Discussion of Rape being banned from plotlines

[Harmless]

This has kinda ferreted out the creepier portion of the playerbase.

*sigh*

Maybe it's time I took another extended break from this game. This whole thread was just depressing.

[Heade]

Don't leave! I've just recently been thinking of coming back.

Although, it was sad to come back and find this announcement and subsequent thread. I don't like seeing my great, wonderful arm changing to become more restrictive and unrealistic when it comes to RP.



I think this thread could use some input from 7deadlyvenoms, synthesis, and LoD. They all still active?

[Jengal]

This has kinda ferreted out the creepier portion of the playerbase.

Or, perhaps, it has ferreted out the same people who'd defend the KKK's right to public assembly. And no, I'm not talking about the racists.

who defendin the kkk

[Harmless]

You're right. I can't take a break from the game unless RL forces me to. Nothing in here makes me want to play the game more, though.

I'm sure as fuck done with the GDB though.

[Heade]

This has kinda ferreted out the creepier portion of the playerbase.

Or, perhaps, it has ferreted out the same people who'd defend the KKK's right to public assembly. And no, I'm not talking about the racists.

who defendin the kkk

Anthony P. Griffin(an african-american attourney), Me, the ACLU, and you, if you're smart enough to care about the first amendment.

[Mood]

imms should ban rape more often imo. a+ thread, would read again.

[TheWanderer]

I don't like all this profanity - I prefer a child friendly environment.

[spicemustflow]

It has also ferreted out sanctimonious assholes.

[Adhira]

Well, the thread was kept open on the condition that we kept it civil. And it no longer is in that place.

Locking this thread.  We will be posting revised content in the next couple of days regarding this policy.

[Morgenes]

Re-opening this again for discussion of the revision. (See 'help rape' and 'help consent')

Note that at this point (apart from typos and answering questions) we have firmed up our position on this situation and this is the way it will be.

[Fujikoma]

I very much appreciate the clarification. I have but one or two questions.

Who or what is incapable of consent? Well, obviously the unconscious (fell off the shield wall, drank too much, over-wayyed, other mysterious forms) or the incapacitated (poison or otherwise paralyzed). Also, no abusing positions of power without consent. But say, in the case of a very low wisdom score? What if it's a mount, or even a corpse? Also, I'd ask about the limitations placed on mindbenders, but I don't know anything about them (yet, anyway). I'm sorry if I read the new rules wrong, but I think it would be nice if these were explained.

[Morgenes]

I very much appreciate the clarification. I have but one or two questions.

Who or what is incapable of consent? Well, obviously the unconscious (fell off the shield wall, drank too much, over-wayyed, other mysterious forms) or the incapacitated (poison or otherwise paralyzed). Also, no abusing positions of power without consent. But say, in the case of a very low wisdom score? What if it's a mount, or even a corpse? Also, I'd ask about the limitations placed on mindbenders, but I don't know anything about them (yet, anyway). I'm sorry if I read the new rules wrong, but I think it would be nice if these were explained.

Mounts (and any other sentient creature in the game) are NPCs and as such you may not rape them.

In the case of necrophilia it is no more rape than having sex with a sock or a pillow.  There is no longer a victim.

Mindbenders are an eight karma class and are expected to adhere to the rules expressed in 'help consent' and 'help rape'

[Yam]

I very much appreciate the clarification. I have but one or two questions.

Who or what is incapable of consent? Well, obviously the unconscious (fell off the shield wall, drank too much, over-wayyed, other mysterious forms) or the incapacitated (poison or otherwise paralyzed). Also, no abusing positions of power without consent. But say, in the case of a very low wisdom score? What if it's a mount, or even a corpse? Also, I'd ask about the limitations placed on mindbenders, but I don't know anything about them (yet, anyway). I'm sorry if I read the new rules wrong, but I think it would be nice if these were explained.

Mounts (and any other sentient creature in the game) are NPCs and as such you may not rape them. =

So.... consensual mount sex is still okay?

[Morgenes]

Yes, if you can get the mount to ooc consent (through staff intervention), it is ok.  But I wouldn't expect you to ever get that.

Also, while humor is appreciated (assuming that was a joke), I'd rather not have to sift through it on this subject.  Please only post if you have a serious question on the subject, or would like to comment on the new policy.

[bcw81]

Yes, if you can get the mount to ooc consent (through staff intervention), it is ok.  But I wouldn't expect you to ever get that.

wish all Hey, I wanna sex Steve my inix. He's giving me a sultry eye and it looks consensual. Can staff have him ooc his consent?

[MeTekillot]

I'm presuming that sex with PCs who are, what, 16 or under is allowed? Is the age of (in-game) consent for Armageddon the youngest character age possible?

[Morgenes]

I'm presuming that sex with PCs who are, what, 16 or under is allowed? Is the age of (in-game) consent for Armageddon the youngest character age possible?

All PCs are considered adult, therefore age of consent is not an issue with PCs.

And before it is asked, if you have a question about an NPC's age and consent, submit a request about it.

