Consent checklist command

[kahuna]

We seem to be on an idea spree on the gdb recently so I thought I'd throw this one out there.

We've seen the game evolve over time and I wanted to bring up this idea of adding in a consent command so
players can check other players consents without going OOC to break immersion. I think this would also help in
terms of dealing with any complaints over roleplay as well, you could theoretically add almost
anything to this list and cover every aspect of roleplaying.  I will preface by saying this is not
an original idea, we used these consent checklists when I was a DM for D&D so I thought I'd bring the
idea over here.


consent [OPTIONS] [SUBOPTIONS] [LEVEL]

options
add
remove
alter

level
green - Enthusiastic consent
yellow - Okay if veiled or offstage, might be okay onstage but requires discussion before hand, uncertain
red - Hard line, do not include

consent list
Horror
Blood
Demons
Eyeballs
Gore
Harm to animals
Harm to children
Rats
Spiders

Relationships
Romance
.Fade to Black
.Explicit
.Between PCs and NPCs
.Between PCs

Sex
.Fade to Black
.Explicit
.Between PCs and NPCs
Between PCs

Social Issues
Homophobia
Racism
Sexism

Mental health
Claustrophobia
Gaslighting
Genocide
Heatstroke
Natural disasters
Paralysis/physical restraint
Pregnancy, miscarriage, abortion
Self-harm
Severe weather
Terrorism
Torture
Thirst

Additional Topics?


Examples:
consent add blood green
consent alter blood yellow
consent add romance fadetoblack green
consent add all green

consent vennant

Vennant consents to the following:
They are consending to everything.

consent amos
They are consending to the following:
Blood - Green
Gore - Yellow
Paralysis - Green
Torture - Yellow


They are not consending to:
Romance - Red
Sex - Red

Thoughts?

[Heade]

Ok, I gotta say, this makes me sorta...



So, to address the root of your idea, I don't think such a command is a bad idea specifically for sexually explicit RP or torture scenes, since staff has determined that those require consent. That said, extending consent to EVERYTHING, including things as mundane as blood or cruelty to animals is way, way over the top. We're playing a game in which murder is in the tagline of the game. Blood is par for the course. And addressing things like animal cruelty is far too difficult to police when definitions of what is cruel and what isn't vary from person to person. A vegan might think that eating animals is cruel. Suddenly hunter PCs need consent to wear furs or talk about their jobs.

Admittedly, I've never been a big fan of the consent thing for adult themes to begin with, because we're playing an adult game that even used to have an 18+ notification before you could create a character. Years ago, on the old website, it stated that you must be 18+ to play the game, and we didn't have all of these issues at that point. This is an RPI mud that features adult themes. If you can opt out of general harshness, what's left in the game? Fade to black everything? Are we going to add trigger warnings to room descriptions and game docs next?

Come on people, let's draw the line somewhere.

[lairos]

I'm all for an on or off consent flag for the usual....Sexual scenes and torture/graphic scenes and all that. I'm totally against adding any others.

[Heade]

I have an idea instead. Let's take this the opposite direction. Instead of placing the onus on the players to get consent from each individual player, let's just put a trigger warning directly on the website:

"If you are disturbed by adult themes like murder, torture, sex, betrayal, theft, animal cruelty, slavery, or virtually any other horrible thing you can imagine that might happen in an RPI game where no consent is required to kill you, this probably isn't the game for you. If that's the case, thanks for stopping by. If not, welcome to Armageddon!"

[Magnate]

I've suggested this a few times in the last twenty years. I would love to see something but far less elaborate.

Graphic violence
Sexual

I also absolutely love Heade's comment - I think consent on a game like this is sort of silly. This isn't Mr. Rogers.

[kahuna]

Despite your preconceived notions, people under 18 do play this game. This is the internet and we can't control who connects to the game and who doesn't. I think it's important also to realize that this game has lost players due to roleplay scenes they may have been uncomfortable with. I don't think is okay.

