But... isnt this the exact point of that line? You went into a situation you couldnt control and grappled with the issue.
It sounds like you wanted pre warning that x could happen in the game which is fair but baring some NSFW stuff it's it assumed that anything can happen in a typical dnd game? You failed a roll. It impacted the story. That is the game.
I feel like I'm missing something. The become resilient part feels like it didnt happen because the DM ret conned the moment. I'm not saying you would have been stronger if not for the ret conning but you would have likely been less impacted by the same event happening in a future dnd game. Even with the ret con you're likely to be less impacted by the same event.
> It sounds like you wanted pre warning that x could happen in the game which is fair but baring some NSFW stuff it's it assumed that anything can happen in a typical dnd game?
Very common advice for TTRPGs, especially with a group that isn't established with implicit boundaries, is, and has been for w couple of decades, to have a pre-session in which this stuff is discussed openly, with both the GM raising anything they expect to be an issue and players putting forward anything else that is an issue for them, to mitigate this. You can't anticipate everything this way, but “everything goes” is recognized as potentially problematic.
It's a bit more challenging to handle mid-campaign additions non-disruptively, and I expect that even at tables that are otherwise good at this that is somewhat more often a problem, though.
I didn’t “grapple with the issue”. I had a panic attack and flashbacks. I dreaded the next session for two weeks.
Vampires are unique in having a single failed throw causing a character to permanently lose their agency and be under the direct mental control of a NPC. In this case, I was told to attack the rest of the party.
I had a psychotic break where this exact thing happened to me. I got to watch myself hurt people I cared about. There are very close relationships that were destroyed. Some I will never be able to repair.
Should I have said something? Yes. But I didn’t want to kicked out of the game.
As far as being more resilient, I’m not. If I had known vampires could do that, I would have been fine. Now? If this happens to a character in another game, I will have to leave the game. Retconning wouldn’t help.
I’ll heal in time. Might take a few months, but it may take years before I handle the situation again.
I'm really glad you are taking care of yourself and found a way to navigate this (game) situation amicably. I've had this happen in both gaming and career context (didn't know what it was at the time) and boy did that set me off skelter for a few months. I hope you have a supportive non-judgmental network of people you trust to lean on.
More resilience is common advice, but agree that its not a panacea for actual trauma. Love that it strikes in interviews for me...
Most of the time, building resilience is the correct way to look at it. Life is filled with challenges and we don't grow if we don't face them.
Trauma (psychological definition) does not work this way. It's like tearing a muscle. Immediately going back to lifting the same weight you did before just causes more damage. You have to work on healing the muscle, but you need to do it carefully.
It’s just one of those things where a little more explanation is needed, but rest assured they’re very right.
It’s one thing to surprise your player(s), it’s another to let one player seduce the wife of another player without any consideration for how they’d feel about it just because someone rolled a nat 20 (actual situation I read about from another player. Also related PSA: a nat 20 does not mean automatic success, let alone that a player gets to do whatever they want).
Covered that right? That is the most common issue with dnd that I've seen. Some people want to include nsfw stuff, to varying degrees, and others dont.
Sure but I can see why “NSFW” doesn’t necessarily mean “things that can upset people” or “everything undesirable.”
For instance, it’s a perfectly reasonable thing for a table to go “we don’t want romance in this campaign.” I’m not saying that’s a game I want to play, I for one enjoy a good love story and I’m always rooting for my character to fall in love, but if that’s the story the group wants to tell…well, they don’t have to! It’s all about communicating that at the top and everybody agreeing, or identifying something during the game and having an open discussion. Odds are unless you’re truly with a group of random people that you’ll find a game that works for everyone.
Where does it say that? "The game" is whatever the people at the table agree they want to play.
This is one way to see "rule 0" or sometimes "the most important rule" in other games, that the players are not slaves to the rulebook and that the point of the game is to enjoy the time playing it, not to slavishly follow a set of rules and who cares if some players hate it.
That is what rule 0 is about. It allows the GM to overrule everything, including a clear, boolean die roll.
I really don't think there is any excuse to allow something to pass in the game that will make the game a miserable experience for any of the players, and that the rules say so is the weakest excuse I can think of, given that the rules are executed by humans, not machines, and most of the rules are violated or forgotten, or hacked, or simply left unused, anyway.
It sounds like you wanted pre warning that x could happen in the game which is fair but baring some NSFW stuff it's it assumed that anything can happen in a typical dnd game? You failed a roll. It impacted the story. That is the game.
I feel like I'm missing something. The become resilient part feels like it didnt happen because the DM ret conned the moment. I'm not saying you would have been stronger if not for the ret conning but you would have likely been less impacted by the same event happening in a future dnd game. Even with the ret con you're likely to be less impacted by the same event.