Jump to content

The Colymar Campaign and the Star Heart


Bohemond

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Let me ask you, how often  do these X-card situations come up in your games? How many times have you altered stuff, edited things, dropped plots and changed story lines due to  somebody using their ability to veto something? Does it happen often? And can you give examples of the sort of things you changed? I'd really like to see how you are applying this as opposed to theory. 

Also wjhat games are you playing where stuff that bothers people so much that they need a veto power is required?

have you read how the x-card works

41 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

A GM is under to compulsion to cater to the whims of a player just because they don't like something. Yes a GM should should take a player desires and situation into account, out of compassion, courtesy, and as his responsibility to try and entertain the players. As should everybody else at the table. My group is doing something along those lines right now, putting out game on hold due to one player losing a family member and  being, understandably, in no mood to play. But that does not mean that GM should be strait jacketed by a player who is so sensitive that he needs to rename the NPCs. A Gm doesn't have to run, and should not be forced into running something that they do not want to. Or run a game for a player they do  not want to. And vice versa. If a player really doesn't like something, they can leave.

again, have you read how this works

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

have you read how the x-card works

again, have you read how this works

Yes have you?

Quote
  •  If at any time a player feels uncomfortable with content that is introduced into the game by the GM or by another player, they may use the X-card to veto that content. 
  • Once the card is used, the person who used it must indicate what content made them uncomfortable. They do not have to explain why it made them uncomfortable.
  • Having an X-card at the table is not optional. If you fail to treat the X-card with respect and professionalism, you may make someone who wants to use the card uncomfortable. This behaviour is unacceptable and you may be asked to leave a game if this happens.
  • Randy taps the X-card when the GM introduces the big bad boss and her name is Catherine. Randy says the name Catherine is a trigger for them and they’d appreciate having the name changed. Randy has no obligation to explain further to the table. The GM should at this point simply change the name and move on.

 

So any player may at any time hold the game hostage for any reason, and nobody can say or do anything about it, and if they do not submit to the all mighty X-Card they could be asked to leave. That is how the X-cards work.

At least with a GM-is God model that g33K mentioned a player can appeal a ruling or tell the GM where to stick it before leaving. 

And yes that means that somebody who has a bad relationship with someone named Lance, could play the X-card card in a Pendragon Campaign and force the GM to retcon Lancelot out of the campaign on the spot. No choice.

 

Oh, and BTW, are you going to get on their case about their use of the word triggered? That is a their phrasing, not mine. Don't blame me for using the tool sold wording the way they did. 

Edited by Atgxtg

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm confused -- in one case, the player who's uncomfortable with something in the game can only suck it up, or leave the table. In the other case, they can suck it up, ask the GM to change the game, or leave the table. Seems to me like the second option is better. It can be an X-card, it can be the GM saying "feel free to interrupt the game and talk to me at any time", or whatever other mechanism you want.

  • Like 2

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, remember that things like X-cards mostly came from convention/meetup-style games, where people typically get together with unknown gamers. It evolved from an actual need -- there are so many horror stories out there. For a regular game, I've never found it to be needed. You would probably know if one of you friends had a particular phobia, or if they had recent life events that would make anything in a game un-fun for them, so you can generally adjust the adventure proactively (I did that a couple times).

Edited by lordabdul
  • Like 2

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

I'm confused -- in one case, the player who's uncomfortable with something in the game can only suck it up, or leave the table.

That's the X-Card.

Quote

In the other case, they can suck it up, ask the GM to change the game, or leave the table.

That's the GM as God, which BTW, very few GM act like.

Quote

Seems to me like the second option is better.

Me too.

Quote

 it can be the GM saying "feel free to interrupt the game and talk to me at any time", or whatever other mechanism you want.

That's what I think. One of the problem with the X-Card is the GM can't ask the player to talk to them about something once the card has been played, so you can't work around it in any way.

 

Now, I know some people might think that my example above was of someone abusing the X-Card tool, but it could very easily be used to derail a campaign for a very legitimate reason. Consider the following X-Card explain taken from the website:

Quote

Charlie taps the X-card when another player strikes them with a curse of  ‘covered in spiders’. Charlie says that they have a major phobia of spiders and would appreciate it if the curse was changed. The GM and other players can brain storm out of character what an equally useful curse would be for the narrative and then resume the game.