The point of this command would not be to prevent roleplay from occurring. It would be more of a guideline of what somebody is comfortable with. I as a roleplayer would rather know what people find uncomfortable, or "hard-lines" before I begin roleplaying one on one with them. I do not think consent can always be acquired in large groups, but if this were available at least you have the option to find out. I would rather know then not know is what I am getting at. I do not really see a negative to it, the more information you have the better you can facilitate the scene.

Also your snide gif is unnecessary and not really productive for a discussion.

[Dar]

What about people whom you cant see in the room?

I'm sorry. But I myself would feel better if I ooc permission for graphic content and have it granted by others.

[kahuna]

What about people whom you cant see in the room?

I'm sorry. But I myself would feel better if I ooc permission for graphic content and have it granted by others.

By all means you can still do this for gore, violence, torture, sexual scenes. I'm not advocating for removing the necessity to break if need be.

[Heade]

Despite your preconceived notions, people under 18 do play this game. This is the internet and we can't control who connects to the game and who doesn't. I think it's important also to realize that this game has lost players due to roleplay scenes they may have been uncomfortable with. I don't think is okay.

I think it's important to realize that this game has lost players due to oppressive rulings regarding adult themed content in a game that was listed as an adult-themed game. This game is very different from what it was when I first started playing. Even very different from how it was 10 years ago. And while I believe staff is better, I think that content and storylines in the game have suffered and stagnated in the wake of these kid-friendly changes.

Sure, people under 18 might play the game. People under 18 look at porn on the internet too. But you don't see porn producers lining up to self-censor out of fear that a minor might ignore all instructions to do otherwise and look anyway. At some point, a decision needs to be made on who you're going to cater to and who your target demographic is going to be. You're never going to please everyone, so a decision either way will cause you to lose people.

Also your snide gif is unnecessary and not really productive for a discussion.

Relax, it's a facepalm gif. It's not offensive or snide. It's the equivalent of an emote, or ::facepalms::, but I went out of my way to give you an entertaining graphic.

If something like that hurts your feelings or offends your sensibilities, then you're sort of making my point for me. We've come to a point where people's delicate sensibilities are detrimentally affecting both the portrayal of the gameworld and general OOC communication. I never signed up for My Little Pony MUD with bone swords. This is armafuckinggeddon. <---(I also suggest the official namechange, just to set the proper mood.)

[MeTekillot]

Armageddon is like BDSM. You always ask permission and you always offer the option to withdraw. I'm fine with the current consent schema.

[Nameless Face]

So what would be the expected response if I decide, your previous flag determining your Enthustiastic Consent or not, that my PC was going to have the scene including any one of your categories that is not already covered by the game's rules for sexually explicit adult scenes, mutation or explicit torture?

Your PC has Red Flags for Animal Cruelty and Rats, from your suggested categories.  My PC stomps a rat in your presence and seems to enjoy it.  Now what? 

[kahuna]

So what would be the expected response if I decide, your previous flag determining your Enthustiastic Consent or not, that my PC was going to have the scene including any one of your categories that is not already covered by the game's rules for sexually explicit adult scenes, mutation or explicit torture?

Your PC has Red Flags for Animal Cruelty and Rats, from your suggested categories.  My PC stomps a rat in your presence and seems to enjoy it.  Now what?

Now nothing. This isn't meant to stop you from playing your character it is meant to give you information so you know what to avoid specifically if you're roleplaying a scene with someone that might be sensitive to them. Consent might be the wrong word, I see it more as guidelines and simply knowing what people are and are not okay with being around. It's better than being in the dark and knowing nothing, offending someone and them quitting the game over something you did, wouldn't you agree?

[Nameless Face]

I don't agree.

If the goal is to prevent anyone from being skeeved out, an open text box would better than categories.

"Hey, I'm really weirded out by mushrooms.  Just an FYI."

I would offer two other suggestions to the above person:
1.  Don't play a MUD called Truffleworld.
2.  Be wary of handing out your preferred kinks or fears in this particular medium.

[kahuna]

I don't agree.

