Release Note discussion!

[Lizzie]

Pour liquids concerns:

Mistakenly forcing someone to drink cleaning liquid. People have consumed it themselves, in error - if there's a LOT going on they might not remember that they have a keg of the stuff in their inventory. This particular thing should not be codedly possible, I feel. Especially since if the person is in a position where someone COULD force them to drink it, they'd already probably be easy to kill without forcing them to drink it.

Mistakenly pouring booze into someone who is unconscious/subdued. Maybe a "are you sure" echo to the person doing the pouring requiring a "y/n" response or something. I can see a lot of unintentional death-by-code happening here.

Intentional drunk/poison while someone is subdued or paralyzed but still conscious (and therefore able to watch without being able to do anything about it)...should require consent.

The concept is awesome though.

[Brokkr]

What is your reasoning behind requesting consent, as it isn't readily apparent to me.

[BrainySmurf]

What is your reasoning behind requesting consent, as it isn't readily apparent to me.

Echoed. I see this as just a secondary way to execute or damage a helpless opponent. You don't have to request consent to execute someone who is subdued with your sword. Terradin should be considered the same, and frankly way cooler for the victim.

[Is Friday]

What is your reasoning behind requesting consent, as it isn't readily apparent to me.

https://youtu.be/pZwvrxVavnQ

Code Select Expand

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZwvrxVavnQ

[sleepyhead]

I think she means consent on the side of the person doing the pouring, not consent on the side of the victim. I don't really think it's necessary but it's not what some seem to think she means.

[lostinspace]

Is there a delay after the pour command for this, and does it crim flag if you pour something hazardous?

What's stopping someone from shitmugging someone sleeping in the side room of the Gaj? Any other aggressive action taken will be stopped / have you arrested by the soldiers.

[Hauwke]

The question arises, why are you accidentally carrying cleaning fluid around while kidnapping people?

If anything, it sounds like a decent way to kill a guy.

[Lizzie]

If a person is conscious and is being forced to drink a liquid that will cause pain/agony/injury against his/her will and without the coded ability to respond, or attempt to prevent it, for the character to even say "oh no!" - that's torture.  Coded torture. I feel the same way about the cuddler and the nursery by the way. The consequence for rejecting torture could be death.

If they're not conscious - then the player won't be seeing any of the various echoes - and their PC will probably die within a few seconds anyway. But people who are subdued and/or paralyzed - their players can see every echo and are incapable of reacting to them. Since the echoes are graphic, and since the players are incapable of reacting to them and are forced to watch them - I feel they should be allowed to decide whether or not they'd rather just accept a death penalty for their characters.

[Dar]

I will confess the combo of
subdue person
pour heramide person

is a tiny little bit WAY TOO POWERFUL. 

A lot more powerful then let's say subduing a person and then trying to knock them out. On account that with heramide pouring, the victim rolls 'one' skill check. On the other scenario, the victim rolls a whole bunch of different checks that are related to a whole bunch of different skills.

So yes. The only time someone should be able to pour something into another's throat without them being able to resist it is paralyze/unconscious.  If you do it to a sleeping person, the sleeping person should have an equivalent of a <sip> amount and then immediately wake up. If you  do it to a subdued person, it should simply not ever work, or have an echo and then a good 60 second delay before execution.

[mansa]

If a person is conscious and is being forced to drink a liquid that will cause pain/agony/injury against his/her will and without the coded ability to respond, or attempt to prevent it, for the character to even say "oh no!" - that's torture.  Coded torture. I feel the same way about the cuddler and the nursery by the way. The consequence for rejecting torture could be death.

If they're not conscious - then the player won't be seeing any of the various echoes - and their PC will probably die within a few seconds anyway. But people who are subdued and/or paralyzed - their players can see every echo and are incapable of reacting to them. Since the echoes are graphic, and since the players are incapable of reacting to them and are forced to watch them - I feel they should be allowed to decide whether or not they'd rather just accept a death penalty for their characters.

I feel like the consent help file is pretty clear.

"If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop."

