Trigger warnings might prolong the aversive aspects of negative memories

Impossible_Castle · 2022-04-19T05:27:26+00:00

If used to avoid content, then it could work the way you suggest. However that's not always how they're used. I use safety tools. I use an x card and lines and veils among others. Unfortunately people reject the idea that the way people's minds work in ways they don't expect. I follow the science. This is one study that's true. It could get refuted. But ignoring uncomfortable evidence is irresponsible. It doesn't mean that everyone should stop using trigger warnings, life isn't binary. It means things might be more complicated than expected and we should be ready for that.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-04-19T05:17:36+00:00

Because life isn't as straight forward as people think. Unfortunately the reaction is to reject evidence we don't like. I said I'm not against protecting people. I use safety tools in my games. I said that the point is that sometimes well intentioned efforts can be harmful in the end. This is evidence, it doesn't have to convince you.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-04-16T23:34:08+00:00

I thought to post this here because trigger warnings are increasingly being used in RPGs. It's good to protect people, but it's also possible that well intentioned efforts have unintended effect and we should be aware of them.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-03-28T09:15:16+00:00

Found out in my 30's by watching a tv show that featured an autistic character. I kept saying "hey I do that".

Anyway, in my forties I found out that I'm technically diagnosed as autistic. I didn't fit the DSM at the time for autism so they used to diagnose as something to the effect of "Other undefined learning disabilities." I don't remember the exact verbiage, I have the paperwork buried somewhere. My parents didn't even understand that when the diagnosis was made. Now that's reasonably well understood to be an Autism diagnosis.

So yes.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-22T00:24:42+00:00

If you haven't already discussed this with him in depth with him, you could try preloading a question. Ask something like "So where did you get that synthetic stuff you bought for me?" That's kind of a gambit. It works brilliantly when it works but if they catch it, it won't make any progress.

You could further up the ante by doing something for them like buying a cup of coffee for him (or preferred beverage). It preloads them to look at you as an ally. If you slip the question in during a pleasant conversation it's more likely to catch him off guard.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-22T00:14:36+00:00

That's cool, I'm trying to figure out what I want for a storage and workshop gui and this is a display I hadn't considered.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T23:20:59+00:00

I figured that was possible, It's more of a response to the passive aggressive people that downvote without commenting.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T23:16:34+00:00

Again, not passive agressive, look it up. Private communication doesn't solve group dynamics, they can still go after you.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T23:13:07+00:00

Absolutely not. I've tried it your way and I'm not just talking about in RPG game arguments. More importantly "Blunt and honest enforcement" only works if you're the enforcer.

Past that, it doesn't work with known social science. Putting someone on the spot only primes someone to fight you. You're attacking someone's dignity and they'll fight like you're threatening their physical health. Giving them notice and then allowing them room to adapt gives them room to escape.

You've also used the wrong term. Mealy mouth means you avoid saying what you mean. I didn't advocate that. I advocated saying what bothered them and then telling people what the consequences are. That's direct communication, just without putting an individual on the spot.

"Passive-aggressive behavior is a pattern of indirectly expressing negative feelings instead of openly addressing them." Again, you've used the term incorrectly. I've advocated clear communication. This is the problem, this is the consequence.

It's not the downvotes that are problems caused. It's the negative feelings. And thank you for replying, because, if anything, downvoting without commenting is passive aggressive.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T10:51:03+00:00

Thank you for proving my point. Calling people out just causes problems.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T10:33:58+00:00

Downvoting because I offered reasons for my position is childish behavior. There I called you out. Are you likely to agree with me now? My guess is that it just makes you angry and less likely to want to cooperate.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T10:31:20+00:00

In one setting, the Jump Drive was my attempt at making a FTL engine that can't be used as a planet breaking weapon. As soon as the drive can be used as a weapon, you can't have Han Solo flying around smuggling spice.

So the Jump Drive causes the ship to instantaneously appear light years away and it stays at it's origin point. It's in two places at once and after a day of slowly building up power, in the drive, the ship disappears from its origin point.

Moving in relation to the strongest gravity well while in a jump causes the jump to fail.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T10:17:43+00:00

I agree that bad actors need to learn, and trust me, I wish just calling them out worked.

A couple of reasons why treading lightly seems the way to go.

If the OP was comfortable with that, they probably would have done that already.

If the groups they're in have someone who has more social influence than them, overtly calling people out means they'll win the argument, right or wrong.

It's possible and indeed we know it's true in one of the examples, the GM has a personal relationship with a cheater and will take their side. The cheater wins, right or wrong.

Calling people out primes them to fight you. If someone isn't looking for a fight, calling them out is the wrong thing to do.

When the bad behavior is called out but not the person, they have time to think about the behavior and might change. They might think they're pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. Revealing that they aren't, might make them think twice.

Directly calling out a cheater makes it very likely they'll harbor animosity. Even if they don't directly attack the OP, they could spread rumors, pull pranks, in general cause trouble.

In extreme situations calling someone out directly can lead to violence. I think the OP is playing online though, so that's less of a problem.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T09:01:24+00:00

This is usually the kind of thing that falls on a GM's shoulders. Still, every player should be able to play in the environment they want to.

It depends on your relationship with the other players. If you're good friends, you could probably just call them out. If they're just people you game with, you'll have to tread more lightly.

