Therapeutic tabletop role-play gaming

1. Introduction

Version followed: the Game to Grow method as named and structured in Kilmer, Davis, Kilmer & Johns (2023, Routledge; known here from its table of contents), with the session-level protocol taken from the open-access Critical Skills methodology (Otani et al., 2024), and the table-safety tools as published by their named creators (O'Leary's CATS post; Monte Cook Games' Consent in Gaming; Sheldon's Script Change) and compiled in the TTRPG Safety Toolkit (Shaw & Bryant-Monk). [source: BVB catalogue TOC; Otani et al. 2024; Darrington Press session-zero page; creators' pages listed in Sources]

Therapeutic tabletop role-play gaming is a family of approaches, not one manualised therapy: a clinician runs a structured tabletop role-playing game (TTRPG, e.g. Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition) for a small group, with the game master (GM) acting as therapist and the story built to give players repeated, low-stakes practice of target skills (social skills, cooperation, frustration tolerance, perspective taking). Named models include Game to Grow (Seattle; founded September 2017 by Adam Johns, MA couple and family therapy, and Adam Davis, MAEd with a drama therapy focus, as a spinoff of their earlier Wheelhouse Workshop), its Critical Core kit, and the Critical Skills methodology from São Paulo. [source: Antioch Common Thread; Geek Therapy 2016; Otani et al. 2024]

Core idea of change: players act through a character in a shared fiction where consequences are real enough to matter but safe enough to try again; the GM targets each player's goals in scene design; and structured talk before and after play links what happened in the game to real life. Davis describes players coming to see their character's strengths as their own and carrying that confidence into daily life. Otani et al. frame the transfer through decisions, consequences and alternatives reviewed in debrief, and draw on psychodrama (the co-therapist as auxiliary ego). [source: Antioch Common Thread; Otani et al. 2024]

Professional frame. There is no regulated profession or protected title of "therapeutic game master"; Game to Grow has run training courses (current availability [uncertain]). The method is a clinical application only when delivered by a clinician licensed or registered in their own discipline (e.g. psychotherapist, counsellor, psychologist, social worker; drama therapists via NADTA RDT in the US or HCPC registration with BADth membership in the UK) and working within that scope. Otani et al. recommend that the Guide have counselling training such as CBT. Game-mastering skill alone is not therapy, and enactment-heavy, drama-therapy-informed variants (embodied role reversal, doubling, sculpting) should not be used without drama therapy or psychodrama training. [source: Game to Grow Teachable page; Otani et al. 2024; synthesis for scope statements]

Materials and physical safety [synthesis]: small dice and miniatures are choking hazards for young children and for clients with pica; check old metal miniatures and paints before use with children [uncertain]; keep snacks allergen-labelled; provide large-print or high-contrast character sheets and colour-blind-safe tokens; arrange seating so anyone can leave the table without climbing past others (this supports the Open Door principle below); limit screen time and check screen brightness and audio levels in online play.

Assessment and projective use. Otani et al. used character building to explore players' personality traits and used a set of standard self-report screens at entry. Character choices, in-game violence or dark themes are not validated indicators of trauma, abuse or disorder: treat them only as material for hypotheses that you then check through ordinary clinical assessment. [source: Otani et al. 2024; synthesis]

2. Framework

Kilmer et al. (2023) organise the Game to Grow method around a transtheoretical approach, choice of game system, population considerations, case conceptualisation and treatment planning, group development and therapeutic factors, session design, facilitation strategies, the qualities of the therapeutic GM ("SPARK"), starting a group, and an example module. The chapter contents are not publicly available, so the phases below follow Otani et al.'s published protocol and are labelled where they are synthesis. [source: BVB catalogue TOC; Otani et al. 2024; uncertain for Game to Grow detail]

Phase 0: planning [synthesis drawing on the book's chapter structure]

Goals: define the population, the therapeutic targets, the game system, the content rating, and the staffing (GM/Guide plus a co-facilitator).
Move on when: you have written referral criteria, a content rating, consent forms (with parent/guardian forms for minors) and a safeguarding plan.

Phase 1: screening and intake [source: Otani et al. 2024 (interviews, clinical assessment, written consent); synthesis for criteria]

Goals: suitability, individual goals, risk, readiness for group, and any topics that must be excluded.
Format: individual interview, and for minors a joint meeting with the parent or carer.
Move on when: each member has at least one observable goal, informed consent (and the child's assent) is recorded, and no exclusion criterion applies (see section 5).

Phase 2: session zero and character creation [source: Otani et al. 2024; Darrington Press]

Goals: agree narrative limits, tone and safety tools; teach the rules; build characters.
Otani et al. used the first session for limits, preferences and themes to avoid, plus screening questionnaires; characters were built with the Guide and co-therapist.
Move on when: the group's lines and veils are written down, every player can demonstrate the during-play tool, and every character is playable.