If the goal is to prevent anyone from being skeeved out, an open text box would better than categories.

"Hey, I'm really weirded out by mushrooms.  Just an FYI."

I would offer two other suggestions to the above person:
1.  Don't play a MUD called Truffleworld.
2.  Be wary of handing out your preferred kinks or fears in this particular medium.

The goal is to prevent people from being offended during roleplay they might not want to be a part of. This is more easily accomplished if you can gain as much information as possible. Right now we have the consent system which is far from perfect or even ideal. Trusting players to just police their own roleplay doesn't really work. Having a system in place would make players more responsible for what they are doing to other players and it gives staff an easier way to see in bulk what they may or may not want to see. You could even have the checklist be a standard Q&A during account creation so new players can enter their stuff from the get go.

This doesn't prevent you from doing the 'red' categories, especially if you don't even know the person is visible. But if I am acting out a gore scene on someone that I have knocked out and I see their checklist shows gore as red I can stop myself before even having to break immersion for consent and simply move on. I can also prevent the headache of a possible player complaint or even worse chasing a new player from the game.

[MeTekillot]

I don't agree.

If the goal is to prevent anyone from being skeeved out, an open text box would better than categories.

"Hey, I'm really weirded out by mushrooms.  Just an FYI."

I would offer two other suggestions to the above person:
1.  Don't play a MUD called Truffleworld.
2.  Be wary of handing out your preferred kinks or fears in this particular medium.

Trusting players to just police their own roleplay doesn't really work.

it doesn't?

[RogueGunslinger]

This is a weird idea for a niche, adult themed roleplaying game. The closest comparison I can think of is how Japan blurs their porn.

[Marauder Moe]

Wow.

Armageddon already has already has kind of a reputation about being a "sex MUD".  Do we really need to codify that with a detailed survey about one's sexual preferences during account creation?!?!?!

I would have NOPE'd the fuck away from the game so fast if I saw something like that.

[Gentleboy]

Why is severe weather on the list? Severe sandstorms are...part of the game code, right?

[LindseyBalboa]

Wow.

Armageddon already has already has kind of a reputation about being a "sex MUD".  Do we really need to codify that with a detailed survey about one's sexual preferences during account creation?!?!?!

I would have NOPE'd the fuck away from the game so fast if I saw something like that.

Lol.

Also, though, I don't see what problem this fixes. The amount of effort seems to offer little reward; Further, t still seems to break character, but now even more so, to me. I have not yet run into an IC situation where consent for violence etc was not respected and asked about, and the break in posing is shorter and out of the way more quickly than having to view someone's consent toggles and figure out what it's okay to pose around them and what not, every time I scene.

[Namino]

SideEyeMonkeyMeme.png at this whole thread.

[Aromit]

My thoughts.

A sex and torture survey upon character creation does paint a particular picture of the mud to new players (an inaccurate one to be clear)

Secondly, players make mistakes. I may be A-OK with role-playing adult themes one day and not okay the next, maybe I have curious people around or I'm playing while working and forget to toggle a flag and something inappropriate pops up on my monitor. Maybe I'm having a bad day. I do this already plenty with mercy on/off, nosave and contact/cease, listen, scan. I would indeed do it with these flags too.

The suggested flags imo don't offer much for consideration, I would still show my fellow players the courtesy of asking oocly if they're alright to progress a scene involving adult themes instead of trusting some kind of toggled flag on the pc. Everything's covered under help consent, players are considerate and I've yet to ever witness a request for consent be disrespected or ruin a scene.

Help consent covers everything pretty well and asking consent is pretty simple and straightforward.

[Thomoto]

Despite your preconceived notions, people under 18 do play this game. This is the internet and we can't control who connects to the game and who doesn't. I think it's important also to realize that this game has lost players due to roleplay scenes they may have been uncomfortable with. I don't think is okay.

Okay, I am the youngest Armageddon player, (at least one of them) and I do get what your saying. But if the game has lost people because they were uncomfortable with the scene, thats why we have FADE TO BLACK. It makes sense to have the grey area where the scene is ROd afterward as if it happened but not explicitly played out.

