Intimate

[Barzalene]

I don't know that I have an actual point here. I said to a friend a moment ago that I find that on Arm sex is the least interesting form of intimacy.

I also find that true intimacy is really hard to achieve. My pcs guard their secrets and vulnerabilities.

Ps while this may evolve or devolve into a conversation of mudsex, it's not the act of mudsex I'm alluding to here.

Those typos just killed me. Deb 8/22/15

[Marauder Moe]

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

[ShaLeah]

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

On Arm I think true intimacy is usually the result of the above.

It -should- be hard to achieve, especially on Arm. Like Moe says, getting naked with someone in a place where everyone carries weapons is a bit daunting, don't you think?

[lordcooper]

It's hard to be intimate in a land where dropping your guard can so easily mean death.  I see no problem with the status quo.

[Barzalene]

It does. I don't think romance is uninteresting, just less interesting than giving people your secrets, your connections or your endorsement.

I think one example is when you play a highly placed assistant of some sort to a highly placed person. Don't we tell our aides things we don't tell our lovers?

[Barzalene]

It's hard to be intimate in a land where dropping your guard can so easily mean death.  I see no problem with the status quo.

I'm not seeing a problem at all. This was meant to be reflection, not complaint. I am curious if my opinion is the norm.

[Marauder Moe]

I think we're in agreement that indeed there are more intimate relationships than sexual partners, yes.

[Barzalene]

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

On Arm I think true intimacy is usually the result of the above.

It -should- be hard to achieve, especially on Arm. Like Moe says, getting naked with someone in a place where everyone carries weapons is a bit daunting, don't you think?

It's interesting that I don't think so, don't you think?

Maybe it's because lovers seem so easy to come by on Arm and friends far less so?

[ShaLeah]

It does. I don't think romance is uninteresting, just less interesting than giving people your secrets, your connections or your endorsement.

I think one example is when you play a highly placed assistant of some sort to a highly placed person. Don't we tell our aides things we don't tell our lovers?

Maybe, at first, till that lover earns a trust that aide can't, less you're kanking them too.

I think we're in agreement that indeed there are more intimate relationships than sexual partners, yes.

I actually played an aide when I got back that was head over heels in love with her boss. I think he was in love with her too but they never kanked. Not once. That intimacy was achieved -without- needing to kank.

I think of a truly intimate (sexual or not) relationship on Arm is akin to coming home for Christmas. You walk in the door, you sigh, all that evil, all that fear, all that tension just melts away and you're home. Safe.

What makes it all the more double-delicious on Arm is that it's often an illusion.

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

On Arm I think true intimacy is usually the result of the above.

It -should- be hard to achieve, especially on Arm. Like Moe says, getting naked with someone in a place where everyone carries weapons is a bit daunting, don't you think?

It's interesting that I don't think so, don't you think?

Maybe it's because lovers seem so easy to come by on Arm and friends far less so?

You think a truly intimate relationship should be easier to achieve on Arm? Cause they're two different things, the sex and the intimacy.

[Marauder Moe]

All I'm saying is that sex is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

[Barzalene]

It does. I don't think romance is uninteresting, just less interesting than giving people your secrets, your connections or your endorsement.

I think one example is when you play a highly placed assistant of some sort to a highly placed person. Don't we tell our aides things we don't tell our lovers?

Maybe, at first, till that lover earns a trust that aide can't, less you're kanking them too.

I think we're in agreement that indeed there are more intimate relationships than sexual partners, yes.

I actually played an aide when I got back that was head over heels in love with her boss. I think he was in love with her too but they never kanked. Not once. That intimacy was achieved -without- needing to kank.

I think of a truly intimate (sexual or not) relationship on Arm is akin to coming home for Christmas. You walk in the door, you sigh, all that evil, all that fear, all that tension just melts away and you're home. Safe.

What makes it all the more double-delicious on Arm is that it's often an illusion.

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

On Arm I think true intimacy is usually the result of the above.

It -should- be hard to achieve, especially on Arm. Like Moe says, getting naked with someone in a place where everyone carries weapons is a bit daunting, don't you think?

It's interesting that I don't think so, don't you think?

Maybe it's because lovers seem so easy to come by on Arm and friends far less so?

You think a truly intimate relationship should be easier to achieve on Arm? Cause they're two different things, the sex and the intimacy.

I do not think so at all. I think it's a huge part of why I find non-sexual intimacy so fascinating. It is rare. There's no shortcut.

[lordcooper]

I do not think so at all. I think it's a huge part of why I find non-sexual intimacy so fascinating. It is rare. There's no shortcut.

That rarity might well come from the nature of MUDs themselves.  We only really get to see the shell of a character (that which is spoken, or h/emoted) whereas in reality we can subconsciously pick up on things that people don't even notice they're doing.  This is no fault of players, it's an inherent aspect of the game being text based.  Nobody could emote literally everything their character does.

[ShaLeah]

I do not think so at all. I think it's a huge part of why I find non-sexual intimacy so fascinating. It is rare. There's no shortcut.

Intimacy between -friends- I think is REALLY easy on Arm. Stupid easy. Much too easy and hence, false most times. Elves have the right idea on this one.

Intimacy between lovers, harder to achieve.