Phase 3: core campaign

Format (Critical Skills): 3 to 6 players; one Guide (GM) plus one Meta Guide (co-therapist who plays inside the group); weekly 3-hour sessions for 4 months, i.e. 12 to 16 sessions over 8 narrative episodes; general recommendation of 2 to 3 hours per session with 1 to 2 hours of play and 30 to 60 minutes of debrief. Characters advanced from level 1 to levels 6 to 8. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Session format: opening rapport (10 to 15 min: technical issues, rules, group dynamics), behavioural review and goal setting (10 to 15 min: each player describes a behaviour from last session and the group discusses alternatives), play (about 90 min of social, combat and exploration scenes built around target skills), debrief (30 to 60 min on decisions, consequences, alternatives), and a journal or form on scenes that affected the player, which feeds the next session's opening. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Game to Grow ran groups for youth aged 9 to 20, many autistic, with ADHD or socially isolated. [source: Antioch Common Thread]
Move between episodes when: the current arc's skill target is being shown in play and named in debrief; increase challenge only when the group is using safety tools comfortably. [synthesis]

Phase 4: closure and transfer [synthesis]

Goals: end the story arc on purpose, de-role, review goals, plan real-life practice, and refer on or offer a new campaign.
Format: the last 1 to 2 sessions, with a final scene, a structured de-roling, and an individual review (with parents for minors).

3. Guiding principles

People before the game. Stavropoulos's framing of the X-Card is that the people playing matter more than the game. Practical meaning: stop or change the story whenever a player's wellbeing needs it, without debate. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card]
Intentional, goal-targeted play. Groups are "intentional and targeted" to build skills. Practical meaning: every scene should exercise at least one named goal for at least one player. [source: Geek Therapy 2016; Antioch Common Thread]
Consent is ongoing, not a one-off form. Safety tools support ongoing consent, not censorship. Practical meaning: revisit limits each session, and treat a tool being used as information, not as failure. [source: Young Heroes/StartPlaying]
No explanation required. A player using the X-Card does not need to say why. Practical meaning: thank them, change course, offer a break, and never probe in front of the group. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card; Young Heroes/StartPlaying]
Prevention plus response. The X-Card is criticised as reactive, still needing someone to speak up in a hard moment (D'Amato). Practical meaning: pair pre-game tools (session zero, lines and veils) with during-play and after-play tools. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card]
Communication and trust carry the tools. Practical meaning: tools work only if the group has practised them and has seen the GM honour them. [source: Museum of Play blog]
Debrief is part of the treatment, not an add-on. Practical meaning: protect 30 to 60 minutes; never let play overrun the debrief. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Structure lowers load for newcomers. Free-form character building overwhelmed newcomers; limited pre-generated characters worked better. Practical meaning: start with pregens or short menus. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Shared spotlight. "Main character syndrome" is a known problem. Practical meaning: track who acts in each scene and design scenes that require every character. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
A co-therapist inside the fiction. The Meta Guide plays alongside the clients as an auxiliary ego. Practical meaning: model skills in character, support regulation, and help in debrief. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Keep the fiction distinct from the self, and bridge back on purpose. Practical meaning: use the character as protective distance while playing, then explicitly invite players to own the strengths their character showed. [source: Antioch Common Thread; synthesis]
Match the system to the population. Practical meaning: pick rules complexity, tone and content that fit the group's age, cognition and goals. [source: Kilmer et al. 2023 chapter titles; synthesis]
Bookmark, don't freeze, the safety resources. The TTRPG Safety Toolkit is a living, changing resource. Practical meaning: check the current version before each new group. [source: Darrington Press]

4. Intervention inventory

The inventory below is ordered as you would use it: setup, session zero, in-session structure and facilitation, safety tools during play, after-play processing, closure, then work with minors and online play. Tools from the wider tabletop community are credited to their creators as published; where only a tool's name and creator are known, the entry says so and marks the procedure [uncertain].

4.1 Screening and intake interview

Purpose: decide suitability, set goals, find topics that must be excluded, and identify risk before anyone joins. [source: Otani et al. 2024 (interviews, clinical assessment, standard self-report screens, written consent); synthesis for steps]
Steps: (1) Ask about experience with games and stories, and what the client hopes to get. (2) Take a standard clinical history, including trauma exposure, current risk, psychosis or dissociation, and substance use. (3) Ask directly which themes would be too much (e.g. violence against children, sexual violence, self-harm, body horror, specific phobias, bereavement). (4) Agree one to three observable goals (e.g. "asks the group before acting", "tolerates losing a roll without leaving the table"). (5) Explain the safety tools and confirm the client can use a nonverbal signal. (6) Get written consent; for minors, guardian consent plus the child's own assent (4.20). [synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "In the game your character may face monsters, arguments, losing. What kinds of story would you want kept right out, and which are fine if we skip over the details?"
Watch for: active suicidality, acute psychosis, unprocessed recent trauma that matches likely campaign content, and difficulty telling fiction from reality. These call for individual work first or a different group (section 5). [synthesis]

4.2 Case conceptualisation and goal mapping

Purpose: tie each player's treatment goals to things that can happen at the table. Kilmer et al. give a chapter to this; its content is not publicly available. [source: Kilmer et al. 2023 TOC; uncertain for their method]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Write each goal in observable terms. (2) List in-game situations that call for it (negotiating with an NPC, sharing loot, choosing a plan, recovering after a failed roll). (3) Note one prompt the GM or co-therapist can use in the moment. (4) Review the goal map before every session.
Example language (illustrative): "Your goal this month is checking in with teammates. Watch for moments where your character could ask the party first."
Watch for: goals so abstract they cannot be seen in play; players who feel watched rather than supported.