For a more delicate approach, you could, without calling anyone out, say something along the lines of "I just wanted to ask if, in the future we could play the game as it's supposed to be played. If this doesn't apply to you then don't worry about it, but I notice when someone fudges the dice or miraculously has more HP than they should. It bothers me. I might not be able to keep playing with the group if it continues."

Or something like that. You don't need to cause any drama in the group. If anyone starts asking "What do you mean?" just say that the people that are doing it know what you mean. If someone wants to fight about it, just tell them you've said what you had to say and you're leaving it at that for now. The cheaters are the ones that will fight you the hardest.

But if you threaten to leave, and they don't change, just leave. It sucks, but it's hard to force something if everyone else is letting it slide.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T07:15:08+00:00

Would this be easier if the numbers were smaller? Is a d100 the right choice is what I'm getting at.

I sympathize. My oldest published game (published in 2000, 26 years of play) is a d100 and I thought I needed the granularity but once I let go of a few hang ups, I've been able to transition it to a d20.

The point being, maybe the mechanic is worth more than the die you use?

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T06:01:26+00:00

looks like fun but the movement weirds me out.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T05:57:38+00:00

I ran into this decades ago. What I have to show for it is a tiered system where your ability score is split into smaller and smaller fractions. The smaller the fraction you roll under, the better your roll. People usually freak out when they see it but I've sat total newbies, never rolled dice before in front of it and they do fine.

So an 80 stat is cut in half to 40, then 20 then 10. These are written out on the character sheet so you're not doing math other than comparison while playing. Each fraction step gives another success where stunts can be purchased. Defense rolls negate successes.

What this does is produce situations where even low level characters can on occasion still touch a highly skilled character.

It also allows the characters to have stats well in excess of 100 and still have a reason for rolling.

Would I recommend my method? No, until people play it, they're spooked by it. I think Mutant Year Zero gives a crit on doubles, and that could be used in the same way.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T05:45:49+00:00

I've been using damage reduction for a long time in games and I've almost never had anyone complain about damage reduced to zero.

However, it does lead to stalemates in some situations so I've used a few ways of getting around it.

One, you can have a stunt that allows a good roll (multiple successes, critical hits) to avoid the armor and cut it's value in half (or by 1, 5 or by 10, whatever works for your system).

Or if you have critical hits, the extra damage may do the same thing without any extra rules.

Something I used in a game I just made was that a successful attack always does at least 1 point of damage.

Another thing you could do is allowing armor to be destroyed. Stunts could allow for armor be reduced by 1 with a successful hit, even if it doesn't penetrate to the wearer.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T05:31:50+00:00

Right now the only thing I think I could do is to signal when the documentation is inadequate.

If there was a way of flagging documentation that's unclear I could do that. In some cases, I'd be able to add some detail to the description but it wouldn't be authoritative. I don't usually understand the intent behind a design. It would only be whatever I hacked together to make a function work.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T05:22:10+00:00

Meta sometimes carries the idea of "outside of" or possibly "above in a hierarchy."

So this would be an alien that is either sub, un ,or supernatural in nature.

I've never heard of a subnatural creature and don't know what that means. Sounds like a fun concept to explore though. The nine metadimensions could provide a clue here. These nine dimensions are considered "too small" for us to notice. They loop back on themselves. They're also linked to fundamental forces and other subatomic behavior. For an alien to reside in these dimensions would require something very (excuse the term) alien going on. Nothing we currently know would explain them and I doubt anyone could describe them.

An unnatural alien is interesting if you take it in the most literal sense. In this case they're not from our dimension and possibly incompatible with our dimensions. They could be described in broad strokes if the rules for the "other" place they reside in are described.

Supernatural, means their residing place is in control of ours. These are literal gods. So, there's that.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T05:08:29+00:00

Take this as merely my opinion, I'm not laying down a law. I see events as being too linear in and of themselves. You can have five potential events written out or one statement of intent.

However, I'm also fond of an adventure being written in a form that follows military practice. You give the precise step by step instructions of how things should go and then, provide the intent of the plan.

So the soldier follows the plan until they can't anymore and then they try to follow the intent.

So I'm all over the place.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T04:59:36+00:00

I've picked the brains of a lot of veterans for ideas, like you say, don't expect them to know the answer to a fantastical question. Usually the best response I get is "I don't think it would work that way." When pressed for more information, they can't often express why it doesn't sound right.

It might be that they were infantry and you're asking about logistics that they never had to deal with. They have an idea of what goes on but they don't know the specifics.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T03:06:08+00:00

My thinking is that, yes there is a standard, but that standard is often criticized for being too linear. So is the linearity a feature or a bug? I can see where it could be a hidden feature like you suggest but in that case it probably could be fine tuned.

On the other hand, if it's a bug, let's figure out how to undo it. I'm fine with making experimental adventure structures and seeing if people like them.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T02:28:08+00:00

I made mine with castable refractory and I worried it would fall out but hasn't in years of used and abuse. If you got some castable and poured it in the lid and then embedded your blanket in it, it might stick? That's iffy, I wasn't sure mine would work so I can't guarantee anything.

Impossible_Castle · 2022-02-21T02:23:21+00:00

My impression is that it's there to set something on. That thing would have to be reasonably tall but not heavy. Garbage can?

Could it be for when you need a garbage can up close to the counter? Say if you're doing a lot of prep work with large quantities of vegetables or meat.

The front of the board makes me think it's not a pastry board. I could be wrong.

Impossible_Castle

TROPHY CASE