Honestly, if someone is using the x-card (sufficiently explained as a way of avoiding content that someone is not comfortable having at the tabletop) as a shut-up card, you've got a pretty clear sign that's someone you shouldn't invite back to your table, they've obviously going to be overbearing and hard to work with.

Suddenly it's a way to vet new players on top of the existing aim of filtering out uncomfortable content. So many features!

That's the problem. How do you know? You can't ask, talk, question or otherwise.

I'm going to respectfully both agree and disagree with the pirate on this one.

Disagreement: I game with a group nearly composed of entirely those with mental illness (I seem to have built a collection of the mentally unusual including 5 friends who have Dissociative Identity Disorder), one of which suffers from PTSD, and a quick way to let me know that we are stepping in territory that relates directly to their past trauma is never a mad thing.

Agreement: I've been gaming with these people for so many years that I know most of these triggers already (through past discussions and them letting me know or me finding out through experience).

1 minute ago, 2P51 said:

That's the problem. How do you know? You can't ask, talk, question or otherwise.

You can?

The point of the x-card is to avoid those conversations at the time. You don't need to tear into the details of why someone wants to exclude certain content then and there, while everyone is watching and it'd disrupt game flow massively.

But can you take them aside after the game and have a quick chat, while trying to remain sensitive? Sure, that's fine.

It's about keeping the flow of the game intact and making sessions a comfortable space, not preventing dialogue entirely.

If I was running a mixed or invitational table in the world we live in I would have a little questionnaire and just ask simple stuff like what's your no go point, as well as, who's your fav character? Do Ewoks suck? etc. I'd know that ahead of time. I would never let someone just shut down everything with a card during the game. Someone who has to have it, best of luck to you, but my table isn't for you. No hard feelings and no exceptions.

I also set ground rules to begin with about good and bad topics. Honestly I think people when they go off on these rants raise the oddest of weirdness and then use that as a goofy example to just scream...."What about the child **** alien kidnap victims! You heartless Pirate!!! Grrr!!!" I should've learned by now to just ask, who in the flying donkey F*** has that kind of crap going on at their table?!?! Incest? Sexual assault? Who the **** would even allow this foolishness at all? I also agree with HD, it's pretty hard to tip toe around a lot of pretty hot button stuff in a game about galactic war.

19 minutes ago, kaosoe said:

Agreement: I've been gaming with these people for so many years that I know most of these triggers already (through past discussions and them letting me know or me finding out through experience).

That’s the thing, when you know peoplewell enough and care about them enough to get to know the details of them, and you are compassionate enough to consider those things when gaming then there shouldn’t be a need for an x-card, but in a situation where the players don’t know each other that well it would be very useful as you also said.

33 minutes ago, Tom Cruise said:

Safe spaces for old grognards are fine though, god forbid any modern concepts get introduced into games to disrupt those

Pretty much every problem anyone has raised with the X-card is the kind of problem that only comes from *** players you don't want at your table anyway, so like, kick them out if it becomes an issue? Having a simple, non-disruptive way to censor out certain sensitive content on the spot doesn't force you to sign an agreement that you can never have a friendly discussion with the player afterwards about what's up. And that's only if you use the **** thing, it's entirely optional. I don't. Can certainly see the appeal for more publicly accessible games though.

Seems like you guys really need an x-card for when anyone dares to introduce a new idea you're not comfortable with?

You've hit the nail on the head. This protects all parties involved, and can serve as a good litmus test for how a new player could integrate with an existing, "salty" group.

31 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

Which whafrog and I agreed with. It's the 'shut up card' that's non sense.

See, that makes me feel like you didn't read the text. The was Desslok describes it is true to the spirit of the card, whereas you're picking up on the abuse of it. Both are valid, but I think we would admit rpg rules have been abused and broken since we were but wee humans.

There's no way to know at the time though, is there? That's the problem.

I just don't buy it. That card gets laid down, the person talking may have meant no offense. Now they feel bad, the whole table starts wondering what they should or shouldn't say, blech, nothing but awkward buzzkill at that point.

Why is the X Card so much better than something verbal?

Even if you're in the "discussions should be stopped instantly via anyone's request" sort of group, that can be done verbally. And, verbal request at least allows for a bit more explanation.

8 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

now to just ask, who in the flying donkey F*** has that kind of crap going on at their table?!?! Incest? Sexual assault? Who the **** would even allow this foolishness at all? I also agree with HD, it's pretty hard to tip toe around a lot of pretty hot button stuff in a game about galactic war.