4.3 Game system and setting selection

Purpose: match rules load, tone and content to the group. [source: Kilmer et al. 2023 TOC (chapter on choosing a system); Otani et al. 2024 used D&D 5th Edition with a homebrew setting]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Decide the content rating with the group's age and vulnerabilities in mind. (2) Choose rules light enough that learning them does not crowd out the therapy; for newcomers, cut options. (3) Write a setting whose central conflict calls for cooperation. (4) Pre-plan scene types (social, combat, exploration) as Otani et al. did.
Example language (illustrative) [synthesis]: "We'll use a simple rule set with a few dice, so we spend our time on the story and not the rulebook."
Watch for: rules arguments taking over sessions; a setting tone that clashes with a group's lines.

4.4 Group composition

Purpose: build a group that can work together. [source: Otani et al. 2024 (3 to 6 players, grouped by training year); Antioch (ages 9 to 20)]
Steps [synthesis]: keep a narrow developmental age band for minors; mix confidence levels so no one is alone at either end; avoid placing someone with a known victim of their past bullying; plan for absences, since low attendance hurt continuity in the Critical Skills groups.
Example language (illustrative) [synthesis]: "Before I place you in a group, is there anyone you'd find hard to play alongside, or anyone you'd like to play with?"
Watch for: one dominant player, cliques formed outside the group, and pairs with a history of conflict.

4.5 Session zero

Purpose: set shared expectations before a new game or long campaign. [source: Darrington Press session-zero page; Otani et al. 2024]
Steps: (1) Explain the group's purpose and how game and therapy connect. (2) Run CATS or a similar conversation (4.7). (3) Collect lines and veils (4.6) and, if used, a consent checklist (4.8). (4) Teach and rehearse the during-play tools (4.14 to 4.17) with a harmless practice scene. (5) Agree out-of-character conduct rules (no mocking, phones, breaks). (6) Agree how character death or serious failure will be handled; Otani et al. suggest raising character death in the opening rapport after a death in play caused frustration and guilt. (7) Build characters (4.9). [source: Otani et al. 2024; Darrington Press; synthesis for order]
Example language (illustrative): "Before we play, we set the rules for our table. Anyone can change the story if it goes somewhere they don't want. Let's practise that now, while nothing is at stake."
Watch for: players agreeing to everything to please the group; quiet players whose limits never surface (use anonymous methods).

4.6 Lines and Veils (Ron Edwards)

Purpose: set content limits before play. Designed by Ron Edwards, who first discussed the terms in 2004. A line is content that must not appear in any form (non-negotiable); a veil is content that may exist in the world but is not shown in detail (it happens "off screen", fade to black). [source: Darrington Press; Young Heroes/StartPlaying; Roll20 blog (Bee Zelda, 2021) for the 2004 date; secondary] Edwards's original wording and title are [uncertain].
Steps: (1) Each person writes lines and veils privately; anonymous lists help people avoid embarrassment. (2) The GM combines them into one list without names. (3) Share the list with the table before play; nobody justifies an entry. (4) Optionally add an "ask first" column for topics someone is unsure about, and check in before those come up, even if another player has listed the same topic as a line. (5) Keep the list visible (shared document or card) and review it each session; it is a living document. (6) Anyone may add to it at any time; online, give players a private channel to signal that something must stop. [source: Museum of Play; Young Heroes/StartPlaying; Darrington Press; Roll20 blog for steps 4 and 6]
Example language (illustrative): "A line means it never happens in our story. A veil means it can happen, but we fade to black and move on."
Watch for: a group list so long the setting cannot work (renegotiate the setting, never the person's limit); limits clients add after a bad moment, which you should honour at once. Companion grid: the Palette by Jay Dragon (procedure not described here [uncertain]). [source: Gift of Gabes list]

4.7 CATS (Patrick O'Leary)

Purpose: a short, structured pre-game conversation so that everyone has the same expectations before play. Created by Patrick O'Leary; the original post is "The CATS Method: A Story Game Opening Ritual" on P. R. O'Leary's blog (25 April 2016), which expands the acronym as Concept, Aim, Tone, Subject matter, run by a facilitator before the rules are explained. [source: O'Leary 2016 (PROLeary.com blog, via Goodreads); Gift of Gabes list] Some later session-zero guides expand S as Safety. [source: Darrington Press]
Steps [source: O'Leary 2016; therapy additions: synthesis]: before explaining the rules, (1) Concept: pitch the game's premise in a sentence or two. (2) Aim: say what the players are trying to achieve (whether anyone can win or everyone can lose, what kind of story) and, in a therapy group, what the group is for. (3) Tone: describe the default tone and any options (serious or light, action or drama) and reach group consensus. (4) Subject matter: name the themes the game may explore, ask whether any would make anyone uncomfortable, and set boundaries, linking to lines and veils (4.6). Keep it to a few minutes.
Example language (illustrative): "Our story is about a village team hunting lost artefacts. The aim is teamwork. The tone is adventurous, not gory."
Watch for [synthesis]: players who agree a tone or content at the start and then avoid or object to it in play. Revisit the agreement rather than holding them to it.

