Preferences (Art by Niels Vergouwen)
-
safety glasses only recommenced if you have REALLY enthusiastic dice rollers
I wish Ted would just bring a dice tower, instead of that damn dice mortar!
-
Source (Instagram)
Wouldn’t it be intragroup if your party are all banging?
-
basically a safe word system for TTRPGs, LARPs, etc.
in my experience they’re useful for large and/or public groups but if you have to use them with small groups of familiar people you’re probably just not a good match for each other TTRPG wise
I’ve used lines and veils before but that was because it was my first time running for those players and wasn’t very familiar with what is or is not ok for them
-
Source (Instagram)
Both of what are valid?
-
Thank you.
-
safety glasses only recommenced if you have REALLY enthusiastic dice rollers
D4’s are a menace that should be illegal.
-
I want the first one but with high magic. Do you know how compelling the story can be when you’re fighting racist oppressors who have access to ‘Wish’?
Yes, the term “in-game racism” is pretty broad. Does it mean anything that’s not a human, elf, dwarf or halfling has a KILL ME sign on it? Or when elves and dwarves don’t get along? Or that character races are called “races” instead of “species”? Is it racism when character race influences stats?
-
Source (Instagram)
Memes are good at presenting false dichotomies for people to nod knowingly and say yeah, that about sums it up.
-
No, they have nothing to do with the style of play. They have to do with group dynamics, which is an entirely separate thing.
I actually haven’t ever used them myself. I’ve only played with people I already know or people that those people are vouching for, and I do a solid session zero to establish campaign content and tone. But it’s who I’m playing with and the fact that we’ve discussed it that’s relevant there, not whether we’re playing heroic fantasy romance or dark gritty realism.
So, you’re just disagreeing based on semantics? In that case sure. Safety tools are a group dynamic thing and not a style of play thing. No argument there.
-
Even at tables that use safety tools, they’re still optional. You can still speak up, but it’s there for people who find that difficult.
I really don’t understand the animosity against tools that help improve the enjoyment for all players involved.
If you, as a player, don’t want to use them, then don’t.
I think you misunderstood. I have nothing against safety tools. I just stated that the majority of players neither use them nor need them and if your group doesn’t include a single player who needs safety tools, then there really isn’t a point in having them. Im not carrying a spare tire while hiking. Doesn’t mean I think that spare tires are a bad concept in general.
-
So, you’re just disagreeing based on semantics? In that case sure. Safety tools are a group dynamic thing and not a style of play thing. No argument there.
No, I disagree that it should be in this comic because it sends the wrong message.
-
It’s probably a target audience thing. People who need safety tools rarely like gritty realism because it tends to contain a lot of potential trigger points and people who lile gritty realism usually don’t use safety tools because they either don’t have triggers or dissociate fantasy rp enough that it doesn’t trigger them.
So, it’s more of a correlation vs causation thing.
-
It’s probably a target audience thing. People who need safety tools rarely like gritty realism because it tends to contain a lot of potential trigger points and people who lile gritty realism usually don’t use safety tools because they either don’t have triggers or dissociate fantasy rp enough that it doesn’t trigger them.
So, it’s more of a correlation vs causation thing.
Right, exactly what you’ve said right here is exactly the mindset I’m pushing back against. The comic comes across as though it’s saying “only those soft soyboys care about stuff like psychological safety, real tough guys who play tough manly gritty realism don’t need that soyboy shit”. Which is an incredibly toxic and lazy point of view.
I don’t think the author of the comic intended it that way, but that’s how it comes across.
-
Well now I want a dice mortar
-
Yes, the term “in-game racism” is pretty broad. Does it mean anything that’s not a human, elf, dwarf or halfling has a KILL ME sign on it? Or when elves and dwarves don’t get along? Or that character races are called “races” instead of “species”? Is it racism when character race influences stats?
What if someone things humans are fine, but is against variant humans?
I knew it’s just optional rules, but I think it’s funnier to think of it as an in-universe race of humans.
-
In formal English, the comma is just wrong. Informally, I agree it does a very effective job of making the message get across that way.
But a much better way would be to say “with safety tools and lots of inter-group romance”.
-
I think you misunderstood. I have nothing against safety tools. I just stated that the majority of players neither use them nor need them and if your group doesn’t include a single player who needs safety tools, then there really isn’t a point in having them. Im not carrying a spare tire while hiking. Doesn’t mean I think that spare tires are a bad concept in general.
And exactly how do you know that none of your players need safety tools?
Nobody is asking you to carry a spare tire while hiking, but you do admit that bringing one extra bottle of water is a good idea while hiking, right?
-
Wouldn’t it be intragroup if your party are all banging?
Which rulebook is that?
-
Ten bucks says the first group hasn’t had a single character die in the whole campaign, and the second group is all on their second characters due to the Sybian Incident
That’s because the first group does their mimic checks
-
I honestly thought it was about PPE.
In Character: I mean, isn’t your armour basically PPE against injury induced by foreign actors?