And now we're on the same page! This is the kinda crap I'm talking about. I have seen GMs allow this and worse. We're not talking the gore & glory of war, we're talking some radically different thoughts on acceptable societal norms, which seem to abound in our fellow gamers in many forms.

3 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

There's no way to know at the time though, is there? That's the problem.

I just don't buy it. That card gets laid down, the person talking may have meant no offense. Now they feel bad, the whole table starts wondering what they should or shouldn't say, blech, nothing but awkward buzzkill at that point.

And this is why it must be used with discretion. It's an apt point, though. I am reconsidering using it after this discussion, but I feel like I'm not going to find a lot of emotionally stable individuals at an FLGS where I can taste the B.O.

1 minute ago, Yaccarus said:

Why is the X Card so much better than something verbal?

Even if you're in the "discussions should be stopped instantly via anyone's request" sort of group, that can be done verbally. And, verbal request at least allows for a bit more explanation.

Visual cue to remind people it's there? Why use minis instead of theater of the mind? Maybe the 29-page document answers this question, I sure can't.

4 minutes ago, themensch said:

Visual cue to remind people it's there? Why use minis instead of theater of the mind? Maybe the 29-page document answers this question, I sure can't.

For a quick visual cue, why use a prop? Can't they just make an "L" on their forehead with their finger and thumb?

6 minutes ago, themensch said:

And now we're on the same page! This is the kinda crap I'm talking about. I have seen GMs allow this and worse. We're not talking the gore & glory of war, we're talking some radically different thoughts on acceptable societal norms, which seem to abound in our fellow gamers in many forms.

And this is why it must be used with discretion. It's an apt point, though. I am reconsidering using it after this discussion, but I feel like I'm not going to find a lot of emotionally stable individuals at an FLGS where I can taste the B.O.

There's a distinct difference between poorly socialized nerds and people with real mental illness, and contrary to anyone's opinions I have decades of dealing with both.

I get people may get upset about stuff, but then the card is thrown down and the poor F talking suddenly feels bad, everyone else starts walking on egg shells, everyone is going to engage in self second guessing and censoring, and then it just turns into dice rolling with way less spontaneity, and really that's the effect regardless of whether the card person is being a hack or for real imo. It is like an emergency brake on role playing.

9 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

For a quick visual cue, why use a prop? Can't they just make an "L" on their forehead with their finger and thumb?

Haha, yeah I anticipate ending up on a tumblr feed for pulling something like that.

8 minutes ago, 2P51 said:

There's a distinct difference between poorly socialized nerds and people with real mental illness, and contrary to anyone's opinions I have decades of dealing with both.

I get people may get upset about stuff, but then the card is thrown down and the poor F talking suddenly feels bad, everyone else starts walking on egg shells, everyone is going to engage in self second guessing and censoring, and then it just turns into dice rolling with way less spontaneity, and really that's the effect regardless of whether the card person is being a hack or for real imo. It is like an emergency brake on role playing.

Naw, I didn't have any doubts you'd dealt with such individuals - most gamers have. You do make an excellent point regarding the possible fallout that I would imagine shows up far more often than the desired "let's move on" result. I haven't actually used it, and while I had intended to, I think I'll just stick to W.S. like I have for decades and let that be my guide.

15 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

For a quick visual cue, why use a prop? Can't they just make an "L" on their forehead with their finger and thumb?

5 minutes ago, themensch said:

Haha, yeah I anticipate ending up on a tumblr feed for pulling something like that.

What happened to good ol nerd rage reactions.....

All I know is that if you just slap down a card and say I cant do such-and-such at my table, my reaction is just going to be that you leave my table. If you just say that you have a problem with the subject matter and dont want it in the game, I will work with you to remove the issue.

For all this talk of people with problems playing, I have to say that I play to get away from real life. If you are a continuing disruption to the game, one of us will leave. If may be a bit harsh, but if it is a continuing problem, gaming wont be fufilling is purpose, so I wont keep running to the same problem over and over.

The thing about this X-card, is that it just makes a 'You must...'. Never a good idea with me.

The bigger question is why this needs to be an issue in the first place. Mental illness is one thing, because it isn't as obvious what is and isn't alright.

But these things should really be established before the game ever happens. It should be clarified from day one as to whether or not there's going to be explicit content. If you don't like what is decided, talk then or leave then. Don't interrupt a game once it comes up.

1 hour ago, 2P51 said:

ask, who in the flying donkey F*** has that kind of crap going on at their table?!?! Incest?