4.8 Consent checklist (Reynolds & Germain, Monte Cook Games)

Purpose: an alternative or supplement to lines and veils, in which players mark how comfortable they are with listed topics. Published free as a PDF, Consent in Gaming (Sean K. Reynolds and Shanna Germain, Monte Cook Games, September 2019): about 12 pages of guidance (No Words and Go Words, the X-Card, recovering from consent mistakes, aftercare and checking in, how to use and not use the checklist) and a one-page Consent Checklist. On the checklist each player marks each topic red (do not want it in the game), yellow (acceptable if handled carefully, sparingly or without heavy detail) or green (fine); colours are paired with shapes for accessibility. Topics are grouped under Horror, Relationships, Social and Cultural Issues, Mental and Physical Health, and Additional Topics, with blank lines for others and a space for concerns to share with the GM; the sheet also records the campaign's planned theme and rating. The guide stresses that no one but the player can set their boundaries, and that agreed content should not become the focus of the game. [source: Monte Cook Games page; Gnome Stew review; Museum of Play]
Steps [form use: source, Gnome Stew review; rest: synthesis]: (1) Fill in the planned theme and rating for the group. (2) Give the form privately at intake or session zero; for minors, go through it with the guardian as well. (3) Summarise results anonymously for the GM: treat red as a line, yellow as a veil or careful handling. (4) Read concerns written for the GM and follow up privately. (5) Revisit the form when content or membership changes.
Example language (illustrative) [synthesis]: "Mark each topic privately: green if it's fine, yellow if it's OK handled carefully, red if you don't want it at all. Only I see your answers."
Watch for [synthesis]: a young person's answers that differ sharply from a guardian's. Use the stricter limit and talk with both. A topic left unmarked is not consent.

4.9 Character creation (pre-generated or guided)

Purpose: build characters that give each player a way in, and use the process to learn about the player. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps: (1) For newcomers, offer limited, pre-generated characters with preselected spells and weapons; Otani et al. found free-form creation overwhelming. (2) Build characters with the GM and co-therapist helping with rules. (3) Ask about the character's values, fears and hopes. (4) Give every character a reason to need the others. [source: Otani et al. 2024; step 4 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "What's one thing your character is great at, and one thing they'd never admit they're scared of?"
Watch for: a character that copies the player's own trauma too closely (offer more distance: a different species, age or setting); a player who keeps rebuilding characters to avoid commitment. Use character choices as clinical hypotheses only, never as diagnostic evidence. [synthesis]

4.10 Opening rapport and recap

Purpose: settle the group, deal with logistics, and reconnect to the story. [source: Otani et al. 2024 (10 to 15 minutes: technical issues, rules questions, group dynamics); recap of the previous session: synthesis]
Steps: check in out of character; sort technical problems and rules questions; recap last session (invite a player to do it); review the lines and veils list; use the journal entries from 4.19 to raise anything unresolved.
Example language (illustrative): "Before we jump in: how is everyone arriving today? Who can remind us where we left the party?"
Watch for [synthesis]: a check-in showing that someone has arrived distressed. Adjust the session, or speak with them privately before play starts.

4.11 Behavioural review and goal setting

Purpose: link last session's behaviour to this session's practice. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps: (1) Each player describes a behaviour they showed last session. (2) The group discusses alternatives. (3) Each player names what they will try today. (4) GM notes these and plans scenes to give them the chance. Takes about 10 to 15 minutes.
Example language (illustrative): "Last time your character charged in alone. What could you try if that happens again?"
Watch for: shaming; keep feedback on choices, not people.

4.12 Skill-targeted scene design

Purpose: make the story deliver practice for each player's goals. [source: Otani et al. 2024 (social, combat and exploration scenes adapted to target specific social skills); Geek Therapy 2016; Antioch]
Steps: (1) From the goal map (4.2), choose one or two targets per session. (2) Build at least one scene that cannot be solved without that skill (e.g. an NPC who only talks to the character who listens; a puzzle that needs two players' clues combined). (3) Grade the difficulty: start with low-stakes versions and raise them as players succeed. (4) Plan a quieter recovery scene after any intense one. [source: Otani et al. 2024 for scene types; steps synthesis]
Example language (illustrative, in character as an NPC): "I'll tell you where the key is, but only if your whole party agrees on what you'll do with it."
Watch for: scenes that put one player on the spot in front of everyone before they are ready; scenes that drift into a veil.

4.13 Co-therapist inside the fiction (Meta Guide)

Purpose: a second clinician plays a character within the party, acting as an auxiliary ego (a psychodrama concept), supporting emotional regulation and helping in debrief. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps [synthesis around the published role]: (1) Agree before each session which skills the co-therapist's character will model. (2) In play, model the skill openly (asking for help, apologising, sharing loot). (3) Watch for distress and quietly offer a break or a tool. (4) In debrief, share observations from inside the party. (5) Keep the co-therapist's character in a support role, not a star.
Example language (illustrative, in character): "I'm not sure about this plan. Can we hear what everyone thinks before we open the door?"
Watch for: the co-therapist's character solving problems for the players; players treating the co-therapist as a peer confidant outside the group.

