Last Sunday’s youtubers video by Jamey Stegmaier (embedded below) was all about how “How Games Approach Sensitive & Controversial Themes”.
Apart from the theme of a game Deliverance not being what first came to mind (hill billies, river trips and squealing like a pig are not apparently what this game is about) this subject got me thinking about D&D. But not only D&D but other RPGs and settings.
RPGs can involve sensitive and controversial themes. For instance look at the Android settings and how bioroids and clones are treated. There are obvious parallels with slavery. In one of the FFG novellas there was even a story with the futuristic version of the underground railway for clones.
Then there is Vampire: The Masquerade an RPG that is for mature players because of its “…graphic and written content of a mature nature, including violence, sexual themes, and strong language.” (Taken from the warning https://www.modiphius.net/collections/vampire-the-masquerade).
So that’s just a couple of examples of official products that contain sensitive and controversial themes. Then we have the actual campaigns and adventures that a DM/GM come up with as well.
There have been a couple of high profile examples of where a DM/GM has abused a position of trust and chosen a subject that is controversial and in my opinion inappropriate for a RPG and has no place in a game whatsoever. Last year there was a GM at UKGE that made the headlines. Then just weeks ago an internet famous GM Adam Koebel caused the cancellation of one of his internet shows.
So how do we handle potential sensitive and controversial material in RPGs?
From an official setting point of view there is the warning about content. Such as that given by the publishers of Vampire: The Masquerade. Everyone playing the RPG should be made aware of that warning. If at an open gaming session at a con, at the start of the session. Or during the session zero.
Similarly EN Publishing give a warning about the content of a published adventure for the Judge Dredd and Worlds of 2000 A.D. called Nobody Expects the SJS! “This scenario involves themes of harsh interrogation and psychological and physical abuse. Please ensure you talk with your players before hand about their feelings in this area.”
As a gaming group the DM/GM during the session zero (that’s the session before any play starts where players create characters, and discuss the up and coming campaign) should be discussing the themes that the upcoming campaign will be touching on. But what’s more important is that the DM/GM makes sure that the players are comfortable with those themes, and giving the players a chance to indicate publicly or privately (because they may not be comfortable discussing in public) whether they are happy with those themes.
During play there is the possibility to use X cards. These allow players during play to discreetly indicate that the current subject matter is unsuitable and making them feel uncomfortable.
I think it also helps if a DM/GM “knows” his players. I knew for my D&D group that I had to avoid certain themes/subjects because of the beliefs of one of the group.
The nature of my campaign means that it is possible that new themes to cover crop up during the campaign as story ideas come along. So I’ve checked with the group that they are comfortable with this new theme. That was an open discussion before a session. Before I start using that story idea and theme I will once again bring the subject up with a bit more detail and give the players an opportunity to publicly and privately discuss this with me.
These two measures should stop incidents happening like the ones mentioned above. But that’s only if everyone follows them. They don’t stop it happening if the DM/GM doesn’t use them or ignores them. We can’t stop people being dicks.
That’s how RPGs handle sensitive and controversial themes.
I think the most important thing to do when something like this does happen is to discuss it with the GM and other players so everybody is on the same page and understands everybody’s feelings. Then the game can move on safely. Throwing a fit and rage quitting doesn’t accomplish anything.
A good point, and I agree with you and disagree with you! I think in the case of something cropping up not covered in the session zero and is something that may be a regular thing for the majority of people, then yes I agree. It’s an innocent mistake/understanding and can be resolved. But when you get situations like the high profile ones mentioned the DM/GM has deliberately chosen to do something that would affect people. In that case I think they have deliberately broken that bond of trust between DM/GM and player. I think it’s then up to the affected player(s) to decide if that is something that can be repaired or not.