Now if this were a new D&D campaign and the DM had bought some Drow Adventures,  Source books, Ultimate Guides, miniatures, all in preparation for a massive campaign against the Drow in an Underdark setting, that DM has to stop his game, an d come up with a whole new campaign. No choice, no discussion, no reimbursement for the money he spent of the time he invested. All because Randy played and X-Card, and for some reason or another never mentioned the spider thing. So nobody gets to play and have fun because X-Cards gave Randy veto power.

Wouldn't have been a better solution for the DM to tell Randy, "Gee Randy, It's a Drow campaign, sorry. Maybe you should skip this and I'll call you when we move onto the Bugbears."

 

Edited by Atgxtg

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JonL said:

Or, the GM could accept the minor inconvenience of swapping in Tsuggtmoi whomever for Lolth, proceeding with the overall adventure as planned reskinning spider monsters as fungus monsters, everyone has a good time and Randy doesn't have to suffer.

to be fair this is kind of out of the scale of the X-Card; that's a larger question that should have been discussed before they got to the table. I would certainly expect to discuss any major intrusive issues I had before the table on the scale of "we're playing fantasy and I have severe arachnophobia". this isn't just a curse of spiders in your nose.

but that's why we use these tools, to discuss these issues before a campaign starts because there are so many situations that turn ugly. i mean, we've all heard stories or had them happen to us. knowing where the boundaries are lets us rampage. usually there's not much in the way of boundaries! most of the time there's just like "can we please have no rape for god's sake" and I hear a surprising amount of "no eyeball violence".

sometimes someone will get triggered by something by surprise, and flash an x-card. nod, move on. maybe they decide to explain later. once someone did it because they missed some meds and were feeling woozy and so the drunken tavern scene was making them nauseous!

Edited by Qizilbashwoman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, JonL said:

Or, the GM could accept the minor inconvenience of swapping in Tsuggtmoi whomever for Lolth, proceeding with the overall adventure as planned reskinning spider monsters as fungus monsters, everyone has a good time and Randy doesn't have to suffer.

Except it wasn't and adventure it was a campaign, and the decision to do that should be up to the GM, not Randy.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

Errr no. The X-Card is the "ask the GM to change things".

No read the page. It's not ask the GM, it's tell the GM. The GM has no choice.  That's what the X-Card rule state. Look at the link. If the rules said ask, I wouldn't be shooting them down. But then you don't need a special X-Card to ask the GM something.

Edited by Atgxtg

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

to be fair this is kind of out of the scale of the X-Card; that's a larger question that should have been discussed before they got to the table.

Yes, I agree. 

6 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

I would certainly expect to discuss any major intrusive issues I had before the table on the scale of "we're playing fantasy and I have severe arachnophobia". this isn't just a curse of spiders in your nose.

Yes, Randy should have brought it up, but maybe he didn't know much about D&D or he didn't think it would be an issue or maybe he got distracted before he could do so. The thing is the GM gets ambushed by the X-Card in play, and can't do a thing about it.

 

6 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

but that's why we use these tools, to discuss these issues before a campaign starts because there are so many situations that turn ugly. i mean, we've all heard stories or had them happen to us.

Now we all haven't. I've gamed for many years and have never had this happen. Not once. 

6 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

knowing where the boundaries are lets us rampage. usually there's not much in the way of boundaries! most of the time there's just like "can we please have no rape for god's sake" and I hear a surprising amount of "no eyeball violence".

We seem to game with groups that have very different play styles. 

6 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

sometimes someone will get triggered by something by surprise, and flash an x-card. nod, move on. maybe they decide to explain later. once someone did it because they missed some meds and were feeling woozy and so the drunken tavern scene was making them nauseous!

If someone has problems enough that they can be triggered (the medical definition) and missed their meds,, and a drunken tavern scene makes then nauseous , they probably shouldn't be at the gaming table.  At the least they should be looking  for their meds.  At the  very least,  the GM and other player should get a choice as if if they are willing to put up with the risks associated with gaming with this person.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

At the  very least,  the GM and other player should get a choice as if if they are willing to put up with the risks associated with gaming with this person.

Missing certains meds can make you lightheaded, but then you aren't supposed to "replace" the missing med, just wait till the next dose. It's not a big deal. Also, you know who likes to game? Disabled people. People have med side effects all the time.

Also, triggered doesn't always mean 100% klaxons. It can just be very upsetting and changing the topic can be sufficient.

39 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

We seem to game with groups that have very different play styles. 

