Contributor
|
Was that a topic? Maybe I missed it.
As I said, I was switching gears. But I started thinking about it after David Foley's concluding comment in post 19 of this thread:
I am afraid that if we do that the creating of these trigger label would be in itself a form of censorship, as writer would become reluctant to add too many such trigger labels to their scenarios so as not to be seen to reduce the potential audience and that in turn would lead IMO to blander scenarios.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Here is a free GM tool that can help you deal with triggering situations in games.
There is at least one game store in New York that I've heard implements it often with their public games.
If you don't understand what trigger warnings are, or what their purpose is, maybe look it up before commenting on them. Essentially they exist to help people avoid or prepare themselves for subjects that will cause trauma due to PTSD or panic attacks.
This is awesome! Definitely worth considering for convention play, or even game days with new folks.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
Alcohol.
Drugs.
Sexual Violence.
Sexuality.
Suicide.That seems like a reasonable list of things to warn parents and sensitive players about.
Aside from people embellishing Zarta's actions or her promises to Chelish, now Dark Archive players, this one should be a nonstarter. I believe it has been said in the past that Paizo development won't publish scenarios with this theme, similar to how they won't publish ones related to child abuse.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I ran into the issue when GMing The Stranger Within. It sends the players to a brothel and I have 2 minors that play (and the younger one plays with his father). My Venture Captain told me to just call it a coffee house in game and so I did.
While running it I mentioned how I couldn't call it the "B-word" when I got some strange looks about the Blushing Rose Coffee House. The 8-year old player says "You mean a bar?" and my reply was "Yes, you are exactly right, it's a bar, the Blushing Rose Bar and Grill" Which got some laughs around the table from the older players. From that day on it will always be the Blushing Rose Bar and Grill whenever I GM in Kaer Maga.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If that X-Card system ever caught on it could be the end for Call of Cthulhu as we (some of us at least) know and love it ;)
Not really. If you opt into playing Call of Cthulhu, you're expecting a horror game. The X-Card isn't used because "Aaaahhh, that was scary in this horror game I'm playing!" It's used if something comes up like, "Your description of how my character was maimed by that Star Spawn was a little too gory for me, let's cut back on that," or to prevent panic attacks and PTSD trauma.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover
|
The X-card system looks great!
Beyond this thread here and the CoC discussion, there are so many implementations. Remember all that female players at the table discussions? Or new players? X-card offers a real great solution there in many ways.
I´ll definately give this a shot in my games and reserve me as a GM the right to use it too!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I would clearly feel sorry for the person in question if that was to happen to me and perhaps avoid that scene should I know in advance that there was to be a player with such a life history, I am not sure what I would do if I was not to know the players life history in advance.. are we to announce to all players that a given Scenario has triggers X,Y and Z before each time we play? and exactly what are the issues that we should be labeling as triggers? I once played a scenario with a player where they started really freaking out when giant spiders were introduced.. I just thought it good role-playing but it turned out they really did have arachnophobia. I am afraid that if we do that the creating of these trigger label would be in itself a form of censorship, as writer would become reluctant to add too many such trigger labels to their scenarios so as not to be seen to reduce the potential audience and that in turn would lead IMO to blander scenarios.
Bolded is my worry as well. That said, I would like there to be a way for GMs to deal with this kind of thing, but given the often random-players nature of PFS, I'm not sure if it's possible.
As to the Fox' list, Fox, when you list sexuality, what does that include? Sex acts? "Courting" of a raunchy nature? Sexual orientation? What this includes will most likely change my opinion on that entry.
I wanted to expand on the one I bolded.
I figured someone would mention it eventually.
Is this thread meant to address traumas only? Adult themes in general? A mix of both? And how far should we go?
Do scenarios with Miss Feathers need to include a warning? What would that warning be, and who would that warning be aimed at?
I wanted to address the bolded directly. NO. We should be trying to normalize the LGBT community in culture and media, and not continue treating these folks like their very existence is "other" or adult-only content (and by extension of that, harmful to children) BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT. They are just people, like you and me.
