One of my friends is really phobic of >thing<. We discovered this when >thing< occured in the plot and he freaked out. I'm not sure the DM quite realised how much of a problem it was, as >thing< has now come up twice more, quite possibly to provoke a reaction from the player.
The player doesn't want to make a big thing of it, but it's pretty obvious to a few of the players at least that it is a genuine issue. Is it the player's responsibilty to tell the DM to back off or can someone else jump in?
It's a fairly common trigger, but I'm not sure I hold with trigger warnings for everything on the off chance... but now it's come up, how best to deal with it?
Is this a pre-written adventure like PFS scenarios or Adventure Paths? Or is this a home game where the GM made up his own content? If it's the former, I'm sure the triggers is probably only short term and can be avoided in future if it's an issue. If it's the latter and the GM is on purpose throwing triggering elements for %*$@s and giggles to freak a player out and some of you think it's an issue, then take a stand and tell the GM to back off on being a dick.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The best idea is to get help for a simple phobia. It doesn't even have to cost too much to get it. If the phobia hurts your life, you will get a new life after treating it.
If that is not possible, sure, you could remove the <thing> from all RPGing and be done with it. However, it's not always a good thing. These things can be VERY disruptive. For example, I had to deal with a huge bunch of people who had a triskadekaphobic among them - she was afraid of the number 13. And everyone had adapted to her. They wrote 12+1 when they meant 13, and so on. That is... too far.
It's an Adventure Path. But I'm pretty sure at least one of the occasions was the DM working it in.
I'm trying not to be too specific, as I know other players may use this forum. It's not a thing you'd expect to keep coming up, and it's a big enough thing that many people wouldn't consider it silly / OTT to have a reaction to.
I believe the player is working on it but finding it hard to deal with as this particular character isn't very able to deal with it, either.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
If the phobic player has a hard time bringing up the issue, but it's obvious that they are bothered by this GM's actions, then the other players can totally jump in and say something! I mean, they should probably consult with the phobic player first before acting on their behalf; the phobic player may not want to make a big deal out of it, but it can be difficult to speak out for yourself in these matters. The important thing to remember is that it is a big deal, because if not everyone is having fun (and especially if someone is experiencing phobic triggers), then the game is just worse.
Also, I'm not sure what this level of triggering is, or what kind of response the triggered player has to it--but whether it's full-on panic attacks or re-traumatization, or just a slight to moderate phobia, the GM trying to "provoke a reaction" with this subject is 100% full-stop NOT OKAY. Someone needs to talk to that GM and tell them to cut that garbage out. It's one thing to accidentally trigger someone, and a completely different thing to do it on purpose; the latter, of course, being unacceptable. Period. If the GM doesn't stop, then I would say that the phobic player cannot play with that GM. Personally, I would find a new GM.
Finally, there is a free gaming tool called the X-Card which is specifically designed to help people play RPGs safely! Its purpose is to help games avoid triggering content in game and make sure that everyone feels safe so they can have fun. I think it does so in a way that helps make it not a big deal, but it's also important to note the numerous times the writer points out that making sure everyone feels safe to play the game is more important than playing the game. Using the X-Card to downplay someone feeling unsafe is not cool. If you like what you see, try showing that doc to your GM and see whether you all think it would be a good inclusion to your games.
Yeah, I have no advice other than "talk to the GM." I just really want to know what this mystery trigger is, now.
Just gonna toss this out there..
As a retired and recovering combat vet..I will say that Roleplaying as used by clinicians and such, is a very powerful tool in dealing with some people "triggers" and phobias.....that being said.
This game is not that..and if this is causing that player actual mental duress...STOP IT!..cease desist.
Its not worth making someone relive something or experience a trauma for sake of game play.
So talk to the GM..remove this from the table..and don't return to it..unless the player in question requests it or OKs it.
|
|
Yeah, talk to the GM about scrapping [thing], since it may be the environment of the game itself that makes it worse for this player. This is often the case since a game is seen as a safe space, and having [thing] in your safe space removes that feeling of comfort that the player felt before.
