454
Preferences (Art by Niels Vergouwen)
(pawb.social)
Source (Instagram)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
454 points (98.1% liked)
RPGMemes
13150 readers
387 users here now
Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Why not?
Because they're valuable whether you're doing sexy romance or gritty realism or something else entirely. They don't factor in with the "various styles of play are all equally valid" conversation.
Ah, excellent point, thanks! We very much agree.
Yes, they do. Believe it or not, but most groups I play in have no use for safety tools. They're great for people who need them, but absolutely unnecessary for others who don't have a problem speaking up when they dislike something and who don't carry around significant amounts of trauma.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Because of a simple yet very effective technique I call: "Asking them". I suggest safety tools for each new group I DM and to this date, all but one group have been open to the idea but after a quick discussion every single player told me that they see absolutely no use in having them and that they will let me know if they ever feel like the topics are getting too rough for them.
BTW, the one group that still has them active pretty much forgot about their existence. I'm a player there and as far as I can tell, the GM is the only one who really wants them.
It all comes down to group composition. If you're comfortable around the other players and the GM and know that you can just say "stop" whenever, then safety tools add nothing to your experience.