"In the case of mutilation, an action that would cause a character to lose their ability to function in some way, the victim may request that they be killed by the procedure. It is then the instigator's responsibility to attempt to kill the victim, or take some other appropriate course of action. The victim should not request other punishments, bargain, or otherwise discuss the situation out of character beyond this provision."


"If you act out a graphic sequence without first obtaining the other player's consent...."

"Please use common sense and have respect for other people's sensibilities."

[BrainySmurf]

I think suggesting the coded terradin echoes are equivalent to fully roleplayed torture is a stretch.

[Lizzie]

If a person is conscious and is being forced to drink a liquid that will cause pain/agony/injury against his/her will and without the coded ability to respond, or attempt to prevent it, for the character to even say "oh no!" - that's torture.  Coded torture. I feel the same way about the cuddler and the nursery by the way. The consequence for rejecting torture could be death.

If they're not conscious - then the player won't be seeing any of the various echoes - and their PC will probably die within a few seconds anyway. But people who are subdued and/or paralyzed - their players can see every echo and are incapable of reacting to them. Since the echoes are graphic, and since the players are incapable of reacting to them and are forced to watch them - I feel they should be allowed to decide whether or not they'd rather just accept a death penalty for their characters.

I feel like the consent help file is pretty clear.

"If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop."

"In the case of mutilation, an action that would cause a character to lose their ability to function in some way, the victim may request that they be killed by the procedure. It is then the instigator's responsibility to attempt to kill the victim, or take some other appropriate course of action. The victim should not request other punishments, bargain, or otherwise discuss the situation out of character beyond this provision."


"If you act out a graphic sequence without first obtaining the other player's consent...."

"Please use common sense and have respect for other people's sensibilities."

Right - that was written before it became possible to force poison down a character's throat without consent of the player, when the coded echoes of that poison are indicative of torture. This is coded, not acted out.  I feel the consent rule should be updated to include this one aspect of it.

[sleepyhead]

Well you can shoot someone with that same poison without their consent.

[Hauwke]

ooc Consent to smash your characters face in with my HG's club right dood?

I feel like you should be able to grab someone, and pour a caustic liquid in their face without having to go to OOC, but then I am also if a mind that you shouldnt need to ask consent for pretty much anything at all in the game. This is a HARSH desert world where we have slavery and an entire sub-species of sentient beings that are often the product of rape.

Why can I not poison a guy without his/her permission if I could otherwise just murder them instead?

If it makes you uncomfortable, sure, ask to tone it down.

[Dar]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

[sleepyhead]

I have a few opinions.

1. I think there should be an advantage to using brewed poisons rather than, say, a tainted waterskin or cleaning fluid. (It's kind of silly that cleaning fluid kills you, anyway. It should just make you throw up a few times and have a really bad few days.) Whether that advantage is being easier to administer or being stronger in effect, I can deal with it either way, but there should be some reward for the skill and knowledge it takes to distill a poison.

2. I also think there should be a delay when pouring something down someone's gullet. There should be an echo that shows that someone is attempting to force you to drink something, so you have time to type flee if you are conscious. There should also be a chance of failure (for conscious victims), aka the would-be drinker spits out all the liquid. Nosave skills or something similar could bypass the check if you're trying to give water to a dehydrated person.

3. If you are sleeping normally, not unconscious, attempting this should wake you up unless you are also subdued, and you should spit out whatever is attempted to be poured down your throat unless you have nosave skills (or whatever) on.

4. If you are unconscious (not normally sleeping), then you are SOL anyway. Take it like the little bitch you are.

EDIT:

I didn't say quite what I meant to say on item #3. If you're sleeping normally, someone trying to make you drink something should wake you up whether or not you're subdued, but it should be a definite fail unless they subdue you, in which case it should be a normal check.

[ShaiHulud]

I pour honey into your mouth, real sweet, you don't react, other than lap it up. I pour acid in your mouth, not so nice. You get a great save?

[RogueGunslinger]

Dear God can we leave the consent rule discussion for things that actually matter. This community spends too much time trying to police other players.

[sleepyhead]

I wouldn't be inclined to [willingly] let some stranger unexpectedly pour honey in my mouth while holding me down, especially since I don't know if it's poison or not. I wouldn't like to wake up to that, either!