Telling them to get over it isn't really a viable solution, since if was that easy, they'd have done it by now. Don't try to engage them about [thing] unless they engage you first, since it's not your place to try and involve yourself in their self care.
Hopefully [thing] isn't something that's easily involved in a lot of games, and can be avoided for their safety and well being, since keeping all players happy is the job of all players, especially the GM.
Well I'd like to think if it was me, I would tell the GM myself. But phobias are weird things. So I certainly can't be sure of that.
Do you think the phobic friend will work him/her self up to say something? That would be best, but sometimes it will never happen.
Do you think the GM is doing it on purpose because he doesn't really realize it is a problem and thinks everyone is getting a laugh out of it? (Thinking it is like a harmless practical joke.)
Talk to the GM privately, "Look Troy doesn't want to make a big deal out of it but is getting really bothered by the repeated X. It really isn't even a little bit funny for Troy. Please back off."
Or do you think the GM knows what a problem it is and is doing it on purpose just to screw with the person? (This is getting into the nasty/mean spirited practical joke territory.)
Talk to the GM privately, "Hey stop being a jack-hole. You know it bothers Troy a lot and you're doing it on purpose. Back off or you just lost at least 2 players cause I won't put up with that being done to a friend."
I don't really know if that is best, but it is what I'd do.
I'm really interested in what the trigger is and if the Gm had prior knoweldge of it or not.
Is this something that we would normally expect to be a trigger for some people? RPG can be very dark, and may include very dark topics such as grisly rape and murder scenes...if you want them to. But they don't need to necessarily. But as a GM, if I don't know where the limits are and I want to go to a dark place I might have something like that casually mentioned not described in detail or implied. Is it wrong? No, but it may not be cool for all groups and players.
At the end of the day all you can do is talk to the GM, perhaps they don't even realize there is a problem.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's possible the GM has the best of intentions but doesn't realize that he's doing something bad.
Quite a few lists of GMing tips recommend finding the things that get a rise out of the players and using those. That's good as long as it's something that makes players a little bit nervous or edgy. That can make the game more exciting.
But it's not good if it goes from light squirming to outright phobia. Because that's not fun at all, and fun is the goal of the game.
It's possible that because your friend doesn't fully show just how deeply he/she is affected, that the GM is misunderstanding the effect he's having.
You should definitely have a friendly but frank talk about it with the GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The player doesn't want to make a big thing of it,
It seems to me that the core question here is do you feel this player is a responsible adult capable of taking care of themselves and dealing with issues that life throws at them, or that the player is incapable of dealing with things on their own and, like a child, needs someone to take care of them.
If it is the former, it would seem to me that basic respect means you assume they are an adult as can handle it.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The player doesn't want to make a big thing of it,It seems to me that the core question here is do you feel this player is a responsible adult capable of taking care of themselves and dealing with issues that life throws at them, or that the player is incapable of dealing with things on their own and, like a child, needs someone to take care of them.
If it is the former, it would seem to me that basic respect means you assume they are an adult as can handle it.
I don't think you understand the difference between "dealing with issues that life throws at them" and a legitimate phobia.
I don't know the phobic player's age, but it's entirely possible that they are an adult who is not going to buck up and "handle it," like magic, because it's not that simple or easy.
Please don't compare people with traumatic issues, or even just people who "need someone to take care of them," to children in this way. It's insultingly dismissive. Look at it this way: who do you know who is a completely independent entity who requires no assistance, care, or friendship from another human being? Are you opposed to caring for your friends (that's rhetorical, I'm hoping the answer is "Yes, duh")?
The player doesn't want to make a big thing of it,It seems to me that the core question here is do you feel this player is a responsible adult capable of taking care of themselves and dealing with issues that life throws at them, or that the player is incapable of dealing with things on their own and, like a child, needs someone to take care of them.
If it is the former, it would seem to me that basic respect means you assume they are an adult as can handle it.
I don't think you understand the difference between "dealing with issues that life throws at them" and a legitimate phobia.
