My Opinion on Safety Tools, One in Particular | D&D

Patreon for $5
Patreon.com/ArchitraveGaming
Discord Server
/ discord
Subscribe for Fantastic World Building Ideas, game philosophy that will change the way you play D&D and other TTAGs, as well as actual gameplay tips and new mechanics.
Architrave Gaming is looking for 3 aspiring game designers and world builders to assist in the passion projects we have in store. We have created an enormous world and a game system to go with it. If you would like to participate in the playtesting of the game or contribute to the world building, please send us a PM on Discord, username architravegaming.
(Key words for the algorithm:) D&D Shorts, MonkeyDM, Adan. one dnd, dnd one. 5.5e, 6e, 5e, How to play Dungeons and Dragons, Dungeons and Dragons Beginners Guide, What class to play in dungeons and dragons, best class in D&D, best subclass, most powerful optimized, monk build, DandD, Warlock, Bard, Fighter, Ranger, Artificer, Cleric, Barbarian, Wizard, Sorcerer, Monk, Paladin, Rogue, DnD Shorts, D&D Shorts, TikTok, Dungeons and Dragons, XP to level 3, Davvychappy, Critical Role, Matthew Mercer, Brennan Lee Mulligan, DC 20 tabletop community, tabletop RPG, Fjord, Beau, Jester, Yasha, Caleb, Nott, Caduceus, Mollymauk, the Mighty Nein, Matt Mercer, Colville, 5th edition, dragons 3.5e, dungeon dudes, Dungeon Master, DM, Game Master, GM, dungeon master, game master, tips, crap guide to dnd, tiktok, Wild Shape, Multiclass, D&D, D&D 5E, D&D 5.5, D&D 6th edition, The pillars of play, player agency

[@mixofreak]

It depends on what you call a safety tool, and how it is used. Lines and veils in session zero, or between sessions before they come up because, say, someone survived near drowning and just doesn't want *that* in the adventure? Yeah, that is absolutely valid. If a GM can't respect that, they shouldn't be running for that player. That is a trauma they don't need to have brought to the forefront of their thoughts again. However, different other safety tools may be more of an issue, depending on abuse. If someone survived drowning, yeah, they shouldn't be in an Age of Sail adventure, because that is a risk that makes sense. Using an X-card to shut something immediately down, rather than to get the GM's attention if something was previously discussed that they're forgetting about? That's an issue for most groups. Using them as a reminder depending on what the GM is describing, on the other hand, completely valid! Early adjustments rather than someone having a breakdown is valid. TTRPGs *are* *not* *therapy* . A GM ignoring those requests agreed to before the session to 'make them tough it out' because the rest of the group is fine with it? That's abusive. Either make it plain that they won't fit for that specific adventure, let them sit out a session, or adjust to the requests of the table. There is no collaborative game without players that feel comfortable enough to trust the GM not to abuse that trust.

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Well said.

[@mikeb.1705]

"If a GM can't respect that, they shouldn't be running for that player." Likewise, that player should respect the rest of the table, and if their trauma is THAT bad, they shouldn't be playing. They should seek actual therapy, which, as you stated, TTRPGs are not. That being said, I personally see it as a chance to deal with problems in a safe environment: the player is not going to actually drown. However, they have the opportunity to share their RL experience with their friends at the table, and potentially have a shared "not-real-drowning" experience to bond with them over.

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Exactly. And as long as the traumatized player is ready and willing to have that exposure therapy, And everyone else has given informed consent, so be it.

[@mixofreak]

@@mikeb.1705 as I said, that player shouldn't probably join up and play in an Age of Sail adventure, because the risk of drowning is too high to make sense to try to avoid. Unless, like you said, they want to take that possibility of facing their trauma in a hopefully safe envirionment However, if a particular traumatic event is something which isn't part of the theme of the adventure, such as it being unlikely to drown in a desert, that player mentioning it in Session Zero or before it comes up has completely justifiable ground to ask if that can be avoided. Context matters. If it isn't necessary to the themes of the adventure, and a person wants to not encouner it, it should be feasible to steer around that subject matter, because it wasn't necessary. A group that trusts each other can discuss stuff they know ahead of time they don't want to deal with-whether from traumas, specific dislikes, etc-in Session Zero, especially if they have encountered certain things in past adventures with that group. If the group is running an adventure with a GM that previously used half their NPCs to backstab the party across the past few adventures, it could be understandable that the group might want an adventure without backstabbing NPC 'allies'. Now, that isn't to say they always want to avoid that, but for that specific adventure, they might want that break so as to not have to be paranoid about every NPC ally. Again, even without trauma points, a GM should be willing to listen to their players in Session Zero or between sessions, to sort out what does or does not work for the group as a whole, or with specific players. Obviously, yes, if someone is joining the wrong adventure, or the group doesn't want to play in that specific adventure that the GM is wanting to run... the GM or players should find someone else to be playing with, or they should all find something they can agree upon. If a GM absolutely wants to run something no one in the group wants, then the GM can try finding a different group to run it with. No matter what, the important thing is not to agree to something, and then not follow through with that agreement. Whether that is the GM or a player breaking that agreement.

