Consent Flag

[Pheonix]

What do players think about adding a 'change consent' flag, so we don't have to keep consenting for certain common (for you mudsexx0rs) scenes such as sexual or torture?

The default could be consent required for all, and the player can have the option of adding what they don't require consent on such as mild sexual/graphic torture emotes. Then, if someone wants to check for consent, they don't have to interupt the scene if unnecessary and just type 'consent' or something and it'll show what sorts of consent flags players in the room have.

Too complicated? Unnecessary? Thoughts?

[Qzzrbl]

Some may think too complicated-- others may think unnecessary....

But I know I'd use it.

[Pheonix]

Just another thought while rereading this, but perhaps be able to direct a consent request to individual players using keywords instead of using OOC.

I just find it really jarring at times when consent is needed and cuts into the middle of an intense scene, or when there's 4+ players that all need to use OOC for it. There's ways to minimize this, but removing or lessening the need for the interruption altogether would be great.

[Qzzrbl]

It also kills it when you OOC for consent to rape before even instigating rape.

[WagonsHo]

It would also avoid all the TERRIBLE DRAMAZ alluded to in the prostitution thread. 

[WWYD]

I don't think it's very necessary. At the very least, I think it'd have an unfortunately negative impact on the game, such as people forming cliqueish "omfg, she doesn't wanna RP teh sexzors? I'm not gonna RP with you" attitudes, and likely lead to OOCly-influenced decisions. I've always found people to be good about use of OOC for consent, anyway - it rarely, if ever, takes more then thirty seconds for everyone to say yea or nay.

[spawnloser]

People could be in the mood one day and not the next while forgetting to turn the flag off.  This would be an unacceptable situation, in my mind.  This idea has been brought up before and I oppose it now as I did in the past.

[Samira]

People could be in the mood one day and not the next while forgetting to turn the flag off.  This would be an unacceptable situation, in my mind.  This idea has been brought up before and I oppose it now as I did in the past.

Seconded.

[Incognito]

The main reason why I would not deem this as a necessary implementation - is that your PC might want to consent to certain PCs and not to others.

i.e. - my PC might consent to graphic sex with his/her mate, but at the same time, might not consent to rape and torture and sexual advances from OTHER PCs.

Having a blanket flag - would definitely be problematic in such scenarios.

[Cutthroat]

The current system works because of the fact that it demands immediate player input upon the formation of a given IC situation. If all of this was decided ahead of time, players would RP certain things with certain players and not RP certain things with other players, regardless of whether their character actually would. So, no, we don't need a consent flag.

[Mazy]

I liked that Armageddon has a consent rule now. I like that Armageddon allows graphic content, since it adds to the harsh realities of the setting. I don't like the idea of flags that would just scream, "torture me pls!"

Keep in mind that graphic scenes can vary wildly, too. Some scenerios are worse than others.

I've wondered if a buglar hidden under the bed ever:
>ooc no I'd rather not see that

Or if someone accidently walked while a templar was torturing someone in public, and due to busstling spam or a heedless emote was not able to ask for consent.

Either way, a fraction of OOC shouldn't kill the RP
Unless it goes like this:
the tall, muscular man OOCs:
"consent to rape?"
the curvaceous maiden OOCs:
"Jack the Ripper or Mike Tyson style?"
the tall, muscular man OOCs:
"whats tyson style?"
the curvaceous maiden OOCs:
"Hm. You have your way and then face the consequences."
the tall, muscular man OOCs:
"o defantly ripper style then"  

[Qzzrbl]

It really sucks to ask for consent to rape....

Because they're more than likely gonna say no, and they're gonna peg your character for a rapist, etc., etc., etc., subliminal OOC crap, etc.

[AmandaGreathouse]

If nothing else, I think it would be nice to have a 'consent to rape' flag, since that's a really good point, Qzzrbl makes. I would pretty much always consent to it, but then I'm hardcore like that. The only time I ever want to fade, really, is due to time constraints, and that's with rape/torture/maiming. With sex, I like to fade when it's not the first time or something particularly unique, just because of the time typically involved, not because I mind seeing it. But in a situation where consent is required to even begin pursuing a plotline, but it's something so OOCly controversial, I think a consent flag would be great. After all, you can always ask to fade the actual scene when/if it happens, if you consent to the plotline.

+1 for the rape consent flag.
I like the other flags idea, too, but would want to see something where you could possibly note it or target consent to specific characters /vs all characters, etc etc.

[Akaramu]

I would also agree to a rape consent flag - as long as it simply indicates consent for the deed to happen, as part of a plot, but not intent to emote it out. It has never happened to any of my characters and I only ever heard of it happening to another PC once - but realistically, it should be quite common. Personally, I think there are much worse things that can happen in Zalanthas than rape - including some things that some NPCs do. Some of that stuff could give me nightmares. A faded rape scene likely would not.