The other thing is a come on bro thing. Violence to animals, rats, spiders? So the staff would have to ping you everytime theres a rat or a spider? And I would have to ask for consent every time I play a hunter or do anything to an animal even if not as gory as a consent scene, thats just PG13 at most. But sexual scenes and torture or extreme gore makes sense and I'm perfectly okay with going ooc to ask consent.

[MatisseOrOtherwise]

Ay I'm pretty sure the OP was a troll, can we please just forget this thread ever happened?
The consent stuff is all fine the way it is right now and has been for 20 years.
More consent checks is silly. Less consent checks is gross. Let's just keep it all smooth and cool & be sure to "ooc consent?" before putting things in secret places, and everyone will be all fine.

[Dar]

This would actually make a good april fools joke. Asking these kind of questions during chargen.  .

[Is Friday]

The reason I create new alt accounts for my clanned PCs is because of other players catering their play in response to knowing stuff about me OOC. I am fully against an automated system which will further segregate the playerbase into those who consent and those who fade. I am always respectful of other people's preference in the game and like to roleplay in 95% of scenes with those who are into super dark shit. I don't want more ways to form meta cliques in the game. I want to play characters motivated by their needs and wants -- to act organically.

[valeria]

I'm very pro CW, pro consent. But I think this would cause more problems than it would solve. The chargen one has already been touched on, and the one where people might forget to note changing preferences. But what about characters who are present that you can't see? The consent OOC gives them a chance to leave even if they don't want to answer. What about having to check consent to torture in a room with 15 people? How is it less immersion breaking to have to check and keep track if 15 preferences than to just ask? What about consent to X with certain people but not with others? I might trust one character to give me a tasteful torture scene, but want some other to just kill me so I don't have to deal with what I perceive as twinkery that I'm already pissed off about. What about "I consent to like  4 nonspecific sex emotes"? Someone could see that I consent to adult RP, but that doesn't mean I want to read a three-line description about the precise sexual geometry the other player has in mind. It's overly granular in one way, but could never be granular enough in another way.

I think the consent rules balance changing situations and needs better than Arm automated command every could.

[ShaLeah]

Been suggested.  For decades. 

[Gentleboy]

Can someone please explain why severe weather would need consent? I'm really confused on why it's on that list.

[kahuna]

Can someone please explain why severe weather would need consent? I'm really confused on why it's on that list.

I pulled most of those suggestions from a D&D checklist, as examples not as a definitive list. It's not about consent and never was, it's a checklist or guideline for what players are or are not comfortable roleplaying. What most people are failing to understand is that this has nothing to do with consent and everything to do with making sure you're not broaching any topics that someone might not be comfortable. I brought 2 new players to the game recently and they've since taken a long absence because of the very issues I previously mentioned which is why I made this thread. Clearly though we won't be seeing this gain any support from the GDB.

[Riev]

I will be flamed for this, however:

Knowing what your triggers are, and demanding to never be exposed to them, are different things.
The consent rule exists so you can put a stop to what is happening, immediately, for any reason. Your scene partner doesn't have to know its traumatic, or because you just don't have time to go through the motions.

I'm sensitive that people have triggers. I've been trained in identifying some of my own. I don't expect anyone to dance on eggshells around me because I might snap. Its on me to work on that.

Outside of that, this would be a massive undertaking that we already have rules for. Most DnD games don't have a blanket "fade" rule.

[kahuna]

This is where my idea came from. I'm a part of a facebook GM group and they posted it.

[Nameless Face]

I can see something like that being useful to a DM setting up a new playgroup or in crafting a scenario or a one-off adventure where he doesn't know the players.

A "what do you like, what should I make" kind of thing.

It just doesn't seem to be helpful for what you are trying to have it do for a pre-existing MUD in an established genre.

[kahuna]

It just doesn't seem to be helpful for what you are trying to have it do for a pre-existing MUD in an established genre.