I mentioned that last bit as a general address, since I'm not sure this was something that Nefreet was arguing for or against.
|
|
Aside from people embellishing Zarta's actions or her promises to Chelish, now Dark Archive players, this one should be a nonstarter. I believe it has been said in the past that Paizo development won't publish scenarios with this theme, similar to how they won't publish ones related to child abuse.Alcohol.
Drugs.
Sexual Violence.
Sexuality.
Suicide.That seems like a reasonable list of things to warn parents and sensitive players about.
Fair point.
|
|
My edited list would be:
Alcohol.
Drugs.
Graphic Violence.
Sexuality.
Suicide.
Maybe people shouldn't be bothered by these themes — I'm not bothered by them after all. But some people are bothered by them. Some people don't want to expose their children to them. I find themes of alcohol and drug use perfectly appropriate for children; some parents don't. I can respect that. There are at least three possible solutions here:
1. Status quo. The risk is Paizo alienates parents who want more information on what their child is being exposed to.
2. Tamer content. Paizo risks alienating the rest of us.
3. Warnings. Paizo risks alienating people triggered by mushrooms.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
|
Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.
Granted, some of that violence can be extremely graphic (In Wrath's Shadow is a case in point). But, all lethal fights are graphic. Some of the more energetic and imaginative GM's might embellish upon the level of "graphicness".
Alcohol? What medieval/fantasy premise has anyone imagined that doesn't involve a bar, a dwarf, and some grog?
Personally, I haven't seen much in the way of anything in the realm of sexuality (that I've played) that could be problematic to those that are sensitive (other than insensitive players). The mention of a house of ill-repute when you have an under-aged player (and what does under-aged mean??? 17? 14?); okay, maybe refrain from mentioning it.
Anything that I've seen with drugs in play has basically painted them as bad/problematic. I see that as a public service announcement. Are there scenarios that "promote" drug use?
I'm concerned about "dumbing" down PFS writing so that a 6 year could play the game. The vast majority of players are adults or older teens (which already hear far worse stuff in their school hallways than they would in Paizo PFS scenario....and, yes, I have a teenager).
I think the GM has to be thoughtful and careful when a young child is at the table and customize the what's read and said. The GM needs to prepare the scenario ahead of time and not run it cold and then apologize for reading something he would have otherwise been familiar with.
Please don't dumb down the scenarios. I don't think ratings are necessary if a GM is prepared and recognizes his audience.
|
|
Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.
...
Alcohol? What medieval/fantasy premise has anyone imagined that doesn't involve a bar, a dwarf, and some grog?
...
Anything that I've seen with drugs in play has basically painted them as bad/problematic. I see that as a public service announcement. Are there scenarios that "promote" drug use?
Are you really unable to see that there are points of view other than your own?
I'm concerned about "dumbing" down PFS writing so that a 6 year could play the game.
...
Please don't dumb down the scenarios. I don't think ratings are necessary if a GM is prepared and recognizes his audience.
Asking for warnings is very different than asking for content to be made more tame. Nobody has asked for content to be removed.
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.
I would.
In fact, I'd like to see a wedding scenario where NO fights break out, and everyone has to TALK the entire time. Just for a change of pace.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.I would.
In fact, I'd like to see a wedding scenario where NO fights break out, and everyone has to TALK the entire time. Just for a change of pace.
cool yeah you could call it real life and roll wisdom checks for which gift registry to buy from then fail a Perform (Dance) check after taking CON damage from too much alcohol at the event itself
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.I would.
In fact, I'd like to see a wedding scenario where NO fights break out, and everyone has to TALK the entire time. Just for a change of pace.
Not a wedding, but I successfully completed Library of the Lion with zero combats.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@David Foley - It's not just a matter of kids. I used to work with a guy in like his 40s(?) whose sister...
** spoiler omitted **
It's very likely that suddenly getting blindsided by such a scene in a game would be deeply troubling. People deserve to have warnings for things like that. Simply acknowledging that the game as a whole is PG-13 does not address that.
Frankly, neither does PG-13 on a movie rating.
If you are that sensitive, and you know something is rated PG-13, then you owe it to yourself to ask someone who's seen that movieplayed that scenario who knows you well enough to know if it would trigger your specific sensitivity.