4.14 X-Card (John Stavropoulos)

Purpose: let anyone remove content during play without explaining. Invented by John Stavropoulos in 2013, first for play with strangers such as conventions, and released under a Creative Commons Share Alike licence. The physical version is an X drawn on an index card in the middle of the table; anyone who is uncomfortable taps it, and the group changes, dials back or skips the content. Stavropoulos called it an exit strategy. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card; Breakout Con safety-tools page, which credits and links the creator's document] Details follow these descriptions of the creator's document. [uncertain]
Steps: (1) Put the card where everyone, including the GM, can reach it. (2) At session zero, explain that anyone can tap it to have the content removed, with no explanation needed. (3) When tapped, the group changes, rewinds or skips that content. (4) Thank the player, do not ask why, and offer a break. (5) Let the player choose whether to talk about it later; limits can be updated after the session. (6) Online: accept saying "X Card", typing X in chat, tapping an X on the virtual tabletop, or showing an X or crossed arms on video. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card; Young Heroes/StartPlaying; Otani et al. 2024 (skipped scenes discussed in debrief)]
Example language (illustrative): "Thanks. That's gone from our story. We'll pick up at the camp the next morning. Anyone need a minute?"
Watch for: it is reactive and still needs someone to act in a hard moment (D'Amato), so it is not enough on its own; some players feel it implies curbing normal table activity. In a therapy group, decide in advance whether and how an X'd scene will be discussed in debrief, and make discussion optional for the person who used it. [source: Wikipedia, X-Card; synthesis]

4.15 N-Card and O-Card (traffic-light set)

Purpose: add gradations to the X-Card. The N-Card is credited to Mysty Vander and Adam Cleaver and the O-Card to Kira Magrann. [source: Gift of Gabes list] As described by the Museum of Play: X (red) means stop and change the scene now; N (yellow) means content is nearing a line or veil, so proceed carefully or move on; O (green) is a check-in during intense play to show the player is okay. [source: Museum of Play]
Steps: (1) Give each player all three cards (or coloured tokens online). (2) During intense scenes, the GM can show O as a question; players answer with a card. (3) Respond to N by softening, veiling or cutting to the next scene. [source: Museum of Play; step 2 synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "This part of the dungeon is spooky. I'll hold up the green card now and then. Just show me where you are."
Watch for: players who always show green; check them individually at the break.

4.16 Pause, do-over and fast-forward; Script Change (Beau Jágr Sheldon)

Purpose: steer the story without leaving the fiction entirely. Otani et al. list pause, do-over, fast-forward, collective problem-solving and character switching among their in-session strategies. [source: Otani et al. 2024] Script Change, by Beau Jágr Sheldon, is a free "content, consent, and safety toolbox" for tabletop, board, live-action and collaborative video games: rewind, fast forward and pause are its core tools, with wrap meetings and frame-by-frame as supplementary tools, each with a verbal and an optional visual (card) form; it is licensed CC BY 4.0, and any use requires crediting Beau Jágr Sheldon. [source: Script Change itch.io listing] At the table, Rewind returns to before the uncomfortable content, Pause halts play, and Fast Forward skips past it. [source: Breakout Con safety-tools page] Frame-by-frame and wrap-meeting procedures are not described here [uncertain]; read the toolbox before using them.
Steps [synthesis around Otani et al.'s list]: Pause: stop play, step out of character, and talk. Do-over: replay a moment with a different choice, which is especially useful for rehearsing a social skill. Fast-forward: skip ahead past content near a veil or past a stuck moment.
Example language (illustrative): "Let's pause. If your character could try that conversation again, what would they say differently? Let's do it over."
Watch for: do-overs used to undo every failure, which removes the chance to practise tolerating setbacks; agree when they are available.

4.17 Open Door and other during-play tools

Purpose: make it normal for anyone to step away, and give other ways to signal. The open door is credited to Lizzie Stark: a player may leave a game at any time, for any reason, without being judged. [source: Gift of Gabes list; Breakout Con] Two further tools with published descriptions: Cut and Brake (from Nordic live-action play): "cut" stops play at once, "brake" de-escalates or steps back without stopping; the Support Flower (Tayler Stokes, based on Jay Sylvano's Support Signals): a player taps a petal while making eye contact with the person addressed, green asking to push the scene harder, yellow to keep it as it is, red to de-escalate at once. [source: Breakout Con] Other tools in the published community lists, with creators as credited (procedures not described here): Luxton technique (PH Lee); the OK check-in (Maury Brown, Sarah Lynne Bowman, Harrison Greene); Tap out and Look down (Johanna Koljonen); "I will not abandon you" (Meguey Baker); Archipelago ritual phrases (Matthias Holter); Feelers (Hexavexagon). [source: Gift of Gabes list] [uncertain for each tool's procedure: read the creator's text before using it]
Steps for open door [synthesis]: (1) Say at session zero that leaving the table is always fine and needs no explanation. (2) Arrange seating and the room so leaving is easy. (3) Agree where a player goes (a quiet corner, a second staff member) and, for minors, that an adult always knows where they are. (4) Welcome them back with no comment in front of the group.
Example language (illustrative): "If you need to step out, just go. Your character will be fine; we'll fill you in when you're back."
Watch for [synthesis]: players who leave often or for long. Check in privately afterwards, and treat repeated exits as a sign that content or group fit needs review.

4.18 In-game debrief and short break

Purpose: deal with emotional moments or conflicts that cannot be resolved in character. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps: (1) Call a short break. (2) Step out of character and name what happened in neutral terms. (3) Let the people involved speak. (4) Agree how to resume (continue, veil, skip, or switch characters). (5) Note it for the end-of-session debrief. [source: Otani et al. 2024 for the tool; steps synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "Let's step out of the story for a minute. That fight between your characters looked like it got real. How are you both doing?"
Watch for [synthesis]: the same conflict returning after breaks. Move it to the end-of-session debrief or to an individual session.