[@mikeb.1705]

Well said, and I agree completely on the "loss of adventure" that an X-card or safety checklist can cause. IMO, if you are THAT afraid of spiders that you are paralyzed at the even the thought of IMAGINARY spiders... you have a problem and should seek help. I've only had one instance where an X-card was used. Context: I run a monthly session at the local library for new / beginner players. Being a publicly sponsored event hosted by the library they require safety tools, including X-cards. Previously all us DMs were warned to avoid "cannibalism" topics in our games as an anonymous player listed that on their safety checklist (most of our players don't submit one). I had a band of goblins in the adventure I was running and one of the players started talking about goblins eating the PCs if they got captured. Another player at the table asked him to stop, but he took that to mean "press the buttons harder" and kept going. The concerned player whipped out the X-card and pushed it in the face of the offending player, but even so I (as the DM) had to lean on the offending player to get him to stop. All this happened in about 15 seconds. We all took a deep breath, dropped the subject, and continued our adventure without issues. So, while I don't (and wouldn't) use X-cards in a game I run for friends and people that I know, in this case it was a game for strangers, and it served the purpose it was intended to.

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Excellently put. I consider the entire experience at the table to be perfectly safe because none of it's real, it's all imaginary. If the mere thought of imaginary spiders landing on someone that's not even you is enough to cause you mental distress, I would recommend professional psychological care. As to your point about the X card being useful, I'd like to point out that the X card didn't even work. It's really just the enforcing of the social contract, and the implicit threat of being removed from the game, that curtails such rude behavior. I think we can dispense with most safety tools designed not to offend people and just have adult conversations in session 0.

[@mikeb.1705]

@@Architrave-Gaming exactly ~ the X-card on its own didn't even work. It required verbal reinforcement by multiple people.

[@daviidenzo995]

Idk why but I thought this was about power tools at first

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Not exactly the same, but I'm sure you could draw some comparisons. Like parachutes when skydiving. It just ruins the thrill, doesn't it?

[@mikeb.1705]

It is a bit of a power tool though >.

[@Yekrep]

Good take. Are you a fan of Black Lodge Games? They have a video on this topic that you might enjoy.

[@Architrave-Gaming]

BLG actually just made a post recommending my channel to their viewers! Yes, I do watch and enjoy much of their content. What's the video? I'm eager to watch it.

[@Yekrep]

@@Architrave-Gaming my comments seem to get deleted when I try to send links. The video is titled "RPG Safety Tools Are Actually WEAPONS"

[@Architrave-Gaming]

I'd seen it before and watched it again. I try to be careful not to voice my personal/political views on this channel because that's not what it's about, but it's undeniable that some people do use "safety tools"that way. That's exactly why I'm against their abuse.

[@arrow4721]

I used to run DnD for mental health orgs so I've used every safety tool under the sun! I had a player with arachnophobiain and I only found out mid spider fight. It was fine, I just toned down the descriptions of the creepy crawlies for their comfort and everyone had fun. Whilst going to a scary movie should mean that the audience is signing up to be scared, that doesn't mean that every audience member is signing up for everything that can possibly make them scared. There are certain things not everyone is comfortable with, and they are allowed to watch a scary movie that makes them thrilled and scared without bringing up old trauma. We can play adventure games without signing up for rape violence man. Case and point, I have never seen safety tools abused as you are describing. Has someone done this in your game? If not, I think you have misunderstood something about safety tools from reading things online... Are you cool with having safety discussions before the game aka session 0?