I mean, I game with women and I am one. "No rape" seems to be a given. Nobody is gonna be raped, rape anyone, or be the product of rape. Rape will not be a threat. Orcs don't rape prisoners, although they might eat them. I hope I don't need to explain why "no rape" is real common table rule.

I don't know about the eyeball thing. It don't bother me but nobody is described getting their eyes gouged out. Seems to be a real common thing.

I guess I should also say I've never been at a table that didn't "fade to black" sex. Not in a baby way, just nobody wanted to be a creep. So you can have tits out or face a handsome naked mans or a vagina monster but if you are going to spend your coin in town with that looker, we're gonna see you go in a room with them. I don't think that's probably a surprise to anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Except it wasn't and adventure it was a campaign, and the decision to do that should be up to the GM, not Randy.

If the GM has to think for more than five seconds whether including Lolth or Randy is more important to the campaign, once again - the problem is not the X-card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

Missing certains meds can make you lightheaded, but then you aren't supposed to "replace" the missing med, just wait till the next dose. It's not a big deal. Also, you know who likes to game? Disabled people. People have med side effects all the time.

And  a X-Card won't make a different on their meds.

16 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

Also, triggered doesn't always mean 100% klaxons. It can just be very upsetting and changing the topic can be sufficient.

Your the one who told me not to use it. 

16 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

I mean, I game with women and I am one. "No rape" seems to be a given. Nobody is gonna be raped, rape anyone, or be the product of rape. Rape will not be a threat. Orcs don't rape prisoners, although they might eat them. I hope I don't need to explain why "no rape" is real common table rule.

I doesn't come up much in the groups I've game with. It might get an oblique reference, as it the Vandals sack the city, rape & Pillage, that sort of thing. It someone can watch a film like the Kirk Douglas version of Spartacus,  or Excalibur they should be able to take anything that comes up in my games, although that does vary a bit with the genre. If that's a problem the n the player should inform me unfront, and this is probably the wrong game for them.  

I play quite a few historical and semi-historical games and rape and other atrocities happened and are part of the setting. I'm not going to retcon that out of the setting and pretend it didn't  happen just because it bother some people. The Vikings are  not going to just post annoying tweet on twitter. If a player can't handle that,  then they are playing the wrong game. Now keep  in mind that the last time something like that happened to a PC or a character than they knew was so long ago that I don't even remember. I vaguely recall a prisoner of a Cyclops character that someone was playing in AD&D in , around 1983, but I was playing not running..  

Just like if somebody has a problem with the name Arthur, Guinivere, Merlin, Lancelot or any of the other famous and universally known characters from Arthurian Lore they should not sit down to play a game called King Arthur Pendragon.   

 

Yes, I can usnderstand that they maybe exceptional cricmstances and a GM might want to adapt something  to  suit the players. I've run games for people who were in wheechairs and needed help getting  to and from the gaming site, people who were blind, who ofteen had to be allowed to go back when they didn't understand the tactical positioning and did something based on a false idea of where someone was, an d with chidlren, whom I had to run with a G rating. They all had thier challenges,m, but it was my decision  to  run for them, and I choose to adapt, I was not forced to adapt.

 

16 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

I don't know about the eyeball thing. It don't bother me but nobody is described getting their eyes gouged out. Seems to be a real common thing.

Odd. That's never come up, and I've gamed with a guy who had an eyes gouged out. 

16 minutes ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

I guess I should also say I've never been at a table that didn't "fade to black" sex. Not in a baby way, just nobody wanted to be a creep. So you can have tits out or face a handsome naked mans or a vagina monster but if you are going to spend your coin in town with that looker, we're gonna see you go in a room with them. I don't think that's probably a surprise to anyone.

Again you play a very different style of gaming that I do. 

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JonL said:

If the GM has to think for more than five seconds whether including Lolth or Randy is more important to the campaign, once again - the problem is not the X-card.

Yes it is  because it doesn't matter what the GM thinks the X-Card dictates his action. Besides if the GM thinks for 1 second they will realize that the  solution to this problem is to say  no,  and get  kicked out and let Randy continue to decide what the group does.

And, why is it you didn't reply to the "that's  not how the X-Card works post?"

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

It's not ask the GM, it's tell the GM. The GM has no choice.

