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.

Yeah, if anything, they're MORE important in a gritty game with death and racism. The further a campaign is likely to go, the more you need to know what's "too far".

I don't want "lots of the safety tools". I want something useful and effective, not just heaping a whole bunch on and assuming more is better.

Honestly, you only need three at most: a way to set limits beforehand, a way to calibrate during and a safe word for when it goes wrong. Thats not "lots"

From my limited understanding of the English language, the comma before the and makes it so that the "lots" refers to the intergroup romance, not the safety tools. I think.

D&D? No thanks

buys yet another no-violence rules-light queer indie rpg book

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.

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.

100% agree

Btw, OP, it's Niels Vergouwen.

Ah, excellent point, thanks! We very much agree.

That sounds fun actually.

Love me some Thirsty Sword Lesbians.

There's "everything goes exactly as planned until one player derails the whole session unhindered by rolls or turns" rules-light and "let things flow more naturally and allow things outside the rules if everyone thinks they add to the story" rules-light though...

Personally I much prefer the presence of rules which can be followed if convenient or desired, or ignored if you'd rather, but it is also equally valid to want to do collaborative storytelling/investigation without being derailed by bad rolls, I just know that dealing with setbacks and things not going to plan (which is different to things not succeeding in a pre-planned manner, but again equally valid, along with everything going well if you'd rather) is probably my favourite part

Gritty, low magic, character death, in game racism… are you sure they first game isn’t the old war hammer pen and paper tabletop?

safety tools: oh-oh the dragon slipped and impaled itself on your spear which you did not know was actually +10 and guaranteed critical against dragons

Ten bucks says the first group hasn't had a single character die in the whole campaign, and the second group is all on their second characters due to the Sybian Incident

I want the first one but with high magic. Do you know how compelling the story can be when you're fighting racist oppressors who have access to 'Wish'?

In formal English, the comma is just wrong. Informally, I agree it does a very effective job of making the message get across that way.