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Discussions before the game are perfectly fine. That's what people have been doing for 50 years. That's just called having an adult conversation. There are also expectations of busy human decency, such as avoiding sexual assault and child violence. That usually goes without saying. I would expect any well-adjusted adult GM to mention that they were going to include something like that and ask if everyone was okay with it. But that's different from the pushing of safety tools as a whole. It leads to the coddling of the mind, the neutering of adventure, and in the worst cases like with the X card, Total immersion break. The way you use the X card is by touching or holding up a card, or making an X with your arms, and the game stops and the GM bypasses the current scene and moves on. That's how it's described as operating. That I think is a self-centered and rude thing to do. I don't like how "safety tools" encourage self-centeredness and a lack of the spirit of adventure. They accommodate people's weakness instead of challenging them to move past them. And they're often used as weapons to control the rest of the group because one person doesn't feel comfortable. Adult human conversations about basic decency before the game is one thing, but interrupting the game for the sake of one person and letting them control everyone else's fun is not okay.

[@arrow4721]

So what would you do if you found out one of your players had arachnophobia mid spider fight? ​@@Architrave-Gaming

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Depends on the age and experience of the player. If It's a young child I'd probably change it. If it's an adult, I likely wouldn't. Also, if it's true arachnophobia, the player probably wouldn't have participated at all. If it's mid-fight, it's probably just a dislike of spiders. Either way, I'd ask them if they want to step out. If the player decided to stay, I'd tone down the descriptions, perhaps just calling them enemies instead of big creepy crawly hairy bitey spiders.

[@kristapsrutkovskis5561]

You bring up a pretty bad example imo. Of course a player saying they dont want to see spiders or blood in their game is dumb. Those are two very common things in a game that involves going into dark and damp locations (that spiders are known to frequent) and killing things (which are known to bleed) but if a player asks you to refrain from mentioning or having scenes of stuff like finger based torture (which is a very common cause of fear and discomfort as far as ive seen) and your reply is "Oh i duno man. Adventuring is dangerous those goblins will do anything to get the information out of you" i would quite frankly just get up and leave the table even if i wasnt the one asking for those things to be left out.

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Oh yeah, of course. In my first public game set in a grimdark archipelago, I had one player tell me they didn't like sharks. And I accommodated. I think adult conversations at session zero are fine. I only had two points in the video. One is that the X card is a bad safety tool and it's rude to everyone else because it robs them of experiences, and secondly that safety tools always limit the amount of adventure one experiences because it limits the danger and the unknown. Not saying that's always a bad thing, not at all, just that it happens. I prefer that it doesn't happen because I like to experience adventure to its highest. The video is education so others know with the consequences of including safety tools are so they can make their own informed decisions. 👍

[@adooraboy-to5lt]

Danger to the characters shouldn't translate to danger to players mental health. You absolutely CAN create a sense of danger without making players have real trauma that they don't want Also, what you are saying is expecting players to know in advance all possible things that may evoke trauma and that basically people with bad mental health shouldnt play dnd, which is some bs

[@adooraboy-to5lt]

Like, also, I expect that is the X-card is used, all players and the DM agreed to use it, so I don't see how it is rude to other people. If we watch a scary movie at home, but we agreed beforehand that we might pause if someone gets really uncomfortable, I don't see where is the problem with then pausing

[@Architrave-Gaming]

That makes sense. But isn't it still better for the sensitive person to excuse themselves instead of removing the experience from everyone else? Even if they did consent. I think only a somewhat selfish person would even as them to forego their fun for his/her own sake. And people with trauma can play games, sure, but being afraid of imaginary spiders as a grown adult isn't trauma, it's mental illness that should be treated. Let's not normalize being sick. Let's get people the help they need! Imagination can't give someone real trauma.

[@adooraboy-to5lt]

@Architrave-Gaming "lets not normalise being sick" so mentally ill people shouldn't play dnd? That's what your saying? Also it is not "normalising mental illness", it is treating mentally ill people as people. For example, would you make the same argument for a blind person that it is "selfish" of them to ask for theater of mind and not physical maps? Would you call that "normalising blindness"??? Also answering your first question, no, I, as a fellow player, would rather enjoy the game without spiders(but with, for example, wolves) rather than them being excluded for the sake of your "feel of adventure" that for some reason is so fragile, it can't survive without spiders I dont consider some emotional needs selfish. Because people don't choose them. What I consider selfish is not doing even a MINIMAL(and it is not that massive) effort for the people you enjoy playing dnd with

[@Architrave-Gaming]

Productive conversations cannot be had with those who willingly misrepresent the other's point of view.

[@adooraboy-to5lt]

@@Architrave-Gaming you are the one who misrepresents the whole point of X-cards and other safety tools tho