There is only so much any entity can do to make sure it doesn't hit someone's trigger.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Not a wedding, but I successfully completed Library of the Lion with zero combats.Isn't the entire premise behind fantasy RPG based in violence? If players aren't going to get into a fight and eviscerate some enemies, no one would play since it would just be a pure social/interactive game.I would.
In fact, I'd like to see a wedding scenario where NO fights break out, and everyone has to TALK the entire time. Just for a change of pace.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the main issue when this type of topic comes up is that most people can't fathom the immensity of the gulf between "squicky" and "traumatic".At the same time, there aren't any clear lines to indicate where you've crossed over to traumatic, in no small part because everyone is different and so the level at which a trigger activates is different.
The concerns are legitimate because some people do have triggers. It's best for the GM to review the scenario ahead of time, but it's not a panacea itself because a GM doesn't always know who's at her table. Labeling isn't a panacea either, though. There's not an easy, one-size-fits-all answer.
Definitely agreed. So each person needs to be responsible for themselves (or their children) and make sure that they get some feedback from someone who knows them well enough, on whether that particular scenario would trigger their particular issue.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the main issue when this type of topic comes up is that most people can't fathom the immensity of the gulf between "squicky" and "traumatic".At the same time, there aren't any clear lines to indicate where you've crossed over to traumatic, in no small part because everyone is different and so the level at which a trigger activates is different.
The concerns are legitimate because some people do have triggers. It's best for the GM to review the scenario ahead of time, but it's not a panacea itself because a GM doesn't always know who's at her table. Labeling isn't a panacea either, though. There's not an easy, one-size-fits-all answer.
Definitely agreed. So each person needs to be responsible for themselves (or their children) and make sure that they get some feedback from someone who knows them well enough, on whether that particular scenario would trigger their particular issue.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
I choose not to go watch horror or slasher films anymore. And even some action adventure films are a bit too gory for me now.
So I choose not to go watch those. I have a friend who visibly sickens even just watching trailers at the movie theatre for those types of movies.
But I've gone to a couple rated R movies that didn't specifically tell me they were a slasher film, and it ended up being so. I didn't get all offended and yell at the theatre, the producers, the distributers, etc. I just walked out when I'd had enough. If I was super worried about that being the case, I would have actually asked someone first who knew me well enough.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
It's not always that easy at a large conventions like Gen Con. Sometimes you see people switch scenarios with very short notice because there aren't enough GMs because of a no show or two, one table is one or two players short while another for another scenario has enough to let one go, or a variety of other reasons. And in the interest of helping players get their play time in, organizers are usually flexible enough to allow it. But it doesn't allow for much research time.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's not always that easy at a large conventions like Gen Con. Sometimes you see people switch scenarios with very short notice because there aren't enough GMs because of a no show or two, one table is one or two players short while another for another scenario has enough to let one go, or a variety of other reasons. And in the interest of helping players get their play time in, organizers are usually flexible enough to allow it. But it doesn't allow for much research time.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
Granted.
But if you are a person who legitimately has a trigger that themes in a PG-13 environment could set you off, then you simply demure from moving to a seat where you haven't done your research.
And if you move, despite not having done the research, then its your own fault and not the scenario's.
At some point, people need to stop looking at others to protect them and start taking ownership of their lives and protect themselves.
|
Contributor
|
...each person needs to be responsible for themselves (or their children) and make sure that they get some feedback from someone who knows them well enough, on whether that particular scenario would trigger their particular issue.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
I agree with you, but I think what people are asking for is a formalized system for the "getting some feedback" step of your sensible proposal. Movies and televisions shows, at least in the US, have content ratings. Books, hmmmm. I don't know how available content warnings are for books, but I've heard enough childrens' librarians using the words "content" and "language" in the peculiar ways they do to suspect that there are websites and so on to go to for researching at least a lot of books. The question we have before us, though, is how available that information is for PFS scenarios, and how formalized it should be.
I wonder if the folks who are suggesting content/trigger warnings for PFS scenarios also advocate for such on other forms of intellectual property. Should The Lord of the Flies have a set of trigger warnings on it, for example?