4.19 End-of-session debrief and between-session journal

Purpose: turn play into learning by reviewing decisions, consequences and alternatives; the journal carries material into the next session. [source: Otani et al. 2024 (30 to 60 minutes; journal or form on scenes that affected the player, used in the next opening rapport)]
Steps: (1) Stop play on time and mark the change (put dice away, stand or move seats) [synthesis]. (2) Go round: one decision each player's character made and what followed. (3) Ask what else could have been tried. (4) Link to the player's real-life goal. (5) Discuss any X'd or skipped scene only with consent from the person who used the tool. (6) Hand out the journal or form for scenes that affected them. (7) Close with a short feedback round (4.22).
Example language (illustrative): "Your character waited for the others before using the scroll. When in your week might waiting like that help you?"
Watch for: debrief turning into rules talk or replaying highlights; players still talking in character voice (go to 4.27).

4.20 Consent, assent and parent or carer involvement (minors)

Purpose: lawful, informed participation for children and teens, with families kept in the loop. Game to Grow groups served ages 9 to 20. [source: Antioch] Safety tools do not replace conversations with children, teens and parents; parents who sign up should know what to expect, and the GM should check in with the parent or guardian after a session in which a safety tool was used. [source: Young Heroes/StartPlaying]
Steps [synthesis except where cited]: (1) Get written consent from the person with parental responsibility, following your jurisdiction's rules for minors' consent to treatment. (2) Get the young person's own assent in age-appropriate words and record it; respect a refusal. (3) Give the guardian the group's content rating, setting summary, lines and veils (names removed), safety tools and confidentiality limits. (4) Agree what will and will not be shared with parents, and tell the young person the same. (5) Check in with the parent after any session where a tool was used or the child was distressed [source: Young Heroes/StartPlaying]. (6) Offer a parent meeting at mid-point and at closure to agree how to support transfer of skills at home.
Example language (illustrative, to a child): "This is a game group where we also practise teamwork. You can say no to joining, and you can stop the story any time. Is it OK with you to give it a try?"
Watch for: a parent pushing a reluctant child; a child who wants details kept from parents that safeguarding rules do not allow you to keep.

4.21 Safeguarding with minors

Purpose: protect children in group and online settings. [synthesis: none of the sources cited gives a safeguarding protocol; follow your employer's policy and your jurisdiction's law]
Steps: (1) Know your mandatory-reporting and safeguarding duties and your designated safeguarding lead before the first session. (2) Use two adults wherever possible (Guide plus co-therapist fits this). (3) Do not contact children privately outside agreed channels; route messages through guardians or an organisational account. (4) Treat in-character disclosures (e.g. a character describing abuse at home in detail beyond the story) as possible real disclosures: pause, speak privately, follow your safeguarding procedure, and never interview leadingly. (5) Keep content within the agreed age rating. (6) Record concerns factually. (7) Never treat a child's character choices or violent or sexualised play as proof of abuse; they are reasons to assess, not evidence.
Example language (illustrative, privately): "I noticed what your character said about home. Sometimes stories are just stories, and sometimes they're about real things. I want to check you're safe."
Watch for [synthesis]: adults or older peers seeking private contact with a child, secrets between players, and any disclosure. Touch: tabletop play needs no physical contact; follow your service's touch policy, never use contact as part of play or reward, and never any sexual touch.

4.22 Stars and Wishes (Lu Quade); Roses and Thorns

Purpose: short end-of-session feedback. Stars and Wishes is credited to Lu Quade: each player names a moment they enjoyed and something they would like going forward, so the GM learns what to keep or change. Roses and Thorns is a similar feedback technique (creator not credited in the sources cited). [source: Museum of Play; Young Heroes/StartPlaying; Gift of Gabes list]
Steps: go round the table; each person gives one star and one wish; the GM notes wishes and acts on one next session.
Example language (illustrative): "One star, one wish. I'll start: my star was the party sharing the healing potion."
Watch for [synthesis]: the same wish coming up with no change, or a player who never names a star. Follow up privately.

4.23 Other published debrief tools

Purpose: options for returning from play. Listed tools with creators: "Debrief: returning to the real world", including a debrief buddy (Sarah Lynne Bowman); EARS, a four-step structured debrief of Explain, Agenda, Reflect, Support (Joshua Fox); game wraps (Fair Escape); Dear Jane letter (RPG Natalie); sharing the cognitive load (Gerrit Reininghaus). [source: Gift of Gabes list] Their procedures are not described here [uncertain]; use only after reading the creators' texts.
Steps [synthesis]: pick one debrief tool, explain it at session zero, and use it the same way at the end of each session so it becomes routine.
Example language (illustrative) [synthesis]: "Before we pack up, let's each take a minute to step out of our characters and say one thing about how we are, as ourselves."
Watch for [synthesis]: players who stay in character or still sound upset after the debrief. Give them more time, or check in individually.