[ShaiHulud]

I think the idea was to allow medics to administer cures to those not able to fix themselves, but I can see the concern of abuse. Thus my snarky idea.
I'm awake and subdued, trying to pour some shit in my mouth..phenomenal save. Unconscious, not so much.

[chrisdcoulombe]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

What?

[CodeMaster]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

What?

I'm just a fly on the wall for this discussion... but what don't you understand about what he wrote?

[BrainySmurf]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

What?

Unless Dar knows something we don't, the process of poisoning a waterskin and poisoning a blade are pretty darn similar. They consume the exact same item to perform.
I'm just a fly on the wall for this discussion... but what don't you understand about what he wrote?

[nauta]

I personally do not like the idea of forcing poison down someone's throat mainly because it makes killing too easy. That's my opinion. Not about consent of graphic violence at all. But just a matter of how easy it is for 2 people to subdue and pour liquid in, to instantly KO someone out.  Granted it's possible to do it by simply stabbing a person with a poisoned dagger. But liquid brewed poison and poison that sticks to blades are two entirely different things in terms of difficulty to procure.

This is a very good point, two points really: (1) the ability to pour a poison, be it a vial or a shitmug, into a victim's throat makes it easy to KO them; (2) the ability to pour a poison that is not a vial (thus not created by the poison or brew skills) makes it so that such vials are far too easy to obtain.  I'm going to pitch an argument against (1), namely, to the conclusion that being able to easily pour poisoned liquid into a victim (subdued, paralyzed, or asleep) is a good thing, not a bad thing.  So I agree with Dar that it would make it very easy to do so; I disagree that this is a bad thing.  However, I totally agree about (2) -- if anyone can make up a shitmug and not just those skilled at poisons, then this will proliferate poisons, and make it so much more deadly.  (Solution: remove shitmugs from the game.  Only those with a poison skill can poison vials / liquid containers.)

1. But first, let's bear in mind that we could do this already from at least two years ago or whenever it was that they implemented the ability to pour vials into other people's mouths.  Here's the change:

"-The pour command can now be used to pour liquids into the mouths of unconscious, paralyzed, and subdued
  characters.  This feature is a result of seeing players attempt it in the game and not having it work the way vials do."

And I can't find it now, but I do remember the ability to use a vial on a victim being implemented with the general rollout of the new tablet code.

What this change allows, however, is for more poisons than just poison vials to be applied to a victim, thus broadening the scope.

2. Ok, so would the ability to pour a poison vial or a shitmug into a victim's throat, where the victim is subdued, paralyzed, or asleep, allow one to more easily kill them?  Yes!  I agree.  Is this a bad thing?  My thesis is: no.  So let's break it down:

Asleep/Paralyzed - If you are asleep/paralyzed, you are at the mercy of those who are not asleep.  They could stab you with a poison dagger and kill you.  They could slit your throat.  They could stuff a vial of killmenow poison into your mouth and kill you now.

Subdued - Here, admittedly, one might see resistance -- and I think this is what Dar is driving at.  HG Biff walks up to you, subdues you, and then, hands free of a weapon to kill you with, somehow manages to pour a poison vial or shitmug down your throat, which he had in his inventory.  I think this might not make a lot of sense, and have a suggestion at the end how to prevent this.  But if HG Biff subdues you and his buddy Ranger Rover stabs you with a poison blade in the face, or pours a poison vial in your mouth, you should be dead.  It's a one-two combo, admittedly, but it was already a one-two combo with a blade.

Suggestion: in order to pour a vial/container of liquid into someone else, you must hold it.  Thus, you could not subdue them AND pour the thing down the throat at the same time, just as you can't subdue them and stab them at the same time, since subdue makes you drop your weapons. You'll need a partner.

[lostinspace]

For subdued, if I'm awake, you're going to have to try really hard to get me to drink something I don't want. Even if you hold me down, I can spit it out or breath through my nose to prevent swallowing.

Those options don't really apply for unconscious or paralyzed, and if I'm asleep, I just want it to wake them up immediately after they pour. You still get the effects of whatever they pour, but at least you can immediately go for a cure, or attack them back.