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Maryland—Hagerstown
|
It's not always that easy at a large conventions like Gen Con. Sometimes you see people switch scenarios with very short notice because there aren't enough GMs because of a no show or two, one table is one or two players short while another for another scenario has enough to let one go, or a variety of other reasons. And in the interest of helping players get their play time in, organizers are usually flexible enough to allow it. But it doesn't allow for much research time.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
YES...THIS...EXACTLY
|
|
...each person needs to be responsible for themselves (or their children) and make sure that they get some feedback from someone who knows them well enough, on whether that particular scenario would trigger their particular issue.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
I agree with you, but I think what people are asking for is a formalized system for the "getting some feedback" step of your sensible proposal. Movies and televisions shows, at least in the US, have content ratings. Books, hmmmm. I don't know how available content warnings are for books, but I've heard enough childrens' librarians using the words "content" and "language" in the peculiar ways they do to suspect that there are websites and so on to go to for researching at least a lot of books. The question we have before us, though, is how available that information is for PFS scenarios, and how formalized it should be.
I wonder if the folks who are suggesting content/trigger warnings for PFS scenarios also advocate for such on other forms of intellectual property. Should The Lord of the Flies have a set of trigger warnings on it, for example?
What does PG-13 mean? That should tell you what you could expect. Anything that could make a scenario PG-13.
So contact your close friends and have them help you if you have a trigger that is that sensitive.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't get all offended and yell at the theatre, the producers, the distributers, etc.
You also didn't start shaking uncontrollably and screaming and sobbing as visions of your own past trauma flooded your mind, causing you to need to be carried out of the theater, and then having to spend some extra sessions with the therapist before you could bring yourself to even let your wife hug you again three weeks later.
Triggers and preferences are not the same thing.
EDIT: Wow, I type slow. :/
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't get all offended and yell at the theatre, the producers, the distributers, etc.You also didn't start shaking uncontrollably and screaming and sobbing as visions of your own past trauma flooded your mind, causing you to need to be carried out of the theater, and then having to spend some extra sessions with the therapist before you could bring yourself to even let your wife hug you again three weeks later.
Triggers and preferences are not the same thing.
And you never saw me say it was. Please don't put words in my mouth.
But each person needs to be responsible for themselves.
If their triggers are literally that extreme, then they need to take ownership of that and do their due diligence before putting themselves into a situation that could cause such said reaction.
And if they don't, then they only have themselves to blame.
At some point, people need to stop looking at others to protect them and start taking ownership of their lives and protect themselves.
But it's not like Paizo is powerless to make it a little easier by using something like the ESRB ratings to indicate general areas of content, integral to the story and hard to cut out, that might be of concern.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But it's not like Paizo is powerless to make it a little easier by using something like the ESRB ratings to indicate general areas of content, integral to the story and hard to cut out, that might be of concern.
At some point, people need to stop looking at others to protect them and start taking ownership of their lives and protect themselves.
So you want to add more work to an already strained to bursting development and editing staff?
Where's folks personal responsibility?
|
Contributor
|
What does PG-13 mean? That should tell you what you could expect. Anything that could make a scenario PG-13.
So contact your close friends and have them help you if you have a trigger that is that sensitive.
I'm pretty sure I agree with you 100% on this Andrew, but now I'm confused as to whether you think those labels should be on PFS Scenarios or not. For me, as I've said, if any labels are ultimately required (and I hope they're not), I think they should be general (your PG-13 example) rather than a specific set of trigger warnings. And again, because there seems to have been some confusion over this, I say this as a medicated PTSD sufferer with a whole raft of triggers of my own, and thus as someone who's very sympathetic to the notion that triggers are a real and substantial thing.
On the topic of PG-13ness, I don't think I would use any system generated by the MPAA. They're notoriously inconsistent with their ratings.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I've gone to a couple rated R movies that didn't specifically tell me they were a slasher film, and it ended up being so. I didn't get all offended and yell at the theatre, the producers, the distributers, etc. I just walked out when I'd had enough. If I was super worried about that being the case, I would have actually asked someone first who knew me well enough.
No one is getting mad at Paizo here in this case either. The OP recommended that Paizo publish a warning for some of these themes to facilitate research by parents or other sensitive players.