4.24 Spotlight management, collective problem-solving and character switching

Purpose: stop one player from taking over ("main character syndrome") and draw everyone in. Otani et al. advise the Guide and Meta Guide to intervene both in play and in feedback, and list collective problem-solving and character switching among their strategies. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Track who has acted in each scene. (2) Turn to quieter players by name in the fiction ("The guard is looking at your character"). (3) Set problems that need the whole party's input. (4) Character switching: have a player briefly voice another character or an NPC to practise perspective taking. (5) Raise the pattern in debrief as a group process, not a personal fault.
Example language (illustrative): "The door has three locks, and each of you holds one key. How will you decide the order?"
Watch for [synthesis]: quieter players who stay silent even when invited. Offer non-verbal or written ways to act, such as a note passed to the Guide.

4.25 Bridging character strengths to real life

Purpose: transfer gains. Davis describes players seeing their character's strengths as their own and carrying that confidence into everyday life. [source: Antioch]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) In debrief, name the strength the character showed. (2) Ask where the player has shown it, or could, outside the game. (3) Agree one small real-life try before next session. (4) Review it at the next opening (4.11).
Example language (illustrative): "Your character talked the troll down. That was you choosing the words. Where else could you use that?"
Watch for [synthesis]: a player who discounts the strength as "only the character". Real-life tries reported back in the next session are the sign that bridging is working.

4.26 Bleed monitoring

Purpose: watch for emotions, thoughts or relationships crossing between player and character. Sarah Lynne Bowman has written on bleed. [source: Gift of Gabes list]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Explain bleed at session zero in plain words. (2) Notice signs: a player still angry at another player for something their character did; carrying the character's mood out of the room; preoccupation with the game between sessions; identity confusion. (3) Use in-game debrief (4.18) and de-roling (4.27). (4) Increase distance if needed: a less similar character, veiling, lighter tone. (5) Consider individual sessions if bleed persists.
Example language (illustrative): "Sometimes feelings from the story stick to us after the game. Is anything from today still with you?"

4.27 De-roling

Purpose: help players step out of role and back to themselves. De-roling comes from dramatherapy and psychodrama and has been discussed for role-play in virtual worlds (Gualeni, Vella & Harrington, 2017). [source: JVWR abstract] The steps below are drawn from general drama-therapy practice and are not from a TTRPG source [synthesis].
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Mark the end of play physically (put miniatures and character sheets away, stand up, change seats). (2) Each player says their character's name, one way they differ from the character, and their own name. (3) Leave something with the character (a feeling, a quality) and take something back (a strength). (4) Brief grounding (feet on the floor, name something in the room). (5) After intense sessions, check in one-to-one before people leave.
Example language (illustrative): "Say goodbye to your character: 'I'm not Thorn the ranger. I'm Sam, and unlike Thorn I don't carry a bow.'"
Watch for: players who mock the ritual (keep it short and matter-of-fact); teens who find it childish (use the sheet-away and change-of-seat parts only).

4.28 Processing character death or major failure

Purpose: handle loss in the fiction. When a character died in combat in the Critical Skills groups, the group processed it in debrief with frustration and guilt voiced; the authors suggest raising character death in opening rapport in future. [source: Otani et al. 2024]
Steps [synthesis around the published example]: agree at session zero whether characters can die; when it happens, pause before carrying on; let the player speak first; ask others about guilt or blame; offer a path back in (a new character, a meaningful farewell scene); review in debrief.
Example language (illustrative): "Your character's story ended bravely. Before we go on, how are you feeling about that?"
Watch for [synthesis]: guilt or blame between players, or a player who wants to leave the group. Check in individually before the next session.

4.29 Campaign closure

Purpose: end the group on purpose. [synthesis: the sources cited describe episodes and length but no closure protocol]
Steps: (1) Announce the final session at least two to three sessions ahead. (2) Write a final episode that pays off each character's arc and uses each player's strengths. (3) Hold an epilogue round in which each player narrates their character's future. (4) Run a fuller de-roling (4.27). (5) Review goals individually, with guardians for minors. (6) Give real-life next steps and refer on or offer a new campaign.
Example language (illustrative): "Ten years later, where is your character, and what did they learn on this journey that you want to keep?"
Watch for [synthesis]: dropout before the final session, or distress about the group ending. Offer an individual review and agree next steps.

4.30 Online play safety

Purpose: run groups on video and virtual tabletops safely. [source: Young Heroes/StartPlaying for tool use online; Museum of Play (the TTRPG Safety Toolkit includes instructions for importing tools into virtual tabletops); remaining steps synthesis]
Steps: (1) Use a platform that meets your health-privacy rules; do not record unless all consent (and guardians, for minors). (2) Put safety tools on screen: an X token on the virtual tabletop, X in chat, crossing arms on camera; every online GM on the StartPlaying platform must choose at least one safety tool. [source: Young Heroes/StartPlaying] (3) Lock the room, use a waiting room, and share links privately. (4) Disable or supervise private messaging between members, especially minors. (5) Agree what to do if someone drops out of the call mid-scene (assume distress until you have checked; have a phone number for each adult or guardian). (6) Ask players to play from a private space and to have a guardian nearby for children. (7) Keep a separate staff channel so the co-therapist can flag concerns without the group seeing. (8) Agree a no-screenshots rule for others' faces and character art.
Example language (illustrative): "If something feels too much, type X or cross your arms on camera. You don't need to explain."
Watch for: cameras off for long stretches (check in privately); members contacting each other off-platform; time-zone and fatigue effects in long online sessions.

5. Handling problems

The sources cited name only a few problems (character death, a late joiner's frustration, low attendance breaking continuity, one player dominating, and bleed). Everything else here is marked [synthesis].