I mean, it's only respectful to the source material

5 minutes ago, Yaccarus said:

The bigger question is why this needs to be an issue in the first place. Mental illness is one thing, because it isn't as obvious what is and isn't alright.

But these things should really be established before the game ever happens. It should be clarified from day one as to whether or not there's going to be explicit content. If you don't like what is decided, talk then or leave then. Don't interrupt a game once it comes up.

there is a method mentioned in the document called the line and veil method, which it has a link to as well, where people can state clearly what they want to happen and not happen in the game, however this can also lead to miscommunication, as the article also points out a female player stated in the beginning that they did not want any non-consensual sex in the game and then later tried to perform non-consensual sex on an npc.

the article states, and i agree, that if you use the line and veil that you end up with the possibility of introducing topics yourself that might not ever come up otherwise, and that even you as a player might not understand exactly what you mean at the time, in the case of the female player she meant that she did not want to have her character be a victim of **** in a game where it likely never would have come up, but the other players did not understand that she intended to do that to another character.

i understand some people's qualms about it disrupting game play, but from what it looks like from actually reading the document, it is designed to create a smooth system of game play that allows people and the gm to be able to play fluidly without worrying about constantly checking themselves for any potential offense, and then when having an offense pointed out, carrying on maturely with the game with the understanding that the offense was not intentional, but that it is something that should from this point not be included.

my favorite parts from the article is where it says,

"The X-card creates a specific mood at the table. It says “We’re here together. If you need to stop, we’ll stop. The people playing are more important than the game we are playing.”

"The X-Card talk is a good way to communicate... this is not a solo activity. The people here matter more than the game we are playing. Help us make this fun for everyone."

"But gaming is about interaction. It's about choices. And it's about the people playing together. No one person's feelings are more important than anyone elses. "

in the end having the card is more important than using it because it allows people playing to know that they as actual people are more important than whatever narrative is being created, and that seems to be a disconnect i've been seeing in this thread where many people are more concerned with their own fun than the wellbeing of the individuals at play.

33 minutes ago, Yaccarus said:

The bigger question is why this needs to be an issue in the first place. Mental illness is one thing, because it isn't as obvious what is and isn't alright.

But these things should really be established before the game ever happens. It should be clarified from day one as to whether or not there's going to be explicit content. If you don't like what is decided, talk then or leave then. Don't interrupt a game once it comes up.

While I agree there's a Session Zero for a reason, that's not always going to happen in a pickup one-shot with people you don't know.

1 hour ago, 2P51 said:

I never said forced, go ahead and quote where I said that. I would never force anyone to do anything, including telling them to shut up.

In retrospect this isn't entirely true. I might've forced a few people to do some things they didn't want to........they were all bad though......

1 hour ago, Tom Cruise said:

Seems like you guys really need an x-card for when anyone dares to introduce a new idea you're not comfortable with?

That's a weird statement. We very obviously don't need an X card. We're stating our opinion, not hiding behind an X card, and some of us are having a discussion. That's as it should be. I'm not *telling* anyone to stop using it. However, I can still think it's pathetic, a symptom of a growing inability in the culture to socialize without feeling endangered.

And there's nothing new in there anyway, it's simply a way to codify passive aggressive cowardice.

1 hour ago, 2P51 said:

If they need a card to interact with people they aren't ready for interacting with strangers who don't know them at all.

Exactly.

My whole thing is clarity. If I was hosting a game in a public setting* where I had no idea who might show up, then as a GM I think it would be on me to explain the parameters of the game, and what social boundaries are being set. If you say "this is a dark and gritty campaign that might explore uncomfortable territory with regards to sex and violence", then forewarned is forearmed. Players don't have to join. If later they tell me the subject is making them uncomfortable, if it's something I can modify, I will; if not, then too bad, retire the character and be done.

That's called clarity, and it's not hard to do, but some people never learn it because they rely on crutches like the X card.

* full disclosure: this would never happen, I'm way too much of an introvert...and I don't need an X card to say so... However, I do spell out the same things for my own group, so it's not a stretch to imagine explaining the same things to an ad hoc group.

18 minutes ago, Norr-Saba said:

in the end having the card is more important than using it because it allows people playing to know that they as actual people are more important than whatever narrative is being created, and that seems to be a disconnect i've been seeing in this thread where many people are more concerned with their own fun than the wellbeing of the individuals at play.

That's where I fall on this - the card is an important symbol. Even if it's never activated, it exists to send the message that it could be. Another tool in the toolbox.