The GM has a choice -- there's no X-Card police that will put them in jail. However, they would indeed be assholes to say they abide by the X-Card etiquette, without doing it. But then again, the whole thing is that if a player goes out of their way to tell the GM "I have a spider phobia, can you replace them with snakes or something?", the GM would be equally an asshole to reply "no, suck it up". I mean, it's not rocket science, it's just a game, I'm sure 2 people can be functioning adults and sort things out. If the player is abusing the X-Card, they're as much of an asshole as the GM who doesn't want to replace spider with snakes. There's a lot of assholes out there, on either side of the screen. I'm pretty sure the whole point of the X-Card etiquette is to announce "I'm not too much of an asshole" first and foremost. Feel free to distribute an X-Card to the GM also, so they can also tell that a player is out of line if necessary.

Edited by lordabdul
  • Like 1

Ludovic aka Lordabdul -- read and listen to  The God Learners , the Gloranthan podcast, newsletter, & blog !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

I'm pretty sure the whole point of the X-Card etiquette is to announce "I'm not too much of an asshole" first and foremost. Feel free to distribute an X-Card to the GM also, so they can also tell that a player is out of line if necessary.

Cease fire all please, The only person taking a middle round here and trying to see both side is lordabdul and if the others will not relax and breathe I think a cessation or move to another venue is in order.

ETA

May I suggest the tavern?

Edited by Bill the barbarian
  • Like 2

... remember, with a TARDIS, one is never late for breakfast!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Qizilbashwoman said:

you know i'm getting a little heated with your comments, did you think this was appropriate the first time you posted it

Yes I did and I still do. That is actually part of the problem here. Just because someone says or posts something that you disagree with or just  don't like  doesn't mean you get to X-Card it away in real life or on a  forum. Lots of people disagree on this forum and elsewhere about lots of things, well, practically everything, but they don't get to censor someone just because they don't like it.

 

Just now, Qizilbashwoman said:

i tried to let you cool off the first time but it's clear you're just not arguing in good faith at all on this topic. you're being cruel and unpleasant. you are deliberately misstating situations. why?

I'm not. You people are claiming how there needs to be this rule to let people dictate what the GM  should do, and how a GM has to cater to every people's special  needs and that the person with the condition is somehow not is any way accountable for  their actions and choices.  

I'm not mistaking situations. I'm pointing what they actually say and mean:

  • I used triggered the same way it was used on the X-Cards description.  Then you got upset.
  • I quoted the actual X-Card rules  for use, actual examples listed in those instructions, and  then reasons why they are bad rules and can cause lots of trouble, far more than whatever problem they were supposed to solve
  • No one of you who disagree with me have posted one example of where the X-Card was the right solution for the  problem. 
  • You all seem to go out of you way to above players of any  sort of personal responsibility or accountability  for their actions, or for suffering the consequences of those actions, which BTW is vital to role-playing.Whose fault was it that somebody missed thier meds? Whose fault is it if the sat down to a game about something that they knew would  make them uncomfortable? If a tavern brawl is too much for them how are the going to handle a typical RPG adventure, where far nastier fights can and do happen? You keep shifting all the responsibility to the GM to accommodate these  player's special  needs" yet so far the only instance of someone who actually had something so severe that it actually needed to be accounted for was  a instance where a player got violent.  If a player is subject to getting violent over something in an RPG, then  they pose a risk to the safety of  others and that risk outweighs their desire to play, and they shouldn't be there. But you seem to think that the GM should put them self and other player at risk to accommodate that player. That isn't just wrong, it's criminal negligence.
  • Most people can handle most of these troublesome situations everywhere else in life, in  the context of entertainment, such as in a film or on TV, and tdo not force the world to censor itself to avoid bothering them. What should gamers have to?
  • Virtually every situation where the X-Card seems to be have any actual  positive effect is one that the player should have just told the GM that something bothered them or that they had problem with something.  The card just  makes the  situation more difficult to deal with. For instance if someone down  the road forgets something that caused someone to  play an X-Card some time in the past and mentions it,  they can be asked to leave.
  • The things that are being brought up as taboos subject are thing that can actually be mentioned  on the hallmark Channel and Oxygen. So apparently it's acceptable in that contest, what makes it so much worse arounnd the gaming table?

 

Yes,  there are specific special situations and conditions that might require special handling but they are few and far between and still a judgement call for the GM as if if they want to accommodate  them, for a player or not. A player shouldn't be dictating what a GM ca or cannot do. 

 

 

  • Sad 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

The GM has a choice -- there's no X-Card police that will put them in jail.

Not according  to the X-Card rules. The GM has no choice, it actually states that in writing. 

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

However, they would indeed be assholes to say they abide by the X-Card etiquette, without doing it.