Screening out and contraindications [synthesis]. Defer group entry, or use individual work first, for: active suicidal intent or recent self-harm with no safety plan; acute psychosis, mania or marked dissociation, or difficulty keeping fiction apart from reality; very recent trauma whose themes the campaign cannot avoid; a current pattern of aggression toward peers that the group cannot contain; and, for minors, no guardian consent or no assent. Where a correctional or forensic service restricts role-playing games, follow its policy. [source for the institutional restriction: RPG Research page metadata, uncertain]

Overwhelm and retraumatisation in play. Signs: freezing, leaving the table, sudden flat or giggly affect, playing the character in a self-punishing way, repeated O-card "fine" with visible distress. Response: (1) use the X-Card yourself if no one else does (the GM may use it too) [source: Wikipedia, X-Card]; (2) call a break and in-game debrief (4.18) [source: Otani et al. 2024]; (3) the co-therapist goes with the distressed player, while the GM keeps the group calm with a neutral recap; (4) grounding and orientation to the room; (5) add the content to the lines and veils list without asking for details; (6) check in individually before the player leaves and contact them (or their guardian) before next session; (7) follow standard risk assessment if self-harm or suicidal thoughts come up. [synthesis for 3 to 7]

Triggering material in long arcs. Long story arcs may expose players, especially those with depression or trauma histories, to triggering material; coordinate with the wider care team. [synthesis] Response [synthesis]: plan arcs with recovery scenes; preview upcoming themes in opening rapport; offer a veil before a heavy scene rather than after.

One player dominates ("main character syndrome"). Response: intervene in play and in feedback. [source: Otani et al. 2024] Use spotlight tracking, whole-party problems, and a private word with the dominant player that frames their skill as leadership that includes others (4.24). [synthesis]

Late joiner or absences. A late-joining player was frustrated and low attendance hurt narrative continuity. [source: Otani et al. 2024] Response [synthesis]: give late joiners a pre-built character with a hook into the party and a one-to-one rules briefing; write episodes that work if someone is missing (the character is "scouting ahead"); recap at every opening.

Character death or crushing failure. Process in debrief and raise it in opening rapport. [source: Otani et al. 2024] See 4.28.

Stuck group or flat play [synthesis]. Check whether the rules load is too high (cut options), whether goals are too abstract (re-map, 4.2), or whether the story lacks stakes the players care about (ask in Stars and Wishes). Introduce an NPC who needs the party's help, or a time-limited problem.

Resistance and non-adherence [synthesis]. Players who refuse debrief, call it boring, or only want to play: shorten debrief rounds, use in-character reflection first ("What would your character say about today?"), give choice of format (talk, write, draw), and tie debrief to rewards inside the game only if this fits your clinical model. If the journal is not done, do it together in the last five minutes.

Player-versus-player conflict and ruptures [synthesis]. In-character conflict spilling into real anger is a bleed issue (4.26): pause, separate the character conflict from the people, let each speak, agree how the characters will resolve it, and repair the alliance with you if you were seen as taking sides. Agree at session zero whether characters may harm each other; in most therapy groups, rule it out.

Misuse of safety tools [synthesis]. A player who X-cards to block others' fun or to win: talk privately, never in front of the group, and never remove access to the tool; look for the underlying need (control, anxiety). A player who never uses tools: offer anonymous channels and individual check-ins.

Fiction used to disclose [synthesis]. Treat a character's story about real harm as a possible disclosure and follow 4.21. Do not question in front of the group.

Obsessive preoccupation [synthesis]. Where a player's interest in the game crowds out school, work or sleep, or they become distressed between sessions about the story, reduce intensity, discuss with guardians (minors), and consider whether the group is the right format.

Sexual or graphic content pressure [synthesis]. In therapy groups, and always with minors, keep sexual content out as a standing line; redirect at once, and treat repeated pushing as a clinical and, with minors, a safeguarding matter.

Online-specific problems [synthesis]. A player drops off mid-scene: pause, message or phone them (or their guardian) and keep the group on a neutral scene until you know they are safe. Private messaging between members: restate rules, involve guardians for minors. Hostile chat: mute, remove from the session, and follow up individually.

When the GM is drawn in [synthesis]. If you notice yourself playing for your own enjoyment (spectacle, rules mastery) over the clients' goals, use the goal map before each session and supervision after. Clinicians unfamiliar with the game should co-lead with someone who knows it, and those without drama-therapy training should not add embodied enactment techniques.

Sources

Pages consulted:

Books and documents cited:

Kilmer, E. D., Davis, A. D., Kilmer, J. N., & Johns, A. R. (2023). Therapeutically applied role-playing games: The Game to Grow method. Routledge (Group psychotherapy series).
Shaw, K., & Bryant-Monk, L. TTRPG Safety Toolkit (a living document, with printable cards such as X-N-O and Script Change). [version: uncertain]
Stavropoulos, J. (2013). X-Card: Safety Tools for Simulations and Role-Playing Games. Described here via Wikipedia and Breakout Con.
Reynolds, S. K., & Germain, S. (2019). Consent in Gaming. Monte Cook Games (free PDF).
Edwards, R. (2004, per Roll20 blog). Lines and veils [original title: uncertain].

← Previous · VIII-176Chess therapy Next · VIII-178 →Video-game therapy