I don't know the phobic player's age, but it's entirely possible that they are an adult who is not going to buck up and "handle it," like magic, because it's not that simple or easy.
Please don't compare people with traumatic issues, or even just people who "need someone to take care of them," to children in this way. It's insultingly dismissive. Look at it this way: who do you know who is a completely independent entity who requires no assistance, care, or friendship from another human being? Are you opposed to caring for your friends (that's rhetorical, I'm hoping the answer is "Yes, duh")?
You are entirely missing my point. I make no assumption as to how difficult the triggering issue is for the person to handle. However, I do assume that an adult can evaluate that for themselves and successfully communicate any issues they are having with the person running the game.
The OP said 'The player doesn't want to make a big thing of it.' Either the OP believes the player is capable of determining that what they can handle, or the OP doesn't.
I think it was stated fairly poorly.
But I do know people that even within the same region have a sort of sub-culture clash.
Some people are raised in an environment with the assumption that adults will ask for help if needed/wanted. Offering or giving unrequested help is often seen as an insult. It is making the assumption that the person is incapable and needs to have things done for them because they can't even tell when they need help.
Others are raised learning the assumption that unrequested help is freely offered. Especially with family and friends, so it doesn't need to be requested. If you know someone is having trouble and don't go out of your way to help them even (or maybe especially) if they haven't asked for it, you are giving the impression that you don't care.
I think most people are somewhere between the two. But I do know a few people that are right solidly in one group or the other.
Something about the word trigger just sets me off.
Now answer this question: Are you obligated to use the word 'trigger' less because it discomforts me?
If whatever is "triggering" your friend could be in a PG movie, then the answer of what your GM should do about it, should be the same as the answer to the above question.
it depends on what that <thing> is. if the player is afraid of rape because they were raped in real life and the GM keeps having maurading bands of ogres molesting townsfolk, then your GM is a beligerent a&! h@&~.
if that <thing> is caves because your player is claustrophobic, and he cant handle having his character go underground, then its ridiculous to be playing an RPG.
we need some context here
it depends on what that <thing> is. if the player is afraid of rape because they were raped in real life and the GM keeps having maurading bands of ogres molesting townsfolk, then your GM is a beligerent a!! h+@!.
if that <thing> is caves because your player is claustrophobic, and he cant handle having his character go underground, then its ridiculous to be playing an RPG.
we need some context here
I don't know about ridiculous, but certainly a discussion about expectations should be had. If you fear common adventuring tropes, like cramped dark caves and being described them verbally, then perhaps RPGs should not be your thing. Or you should at least request something where such an encounter will be minimal. The closest I can think of is liek Skull and Shackles, even though that did involve some dungeon delving from time to time.
Also, I do have a hard time thinking about something like a claustrophobic person having a hard time because someone describes being in a small dark cave. But I can sympathize to an extent, because I am afraid of spiders. They give me the creeps, and I remember when someone posted a picture of a fried spider or something in a thread on the forums and it made me almost vomit when I looked at it.
But I feel seeing something is very different from someone just telling me there are spiders. Maybe I just don't have a very good imaginaiton.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Something about the word trigger just sets me off.
Now answer this question: Are you obligated to use the word 'trigger' less because it discomforts me?
If whatever is "triggering" your friend could be in a PG movie, then the answer of what your GM should do about it, should be the same as the answer to the above question.
Depends on the reaction.
If for some bizarre reason you really do have serious panic attacks when you hear the word "trigger", you're damn right I'd avoid using it around you. If you find the word mildly irritating I won't, though I'd probably try to use other terms cause I'm a nice guy.Not likely to come up in a game, since I don't think verbal description really set her off, but I've got a friend with a severe snake phobia. As in Throw you at the snake to delay and run screaming.
Snakes can appear in PG movies, but do I have an obligation to not surprise her with fake snakes, videos and pictures of snakes? I don't know about obligation, but I'm pretty much of a jerk if I do.
I would assume though that the GM is under no obligation to not include snakes in the campaign.
I would even go so far as to say the GM is under no obligation not to include snake minis.
