things that make them uncomfortable.
If you are rocking up to a group of strangers or some new people are arriving and aren’t super comfortable going through the list of things that make them uncomfortable it may be easier jsut to have an option to skip that problem when it comes up.
@@OnslaughtSix How would you end up at a table running a game like that without having any idea what you're getting into?
@@manchasdos Perhaps my normal D&D group is playing something different, which requires a recalibration of expectations.
@@OnslaughtSix I guess my point is that would be made clear before the game, right? I think everyone agrees that giving people a heads up on what they are getting into is far more important. And after that's done, is there still a need for an X-card?
We have had safety tools for a long time. They are called words.
If invited to a party you dont bring X cards to give to strangers if they say something you dont like, so why should it be ok to do this at a table top game?
I have a pool of about 40 people I invite for some home one shots. They have different topics.
Like one dungeon the youngsters was sent into to prove them self, in the 2nd floor, east wing. If they went anywhere else they would discover how the jarl came to power by murder And lower they would see how his family was cursed and manipulated. So on. Generational trauma. Not a heavy horror game. Just investigation in a Dungeon. But you never know... And one time I leaned a bit too heavy in the body horror in describing attacks and a player tapped the X card and I went more on the action hero genre hardly missing a beat in the description. I actually thought that was pretty effective communication.
If you are invited to a party and the group of strangers you are talking to say something you don't like you just leave and go find someone else to talk to. And you'll likely never see those strangers ever again. Nothing lost.
If you are playing D&D with a group of strangers and you just get up and leave, you and the other players have just lost out on playing D&D.
I feel like this stems from playing with strangers. A group of friends that know each other will unlikely need this kind of tool. And I feel it's also counter productive. People playing together should be able to communicate openly and sympathetically.
@@8vius I run a huge group of strangers playing together and I still think safety tools are generally a bad idea.
We put a lot of energy into teaching players and DMs to communicate effectively, if there was a magic wand to simplify that I'd use it but they just mask or compound d problems, rather than resolving them.
The trick is that different people have different cultural assumptions about communication and acceptability. By making the conversation and table rules(safety tools) for communication explicit and structured you establish a shared culture of communication and expectations.
A lot of people are saying they don't have safety tools because they have a conversation about what's acceptable and expected and how they will approach bad behavior or situations... That's safety tools but without using the politically stigmatized language.
@@SeldonnHari Having a conversation is explicitly not the same as using safety tools. If that was the case there would be no need for the term.
Safety tools are formulaic and have set rules. I'm sure they can be helpful in some situations but I think open conversation is better.
Absolutely. Communication tools are for strangers. I've never had the need to do anything for groups with people I know well. We'll still communicate on what the game will be about and the topics, but we don't use any of the lines and veils or like the X card. We just direct message each other when there's issues.
@@matthewtopping Yes, but an open conversation will not always help, honestly. A safety tool regulates an expected outcome. Draw a line regarding spiders = there are no spiders, period. It won't get mentioned at the table, not even in jest.
Open communication has no expected outcome. You might open up about your fear of spiders, which might tempt one player to constantly push that trigger.
I realized the "we don't need safety tools" back then, we don't need them now" comes from a perspective of people who played with friends. Friends who already knew where lines were, even if they were never mentioned. Going to a Con might get you in a "bad" group, but you'd say the GM or player wasn't rping correctly. As rpgs opened up to VTTs and other online forms, pick up campaigns, organized play, and paid GMs I came to realize many people have different life experiences and my life experiences, opinions, etc. don't invalidate others. Even in my personal group, opinions have changed. Stuff we had in games as a teenager in the 80s-90s is no longer the same now that we are in our 40s-50s. We do have session 0s and time outs to make sure of things in our 30+ year group. For a group of strangers, it's just common sense respect.