Just so I understand your position what do you think I am trying to have it do exactly?

[mansa]

I agree with the statements that consent is every changing from one scene to another scene, and from one playtime to another playtime.

I don't think it's like a 'nosave' toggle.




I think it may possibly work if you had to redefine it every time you log into the game, but ....  I'm lazy.

[Lizzie]

I agree with the statements that consent is every changing from one scene to another scene, and from one playtime to another playtime.

I don't think it's like a 'nosave' toggle.




I think it may possibly work if you had to redefine it every time you log into the game, but ....  I'm lazy.

It's even changing from one PC to another. Maybe I just don't like the way certain players roleplay certain types of scenes, and would rather not have to spend an hour watching them type out whatever they're going to type out and coming up with responses to them. Maybe I really LOVE how other people RP certain types of scenes, and would RP it out every time with them.

as for a consent list and what *I* think kahuna is trying to have it do:

The purpose of declaring what you are willing to consent to and what you're not willing to consent to, is to ensure that no one subjects you to the things you're not willing to consent to. Otherwise, why bother having a consent list at all?

I don't think it's necessary, and I think it's way over the top, and in some cases antithetical to the theme of the game. If you aren't willing to consent to seeing people die, don't play Armageddon.

Maybe instead of a consent list, there should be an assumed list in the official docs:

By playing Armageddon, you consent to extreme weather, acrobatics, character death, animal death, blood, the existence of gore and guts, the existence of omnivores, carnivores, and herbivores. You consent to the existence of various gender identities and sexual preferences OF FICTIONAL CHARACTERS, you consent to trees, water, slavery as a general concept, interspecies breeding, the color orange, and the possibility that your FICTIONAL CHARACTER might have to eat a cockroach.

[Nameless Face]

The goal is to prevent people from being offended during roleplay they might not want to be a part of.
<snip>
Trusting players to just police their own roleplay doesn't really work.
<snip>
You could even have the checklist be a standard Q&A during account creation so new players can enter their stuff from the get go.

Its not that you aren't clear.  I just don't agree this suggestion as presented is a positive solution.  It'd be a better tool to help sort out what kind of MUDs or other games are a good fit for you before you start them.

[kahuna]

The goal is to prevent people from being offended during roleplay they might not want to be a part of.
<snip>
Trusting players to just police their own roleplay doesn't really work.
<snip>
You could even have the checklist be a standard Q&A during account creation so new players can enter their stuff from the get go.

Its not that you aren't clear.  I just don't agree this suggestion as presented is a positive solution.  It'd be a better tool to help sort out what kind of MUDs or other games are a good fit for you before you start them.

Right so can you tell me why it's not a positive solution? I am all for having more information about the players I play with. What they want or don't want to see. Makes my life a lot easier if am trying to facilitate something. The MUD operates 24/7, this isn't a tabletop, therefore automated systems such as this are very useful for all my aforementioned reasons.

Still trying to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this information?

[Lizzie]

The goal is to prevent people from being offended during roleplay they might not want to be a part of.
<snip>
Trusting players to just police their own roleplay doesn't really work.
<snip>
You could even have the checklist be a standard Q&A during account creation so new players can enter their stuff from the get go.

Its not that you aren't clear.  I just don't agree this suggestion as presented is a positive solution.  It'd be a better tool to help sort out what kind of MUDs or other games are a good fit for you before you start them.

Right so can you tell me why it's not a positive solution? I am all for having more information about the players I play with. What they want or don't want to see. Makes my life a lot easier if am trying to facilitate something. The MUD operates 24/7, this isn't a tabletop, therefore automated systems such as this are very useful for all my aforementioned reasons.

Still trying to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this information?

Because it makes no sense in the context of the game. You don't know who is in the room with you. There could be invisible PCs, hiding PCs, shadowed PCs, or it could be held in a room where people can watch from another room (such as the arena). You have no way of knowing if those people consent or not, because your character can't see them to assess them for consent options.