Sometimes people just need to deal with it.
Another poster just brought up the dreaded R-word topic. That's the kind of thing that I could easily see as, "hey dude we're all here to have a bit of fun. Let's crank down the heavy stuff".
Thanks for the Xcard idea. That could really help, actually. It wouldn't be too hard to work it in with breaks and things... we're quite flexible on breaks anyway, so it wouldn't be a big deal. And, as I said, other people have noticed so one of us could do it if it happened again.
The "player doesn't want to make a big thing about it" is more of a "player would rather people didn't know >thing< occured" than "player is being overly passive". It's tricky...
GM takes it as a bit of a joke, I think. GM isn't malicious. Just missed some subtext on this one.
I know "trigger" can be very much overused, but it's fairly valid in this case.
If the player is severely arachnaphobic and GM keeps having the PC attacked by giant spiders, that's still a jerk move.
I mean, it might be if the GM is doing it to specifically get the player to freak. But as someone who is arachnaphobic:
A) The description of spiders doesn't scare me, though this could be different for others I guess. It would just surprise me. Show me a picture like I mentioned and I will have shivers up and down my spine, but a verbal description wont do much. Also Vlad the Conqueror Barbarian doesn't have my fear of spiders.B) If the GM doesn't know, and the player doesn't show much of a reaction do we expect the GM to read his player's mind?
C) Giant spiders are a fairly common enemy to encounter, perhaps it is called for by the adventure path or scenario and the GM is just folling it with no knowledge of the player's issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM, I would hope that if I inadvertantly stepped on a player's landmine, he or she would tell me what happened. I'm a pretty perceptive guy, and I can usually tell when someone suddenly becomes upset-- particualarly at the gaming table. That's the time for an out-of-game discussion.
I've accidentally hit a triggering situation for players in the past. It's very uncomfortable all around. These days, when I start up a new campaign with new players, I always ask players individually before we start playing together if there are any themes, situations, or storylines that would be a potential problem.
For example, I had a player resign from my Runelords campaign because of the themes in The Skinsaw Murders. I hadn't known that he'd once worked as a forensic anthropologist in El Salvador to help identify victims of death squads-- and had to quit that job due to the emotional stress of digging up mass graves with bodies of children. In real life.
In a much earlier example, I made a very grave error in running a scene that included a zombie child. One of my players had witnessed his 5-year-old sister killed in a car accident decades earlier, which I had not known.
No one was in the wrong here. If I'd known that the situations would have caused pain to my players, I would certainly have run something different. Now, I always have that discussion ahead of time, individually with each player.
The bottom line is that this is a game and is supposed to be a fun time for everyone. Dredging up old emotional trauma is not fun for anyone. The only way to avoid is is open communication channels; the only way to fix it after the fact is to be respectful and understanding.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Another option, especially if the player in question really doesn't want to have >thing< associated with them, is to tell the GM you're not okay with it. That you don't want it in game, leaving the other player out entirely.Thanks for the Xcard idea. That could really help, actually. It wouldn't be too hard to work it in with breaks and things... we're quite flexible on breaks anyway, so it wouldn't be a big deal. And, as I said, other people have noticed so one of us could do it if it happened again.
The "player doesn't want to make a big thing about it" is more of a "player would rather people didn't know >thing< occured" than "player is being overly passive". It's tricky...
GM takes it as a bit of a joke, I think. GM isn't malicious. Just missed some subtext on this one.
I know "trigger" can be very much overused, but it's fairly valid in this case.
Actually, this seems like an elegant and simple solution given the situation. Hopefully it won't be a hard Bluff check.
If the GM is treating it as a joke, it doesn't matter if they're doing it maliciously, because it's causing actual harm. It doesn't make them a bad person, but the behavior is harmful. I'd try to make the GM understand that, if need be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's not turn this into a debate about the validity of triggers. That doesn't help anyone.