[FreeRangeVestric]

I like this better than the originally set out guidelines, even if I'm still far from in favor. It seems rather peculiar that the rules are now basically, "You can rape another character, as long as your character has power over them in some way other than purely physically, and you have OOC consent from both parties (which was always the case.)" I do like that these possibilities (coercion and the like) were left open, of course, I just don't see the essential difference between the two cases that led to one being banned and the other being allowed.

Still, I do appreciate that the concerns we voiced were clearly taken into consideration. So thank you for that.

[QuillDipper]

I think that the system laid out now should suit everyone, people for and against it, suitably. It covers a lot of concerns while still keeping the main issue presented.

10/10 would ban again

[TheWanderer]

Yes, if you can get the mount to ooc consent (through staff intervention), it is ok.  But I wouldn't expect you to ever get that.

I can be pretty persuasive.

Why was it decided you could talk about raping somebody, but you couldn't threaten to rape somebody directly? And is it not cool to say, "The las' thing you're gonna remember is my [genitals] going straight through your [flipping] head." That is skullfucking, and thusly, the person would likely be dead beforehand - I hope.

[Morgenes]

Yes, if you can get the mount to ooc consent (through staff intervention), it is ok.  But I wouldn't expect you to ever get that.

I can be pretty persuasive.

Why was it decided you could talk about raping somebody, but you couldn't threaten to rape somebody directly? And is it not cool to say, "The las' thing you're gonna remember is my [genitals] going straight through your [flipping] head." That is skullfucking, and thusly, the person would likely be dead beforehand - I hope.

You can talk about it if you did it, and by our definition and rules, you must have done it to an vNPC.  Threatening someone with rape (per our definition laid out in the help file) is not allowed as you can never carry it out.

Saying you are going to do it to their corpse, is fine.

[Cutthroat]

I like this better than the originally set out guidelines, even if I'm still far from in favor. It seems rather peculiar that the rules are now basically, "You can rape another character, as long as your character has power over them in some way other than purely physically, and you have OOC consent from both parties (which was always the case.)" I do like that these possibilities (coercion and the like) were left open, of course, I just don't see the essential difference between the two cases that led to one being banned and the other being allowed.

I imagine that exception was made to allow for Allanaki concubinage to stay, though I guess there are other reasons too.

[Narf]

I like this better than the originally set out guidelines, even if I'm still far from in favor. It seems rather peculiar that the rules are now basically, "You can rape another character, as long as your character has power over them in some way other than purely physically, and you have OOC consent from both parties (which was always the case.)" I do like that these possibilities (coercion and the like) were left open, of course, I just don't see the essential difference between the two cases that led to one being banned and the other being allowed.

I imagine that exception was made to allow for Allanaki concubinage to stay, though I guess there are other reasons too.

Yeah, 95% of prostitution would be impossible without some degree of of gray area coercion (is the threat of starvation if you don't bang this person coercion? Is the chance that my pimp will smack me around if I try to work elsewhere coercion?)

I mean you could have only prostitutes with great relationships with their pimps, who don't really need to prostitute themselves out but chose to do it anyways... but they'd be kinda boring, and eventually after the 57th one, immersion shattering.

[ale six]

I like this better than the originally set out guidelines, even if I'm still far from in favor. It seems rather peculiar that the rules are now basically, "You can rape another character, as long as your character has power over them in some way other than purely physically, and you have OOC consent from both parties (which was always the case.)" I do like that these possibilities (coercion and the like) were left open, of course, I just don't see the essential difference between the two cases that led to one being banned and the other being allowed.

I imagine that exception was made to allow for Allanaki concubinage to stay, though I guess there are other reasons too.

Concubines are in a whole different class of relationship that's generally very consensual. A noble wouldn't be forcing themself on their concubine - the concubine is probably going to be willing and eager in most cases.

A better example might be a lecherous templar. "Well, cute little thief, the fine for your crimes is normally 500 coin, but there might be other alternatives..." at which point it seems you'd want to ask for consent immediately afterward. Ditto a Sarge who's willing to forgive the tressy-tressed Runner's rule breaking if she.... or the merchant who'll sell you that awesome uber axe if you just... or even the breed hunter who caught you secret-magicking in the sands and is gonna tell the authorities unless you...

All in all, I think the changes are clear, and will be fine. Besides the "no false accusations of rape" rule, I don't think much will change at all.

[Heade]

Overall, I feel much better about how it's presented. However, I do agree that it seems like a silly distinction. You can still rape through coercion/abuse of power, but not through threats of violence? So I can threaten someone with releasing their dirty secrets to the templarate(which will get them killed), but can't just threaten death myself.

Speaking of which, does being armed while someone else is unarmed constitute a "power imbalance" as per the aforementioned rules? Not trying to be funny. Just pointing out a possible interpretation of the rules that could potentially go against the spirit of said rule. What about being an experienced warrior and knowing someone else can't defend themselves? Is that a power imbalance that would fall under this rule, or only social power balances? Does one commoner who has managed to start his own business and employs a different commoner then create a power imbalance between them, even though they're the same caste?

I am getting the feeling that the primary issue here is that false accusations of rape caused PC deaths because players overreacted to the false accusations in a lethal manner, which wouldn't really be the zalanthan way. If that is the primary driver behind these changes, why change the entire system? Why not just make the rule: "You cannot falsely accuse someone of rape."