If ONE person doesn't want to experience one item on the entire list, and that was the one thing you were planning to do, now you'll have to change your plans to accommodate that ONE person - even though everyone else in the room is fine with it.

In addition, this is supposed to be a harsh brutal world. That is the THEME of the game. You're trying to change the theme by saying "it's harsh, except if you don't want it to be, even if everyone else is fine with it."

[kahuna]

You might want to re-read some of this thread. I never said any of that. Normal consent rules of the game still apply. This would be so people know before hand what people want or don't want to experience. It's simply more information.

People attend the Arena games all the time and no consent is required or asked for at any time so I fail to see how this would change anything there?

People also fail to get consent behind closed doors all the time, especially if there are invisible characters. This command would negate you from seeing invisible or hidden characters, obviously that would be easily abused. I think it is safe to assume that if there are PCs that are not visible you cannot be held accountable for their request for consent.

I'm trying to change the theme of the game by wanting to know more about the players in the room with me and if I offend them with my roleplay? Ok..

[Lizzie]

You might want to re-read some of this thread. I never said any of that. Normal consent rules of the game still apply. This would be so people know before hand what people want or don't want to experience. It's simply more information.

People attend the Arena games all the time and no consent is required or asked for at any time so I fail to see how this would change anything there?

People also fail to get consent behind closed doors all the time, especially if there are invisible characters. This command would negate you from seeing invisible or hidden characters, obviously that would be easily abused. I think it is safe to assume that if there are PCs that are not visible you cannot be held accountable for their request for consent.

I'm trying to change the theme of the game by wanting to know more about the players in the room with me and if I offend them with my roleplay? Ok..

What I want, is to play the game as intended. What I don't want, is to have the added burden of checking to see who likes and doesn't like every little bit of minutae about the IC plots and plans. And if I know that someone doesn't want something - and I do it anyway, whose responsibility is it that they got their feelings hurt? Mine? Or theirs, for choosing to play the game that involves things they might be sensitive to?

The point of "consent" is to give permission for something to happen. If you don't give consent, it means you do not permit it to happen in your presence. If that isn't what you intend by having a consent list, then it's not a consent list. It's a list of likes and dislikes. And honestly - I'm not going to check it if I'm trying to RP a scene.

[JohnMichaelHenry]

Some folks play this game to chop mothafuckaz up with bone swords.
I play this game, cuz I ain't gotta give a shit about anyone's feelings.

plus, everything Lizzie just said

[Veselka]

I play ArmageddonMUD to escape trigger warnings.

I think the consent rules as they stand are just fine.

[Yam]

Fuck no. This is weird.

[Medena]

Right so can you tell me why it's not a positive solution? I am all for having more information about the players I play with. What they want or don't want to see. Makes my life a lot easier if am trying to facilitate something. The MUD operates 24/7, this isn't a tabletop, therefore automated systems such as this are very useful for all my aforementioned reasons.

Still trying to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this information?

I don't generally want to know things about the players I play with.  While I have, over the years, gotten to know a few of the players and made some good friends, for the most part I do not wish to do so.  I especially do not want to know the likes/dislikes/fears/preferences/character -- in short the identity--  of the player behind the PC I am currently playing with.  I do, however, want to get to know all about the PC I am interacting with.

Our existing consent rules work just fine to ensure the players behind the PC's are comfortable with the content presented to them.

[LindseyBalboa]

Right so can you tell me why it's not a positive solution? I am all for having more information about the players I play with. What they want or don't want to see. Makes my life a lot easier if am trying to facilitate something. The MUD operates 24/7, this isn't a tabletop, therefore automated systems such as this are very useful for all my aforementioned reasons.

Still trying to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this information?

... why would you, though? We don't have player 'whois' information, and this is something that would fit in with the sort of game that had that. We don't have tells, or pages, OOC talk is almost non-existent. This "rp preference" sheet of whether someone wants to RP about storms or doesn't like eating animals just doesn't really fit into the theme of this particular game.

[chrisdcoulombe]

Fuck no. This is weird.