We'd really need to know a little more about the situation to offer specific advice. What to do about the trigger would depend on how frequent the trigger comes up, whether it's a very common thing that one would expect in the normal course of a story, e.g. someone has a panic attack whenever food is discussed, or whether it's rare and specific, e.g. someone has a panic attack when giant spiders are discussed. (There's always something other than giant spiders one can use, even if they're a ubiquitous fantasy trope.)
Some good advice, here. TheJeff's plan may work. TBH, the triggering thing is kind of unsettling / creepy / a bit squicky anyway. As much as I hate to say this, as the only female player, it might be easier / more expected from me anyway (no, I don't play with a load of knuckle dragging sexists, I'm just quite an emotional player :p).
If it just doesn't come up again then problem solved. The GM isn't the most empathetic at times, but I can't imagine he'd want to freak someone out to this extent.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks to everyone who contributed and sorry it was a bit vague (at least two other players use this forum and one hasn't noticed so far and I didn't want him to put two and two together).
I spoke to the GM about it. He didn't take offense or anything, but didn't quite get the strength of reaction. But he agreed not to use >thing< again if it was a problem. It's certainly not something that needs to be in the AP, beyond the first time, so it's not like we're derailing the game because, for instance, someone is playing Skulls and Shackles and is a bit worried about any mention of water.
I don't think the player is particularly worried about it coming up again, so that may be problem solved.
Which Adventure Path is it?
Which Adventure Path is it?
I'm going to take a wild guess, and say, RotR, book 3.
While I would happily remove anything that would make people really uncomfortable, I really like that Paizo includes some R rated material in their adventures. After a while the G rated stuff breaks immersion when it is supposed to be really Evil.
Which Adventure Path is it?I'm going to take a wild guess, and say, RotR, book 3.
While I would happily remove anything that would make people really uncomfortable, I really like that Paizo includes some R rated material in their adventures. After a while the G rated stuff breaks immersion when it is supposed to be really Evil.
But I've never had anything which I thought was too graphic or sickening that was included in a Paizo AP. Certainly they can get a little edgy, but in the same way that a good movie gets edgy.
If this is a pre-written adventure I'm really wondering where the problem is, because I'm not used to finding anything to objectionable. A homebrew game would be different, but I've always considered APs relatively mild except for a few points once in a while. But maybe I spend too much time on /r/wtf.
I think a good AP should scare you a little, or maybe have certian things happen that make you a little angry. I think the pinnacle of a role playing game is actually experiecning the emotions of your character because the story is so compelling. But, it could certainly cross a line where it makes people uncomfortable.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But it IS a method psychologists use to help people overcome their phobiasYeah, don't do that. That's terrible and not funny at all.I would include the trigger even more often than i normally would.
But then, I'm a jerk.
Yes, I'm well aware of immersion therapy, but we're not talking about that. That's practiced by professionals as a way to help someone, it's done by people who are trained to be able to help them, and is often sought out by the person with said trigger.
What we are talking about is you purposefully and maliciously doing something solely for your own enjoyment at the expense of someone you KNOW to be suffering from your actions, which isn't even meant to 'help' anyone because you admitted you were only doing it because you are a, and I quote, "jerk."
I'm sure you think you're some kind of cool jerk for not respecting triggers, but you're not. There's nothing cool about this kind of behavior, and you should look at the reasons that would even make you do something like that as well as feel the need to announce to others that you lack empathy like it's something to be proud of.
2) That's not necessarily the issue though. Something can be generally mild or unobjectionable, but still hit someone's specific trigger, if it just hits too close to home.
Right, which I think is probably the case assuming that they're playing an AP.
But it IS a method psychologists use to help people overcome their phobias
I'm also going to guess that the success or failure in those sessions are not decided by rolling dice.
I'm a tad unsympathetic to people who have triggers but I think this has a lot with the one person I've personally known with a trigger (would have "panic attacks" every time said trigger was even hinted at) stopped suffering from it once we started ignoring them. Yes be sensitive to others especially if it relates to a traumatic experience but tbh I think there's an onus on the triggeree to work through the issue if it's something as silly as a phobia. You cannot go through life acting like a snowflake wrapped in cotton wool.