[Niamh]

From a code standpoint, how would other players know whether or not another has this consent flag toggled on or off, and for what types of activities?

[netflix]

From a code standpoint, how would other players know whether or not another has this consent flag toggled on or off, and for what types of activities?

Something that could be checked with an assses -v I suppose. But I think the trouble would come in that there are multiple situations that require consent and some people may be alright with some, but not with others. And that would require -multiple- consent flags, which I think is reaching the point that it'd become more trouble then it's worth.

[Pheonix]

I was thinking something like the current 'who' command, but only applicable to those PCs currently in the same room?

While I can understand the arguments against some of the flags, players can always keep it on the default (requiring consent as it currently is) while other players can make use of the different options if they choose to.

[brytta.leofa]

I don't really think this is a good idea, but...

> consent
You previously elected to consent to graphic torture, moderate sexual situations, and no sexual abuse.
To remove all consent, type: consent none
To change your options, type: consent [torture|sex|abuse] [none|moderate|graphic]

> consent check
Everyone visible to you consents to at least: moderate torture, no sexual situations, and no sexual abuse.

When you type "consent check," other players in the room will receive the following message (with certain exceptions):
The tall, muscular man's player wishes to know everyone's consent preferences.
You previously elected to consent to graphic torture, moderate sexual situations, and no sexual abuse.
To remove all consent, type: consent none
To change your options, type: consent [torture|sex|abuse] [none|moderate|graphic]

However, folks won't receive that message more than once every three hours (logout time included).

45 seconds after you type "consent check," if the net consent status of people visible to you in the room has changed, you will be notified:
Everyone visible to you now consents to at least: no torture, no sexual situations, and no sexual abuse.

If you're invisible or hidden and someone types "consent check," your consent status will not be reported. However, you will ALWAYS get the following message:
The tall, muscular man's player wishes to know everyone's consent preferences.
Because you are [hidden|invisible], your consent preferences will not be reported to this player. 
If you want your preferences to be considered, type "consent tally" immediately.
You previously elected to consent to graphic torture, moderate sexual situations, and no sexual abuse.
To remove all consent, type: consent none
To change your options, type: consent [torture|sex|abuse] [none|moderate|graphic]

[Lizzie]

Consent, and denial of consent, should never be left to automation. If a game requires consent, it should require *active* consent, or *active* denial of consent. Otherwise, don't bother having the rule at all.

[deviant storm]

I really don't care for the thought of flags. Every situation is different. Where I might consent to one scene doesn't mean I want to be everyone's victim.

I dislike the thought of it also because there will be people who look at the consent flag on someone and make preconceived notions based upon that. Some will oocly judge you for what your character is or is not willing to do. It might influence the rp in one way or another, based on preconceived notions.

I don't see any harm in asking if the story leads to that point where torture/rape/sex is a posibility. We're players, people, what's wrong with remembering that once in a while?

[spawnloser]

If you can see what someone has consented to before initiating a scene, that would subliminally affect your handling of the scene long before you would ask for consent.  Again, I must oppose this idea.

[Malifaxis]

Syntax:

consent
What would you like to consent to?  Choose:
   graphic violence
   torture
   rape
   dismemberment
   all

consent on rape
You are now consenting to rape.

consent off dismemberment.
You are not consenting to dismemberment, and will notify anyone who checks consent room.

consent status
You are consenting to rape, and are not consenting to dismemberment.

consent room
The dapper, long-schlonged man is consenting to all.
The one-eyed, slender man is consenting to rape, torture, and is AGAINST dismemberment.
The buxom, hard-nosed templar is consenting to torture, graphic violence and is AGAINST rape.

[brytta.leofa]

consent room
The dapper, long-winded man is consenting to all.
The one-eyed, slender man is consenting to rape, torture, and is AGAINST dismemberment.
The buxom, hard-nosed templar is consenting to torture, graphic violence and is AGAINST rape.

You really don't need to know who consents to what; you only need to know the maximum mutually consented to.

[Malifaxis]

consent room
The dapper, long-winded man is consenting to all.
The one-eyed, slender man is consenting to rape, torture, and is AGAINST dismemberment.
The buxom, hard-nosed templar is consenting to torture, graphic violence and is AGAINST rape.

You really don't need to know who consents to what; you only need to know the maximum mutually consented to.

True, but knowing what each person's limits are would allow you to tailor the scene specifically.  *shrug*

[Sephiroto]

I consent to all things all the time out of a matter of principle.  Give me a flag!