Intimacy between almost/wannabebutcan'tbe lovers is much, much harder. I imagine this is quite frequent up in Tuluk where a law forcing no sexual contact would make it PRIME land for that kind of thing. Not being able to kank someone by no means means not WANTING to fuck'em. I can only imagine some of the thinks (those brave enough to THINK about it) on some of these people. Closet pervs, coveters, droolers. \derail

[Barzalene]

I do not think so at all. I think it's a huge part of why I find non-sexual intimacy so fascinating. It is rare. There's no shortcut.

Intimacy between -friends- I think is REALLY easy on Arm. Stupid easy. Much too easy and hence, false most times. Elves have the right idea on this one.

Intimacy between lovers, harder

I think we have to agree to disagree.

[Barzalene]

I do not think so at all. I think it's a huge part of why I find non-sexual intimacy so fascinating. It is rare. There's no shortcut.

That rarity might well come from the nature of MUDs themselves.  We only really get to see the shell of a character (that which is spoken, or h/emoted) whereas in reality we can subconsciously pick up on things that people don't even notice they're doing.  This is no fault of players, it's an inherent aspect of the game being text based.  Nobody could emote literally everything their character does.

I think you are on to something.

[James de Monet]

I think the social stratum of the character also plays into it. Friends represent an investment in trust and time. The more you have to lose, the more expensive picking the wrong friends becomes, and therefore the less likely PCs are to risk it. It's entirely possible to have a lover you don't trust, but a friend isn't really a friend until you trust them.

I guess maybe it isn't a clear cut question of status as much as it is vulnerability. The more people might want to see you dead or disgraced, the less trusting you will be. If you're Amos the Grebber, never offended anyone and no one knows your name, trust might come easier to you. The more powerful or criminal, famous or notorious you get, the harder that is going to be.

[Molten Heart]

Mutual trust and mutual sacrifice are what create intimacy.  Sex is a very powerful way to share/confirm that intimacy once the groundwork has been laid, depending on the nature of the relationship (depending on what's being shared in the relationship).

[Narf]

I don't think it's the least interesting form.  If you are alone and naked in an apartment with someone, that represents a tremendous amount of trust.

It -should- be hard to achieve, especially on Arm. Like Moe says, getting naked with someone in a place where everyone carries weapons is a bit daunting, don't you think?

Depends. Some of the better sex toys can double as weapons in a pinch.

[greasygemo]

When you start emoting and saying identical things at the exact same time and also feel comfortable revealing, things that would under normals circumstances come back and get you murdered later, to each other, then, and only then, can you say that's your "mate". Otherwise, they are just your kank-buddy.

[Narf]

When you start emoting and saying identical things at the exact same time and also feel comfortable revealing, things that would under normals circumstances come back and get you murdered later, to each other, then, and only then, can you say that's your "mate". Otherwise, they are just your kank-buddy.

If your character is constantly saying things that could get them murdered to pretty much everyone, does that then make him a slut?

[AreteX]

Sex has seemed to be an ice-breaker for intimacy to develop in the future.  If you're able to kank then they have passed the first test of trust.  You didn't get stabbed in the back while naked.  That makes it easier to then trust them further and for more intimate things such as secrets, stories you never told anyone else, or lending them your connections, ect.  This has often at least been my experience with sex between characters.  It often leads towards a more intimate relationship that has nothing to do with sex even if that is a regular occurrence.

I think at least on Armageddon intimacy comes in different forms as well.  Two drinking buddies might be intimate with each other.  It happens in real life as well.  You hang out often enough you become familiar.  You drink which opens you up to talking more than you normally might, and soon you're sharing things and confessing to each other.

[Fredd]

I've had some very intimate relationships on Arm. I've had relationships that (literally) made my pc's go crazy. I've run the whole gamut on this. I do agree though, finding someone to kank is easier then finding someone your pc can be truly intimate with.

[greasygemo]

When you start emoting and saying identical things at the exact same time and also feel comfortable revealing, things that would under normals circumstances come back and get you murdered later, to each other, then, and only then, can you say that's your "mate". Otherwise, they are just your kank-buddy.

If your character is constantly saying things that could get them murdered to pretty much everyone, does that then make him a slut?

Depends on how many times they do it before being murdered. I think the magic number is five then you can start charting the slut-o-meter.

[Barzalene]

When you start emoting and saying identical things at the exact same time and also feel comfortable revealing, things that would under normals circumstances come back and get you murdered later, to each other, then, and only then, can you say that's your "mate". Otherwise, they are just your kank-buddy.

If your character is constantly saying things that could get them murdered to pretty much everyone, does that then make him a slut?

A dead slut.

[Dakota]

I love intimacy in arm. I don't mean sex. I mean intimacy.

Perhaps its a fault, but some of my own personal traits come out in my PC's. Like I don't pretend to be best friends with someone if I've seen them a few times. I like that whole.. getting close to someone aspect. RPing it out. Testing them. Gauging them. Baiting them and seeing what they do in the aspect to the relationship you have with that person (just talking general friendship here).

I think all my PC's, even the ones that were long lived could count their "friends" on a single hand. And it took a long time and lots of RP to get them to be considered a friend.

That kind of intimate roleplay that really makes me feel like this game takes things to another level.