This seems to be a reasonable request, IMO, and enables parents and sensitive players to take on that responsibility for themselves just like you suggested.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm pretty sure I agree with you 100% on this Andrew, but now I'm confused as to whether you think those labels should be on PFS Scenarios or not. For me, as I've said, if any labels are ultimately required (and I hope they're not), I think they should be general (your PG-13 example) rather than a specific set of trigger warnings. And again, because there seems to have been some confusion over this, I say this as a medicated PTSD sufferer with a whole raft of triggers of my own, and thus as someone who's very sympathetic to the notion that triggers are a real and substantial thing.What does PG-13 mean? That should tell you what you could expect. Anything that could make a scenario PG-13.
So contact your close friends and have them help you if you have a trigger that is that sensitive.
I think the comment in the guide that PFS is PG-13 is enough. I don't agree with putting more work into publishing a scenario.
|
|
I think the comment in the guide that PFS is PG-13 is enough. I don't agree with putting more work into publishing a scenario.
Could you provide a page number? I'm not seeing it. I have searched for "PG", "PG-13", "PG13", "adult", "mature", "children", "teen", "content", "sex", and "sexuality". None of those provide any indication that PFS might explore themes of suicide, explicit violence, or sexuality.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But each person needs to be responsible for themselves.
If their triggers are literally that extreme, then they need to take ownership of that and do their due diligence before putting themselves into a situation that could cause such said reaction.
I agree.
I just think that reading the scenario blurb should be enough, at least for the really common triggers (like suicide, rape, or child abuse). Someone who wants to know if the scenario they're planning to play has a scene that could be a trigger shouldn't have to know someone who has played it and that they're comfortable revealing their trigger to (those triggers tend to come with LOADS of shame, even for an innocent victim).If they go and read the scenario blurb (in the privacy of their own home) and see that it's a scenario about (say) escorting an archaeologist to another city to appraise an artifact and negotiate a price, it's not reasonable to expect them to double-check whether a storyline like that might randomly include walking in on a father beating his child bloody (or whatever).
So even if not "labels", something in the product description that would at least prompt the idea that this scenario might contain a trigger and warrants further investigation would be a good step. Requiring someone who's already a victim to have to do at least semi-public research about every single scenario just to keep from getting hurt more, well, that's outside the realm of "due diligence".
|
|
...each person needs to be responsible for themselves (or their children) and make sure that they get some feedback from someone who knows them well enough, on whether that particular scenario would trigger their particular issue.
They have to do the same to go see a movie or watch a particular TV show or even read a book. So why can't they take that responsibility upon themselves to do so for a scenario before signing up to play?
I agree with you, but I think what people are asking for is a formalized system for the "getting some feedback" step of your sensible proposal. Movies and televisions shows, at least in the US, have content ratings. Books, hmmmm. I don't know how available content warnings are for books, but I've heard enough childrens' librarians using the words "content" and "language" in the peculiar ways they do to suspect that there are websites and so on to go to for researching at least a lot of books. The question we have before us, though, is how available that information is for PFS scenarios, and how formalized it should be.
I wonder if the folks who are suggesting content/trigger warnings for PFS scenarios also advocate for such on other forms of intellectual property. Should The Lord of the Flies have a set of trigger warnings on it, for example?
Most rating aystems have a box next to the rating with a brief overview of why its being rated the way it is. Ie. brief nudity, sexual themes, drug use, violence, etc.
|
first I applaud the Gm of the op for knowing her audience and censoring them in a way that she felt appropriate. Given that this (as far to my knowledge is pertaining to a home game) appropriate. As far as the individual consumer/player it responsibility does fall on both the GM and the players as to playing/running a scenario that is appropriate. This can be done by pre reading the scenario or just looking at the description of it.
Example
GM " i want to run Sanos abduction"
player1: "idk it looks like it has a murder horse on it that is a no go for little Timmy"
GM "ok looks like were playing the confirmation"
As far as warnings how about adding this to the guide
pathfinder society- may contain adult oriented themes.
other than that I find society PG enough not to worry too much and would rather not have to have a bonekeep like warning read off before I play