Liar's too. If  they agree to abide by it then they  should, or at least explain why they will stop doing so before going into  reverse.

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

But then again, the whole thing is that if a player goes out of their way to tell the GM "I have a spider phobia, can you replace them with snakes or something?", the GM would be equally an asshole to reply "no, suck it up".

Yes, if a player does that. But you don't need X-Card rules  for that. In my current camapign I have one player (out of four) who is a woman. Since Pendragon is a very male-centeric game we did indeed discuss the complications of gender in the game. I actually offered to and was willing to run something else, but she was the one who really anted to  try Pendragon. So  I started my 6th or 7th Pendragon campaign. But I worked to make clear what the ground rules were, that there w ere no females knight yet, as it was too early for any elightned thinknig that might come along with Arthur, and that:

  1. She should play a Knight to experience the dynastic aspects  of the game and  passing things down to the heirs, and
  2. A  female warrior of some type  was  perfectly okay, and  could be accommodate for in several ways
  3. In the future things change and a female knight could be possible.

We worked it out, situation resolved. She has a Knight and is now playing his half-fae son, and a Saxon Shield maiden at King Budec's  court. We didn't need any special cards or rules, w e just discussed it like two human being. 

 

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

I mean, it's not rocket science, it's just a game, I'm sure 2 people can be functioning adults and sort things out.

Yes,  exactly. I would never deliberately run something that  I though would serious upset anybody. But plenty of the things that happen in a game can and will bother and upset people. They are  supposed to, just not to a significant degree.

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

If the player is abusing the X-Card, they're as much of an asshole as the GM who doesn't want to replace spider with snakes.

Yes. But the problem with the X-Card is that it give the player the belief that they have the right to dictate the GM actions. Instead of  two functrion adults working somethin gout you have one adult dictating that another cannot do  something with no way to try and sort things out.

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

There's a lot of assholes out there, on either side of the screen.

Yup. And even those who aren't  have moments  of stubbornness and meanness, get angry or  just screw up.

20 minutes ago, lordabdul said:

I'm pretty sure the whole point of the X-Card etiquette is to announce "I'm not too much of an asshole" first and foremost. Feel free to distribute an X-Card to the GM also, so they can also tell that a player is out of line if necessary.

I'm sure too. The rule is well intentioned, but the road  to Hell is paved with good intentions and X-Cards. It's giving one person the power to censor someone else for no reason other than they don't like, are made unconformable or are bothered by something. And that actually makes it harder to work with someone to get around problem. 

Look I figure most groups don;t have situations where a player is so uncomfortable with something that they can't game through it that they need a special rule for it.  And for those that do have that many situations, just keeping track of all the taboo subjects is going to become difficult to manage.  And  the consequence for slipping up just once is  the threat of expulsion.      

 

All I'm, saying is that  the card's are a bad tool, and that either there are better ways to handle these situations, or if the situation is extreme then those players probably shouldn't be there,  and that they bear some responsibility for what sort of situations they put themselves into.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Bill the barbarian said:

Cease fire all please, The only person taking a middle round here and trying to see both side is lordabdul and if the others will not relax and breathe I think a cessation or move to another venue is in order.

Alright, I'm okay with either option.  Sorry for the last two posts I was typing before I saw your message.

Edited by Atgxtg

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Alright, I'm okay with either option.  Sorry for the last two posts I was typing before I saw your message.

Not a worry... seems to me that we have squatted egregiously long enough. Sorry @Bohemond, This might have just killed your thread, Hope not.

... remember, with a TARDIS, one is never late for breakfast!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just find it a bit odd that someone is claiming that X-Cards and the like allow allegedly overly sensitive players to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, and in the process are making a mountain of the mole-hill that X-Cards and the like are, imho.

Could it hypothetically be annoying if Jerry puts up his X-Card and goes "hey, no cheese platter scenarios, please", and the GM has to hurriedly scribble around his pre-written scenario for cheese-tasting? Yeah, sure... but, like... we'll deal. And crazy notion: if the group considers Jerry's interruptions to be too invasive and counter to the rest of the group's interests, someone might have to have a chat and maybe Jerry wasn't the right fit for the group. As I mentioned above - social friction is awkward and sucks, but it happens, and is not the end of the world. And if Jery hadn't had those X-Cards or Veils or whatever, does anyone honestly think this imaginary scenario would have played out better?

I dunno, this all seems like a storm in a teacup.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...