The games direction.

[Dresan]

Everyone is welcomed to their opinion.

I dislike threads like this with OOC content, in the same way I dislike OOC general discussion board. To put it politely, too much information about players and their OOC views for me due to this just being a text game.

While browsing through this thread  though what stood out to me is how close-minded and biased people can be in regards to RP in general, especially when it can be interpreted in many ways.

We encounter the same problem with skills. People having different yet still biased close minded opinions when and how a skill should be used and RPed with what flowery emotes.

Unfortunately unlike with discussions regarding RPing skills I have no interest in engaging in OOC fueled discussions within a text game. Sorry 

[Vex]

For the sake of discussion, the complaint was regarding a PC (Bebop's) being codedly subdued and then codedly whipped using a whip object that utilizes a script. The PC performing the whipping and the PC subduing Bebop's PC performed no additional emotes pertaining to the action of the barbed whip (the barbed nature of the whip being described in both the object's sdesc and its mdesc). The complaint was based upon the question: does coded, base gameplay in the game ever require asking consent?

Thank you, for the transparency on this.

AFAIK, I was around for that particular incident, if it's the one I'm thinking. I wouldn't have qualified it as 'torture', per the usual understanding of torture/consent rules.

Excessive and bordering on grief play, but not in the realm of what I'd ever expect/offer consent OOC's over.

[DesertT]

Consent Not Required:
-A tattoo is forced upon your character. (Mutilation is considered the loss of a body part, such as a limb or an ear.)
-You are in a room with another player who is in a state of undress, though no sexual connotations can be discerned. (Certain cultures in game may be more liberal with their view on clothing.)
-You are being whipped with the 'whip' command, but no gruesome or visceral emotes are being emoted. (Command echoes are not considered 'mutilation', and are a part of the game.)

I've whipped a couple of characters before and both were pushing IC issues that definitely warranted worse than a whipping per the docs.  I don't tend towards killing characters.  I'd rather them have an opportunity for additional roleplay and development, maybe even conflict.  So if both characters didn't want whipped, they would've been killed.  End of Storyline.

I'm not into that.

Neither player of the whipped characters stated that they were uncomfortable.  One mocked me OOC'ly for not knowing that you had to have their character subdued.  The other threatened a complaint if I was wrong about quoting the above rules, which can be found on the website or even when you type HELP CONSENT in game, which I noted to both.

So again, neither player said they were uncomfortable, but both were OOC'ly responding with threats that felt more like they were taking it personally that their characters were being whipped.  I didn't feel like getting into an OOC debate about how the docs state after what their characters did, they deserved death, and felt it more important that the others around be witness and see a punishment dealt out that wasn't death.

End result.  One left.  One stayed.  And surprisingly, the one who threatened to report ended up staying and IC'ly, had a change in attitude.

If you're going to be in an organization with posted rules about IC play and you decide to break those rules, expect IC repercussions.  And when the leader decides to lessen the punishment to whipping instead of death, ending all your plots and story lines (unless of course you wanted to play a martyr), then maybe a different response is warranted?

"Hey, I'm going to break a few rules that the docs say warrant death for this clan, then when you decide to whip my character instead of killing them, I'm going to file a complaint against you."

[Vex]

I've never been in a scene where a player is upset with the proceedings, and I felt the need to press it to the hilt to maximize their displeasure. I'd rather kill the character, than force a scene that is going to risk their leaving the game. It isn't difficult to read the flow of text, or how the character is responding. If they're losing it to such a degree, they're throwing out upset ooc comments? The integrity of the scene, is probably going to be the least of my concerns.

But, hey, you do you.

[Lotion]

The thing about whipping is even if the other players only use coded functions to make the server send the whipping echoes to your screen you as a player are still expected to roleplay a character who has just been whipped which is an equivalent violation of the player's agency to non-consensual IC torture. I'm not sure if there have ever been cases of a PC being whipped and then deleted by staff because they did not adequately RP as a recent victim of extremely painful flagellation but it's not something I find unimaginable.

[Hauwke]

Using the OOC command to tell a player that them that they are going too far is acceptable.

Using the OOC command to tell a player you are going to complaint them without first trying to work it out with them is at best naive and unaware, and at worst and far more likely an attempt at posturing to get a more favorable outcome.

The thing about whipping is even if the other players only use coded functions to make the server send the whipping echoes to your screen you as a player are still expected to roleplay a character who has just been whipped which is an equivalent violation of the player's agency to non-consensual IC torture. I'm not sure if there have ever been cases of a PC being whipped and then deleted by staff because they did not adequately RP as a recent victim of extremely painful flagellation but it's not something I find unimaginable.

As far as this goes, the same could be said of anyone who uses kick or bash or attack. Striking someone in the head results in a cut to the head. The exact same as a whip to the back results in a cut to the back. Why is there any distinction at all? Your PC is being hit with a weapon, there is no reason to be upset by it.

[HeeBeeGB]

I've played Byn Sergeants before who's recourse is either execution or whipping. I think the situation is pretty cut and dry.

Whipping typically requires some OOC finagling -- The person needs to not be wearing a backpack, be subdued, and otherwise 'submit to whipping'. It falls in line that OOC consent to coded whipping can be obtained, much in the way that non-coded torture must be consented to. If the disagreeing party (the one to be whipped) does not give consent to being whipped, they should then be killed, just as is the case with torture RP/consent.

The rule simply needs to be altered to include 'coded torture' in the same way 'non-coded torture' is considered.

Similarly, using OOC to threaten to complain against another PC to Staff is not acceptable behavior, regardless of the circumstance. You can file a player complaint at any time, for any reason, valid or not. There is no need to also break the rules of OOC in the game to threaten other players with that assertion. OOC should be used sparingly, most often for clarification of event times, and informing another player of what actions to take to join a clan forum. That's it.

[Lotion]

Isn't there something called the nursery or cuddler that also have coded torture echoes?

[HeeBeeGB]

Isn't there something called the nursery or cuddler that also have coded torture echoes?

Sure, there are other forms of 'coded death or torture' that could similarly ask for OOC consent before using. There is the executioner (Templar, in that case). They can ask OOC for consent to kill them using the Nursery or the Cuddler. If the offended party (the victim) decides they would rather be unceremoniously killed by half giant NPCs, I would say grant them the unimaginative death they desire.

[Kankfly]

I don't think a player should lose their character if they don't consent to a particular scene, unless there are absolutely no alternative and the IC consequences warrant a PC death. There's also alternative methods of creative punishments that can be vetted out to the PC in question, without the PC dying. I am speaking as someone who's also played a Byn Sergeant, and has been faced with scenarios where a PC has to be punished ICly. I don't think there's anyone that said no to a whipping, but there's also been other forms of punishment that isn't just execution or the whip (or even mutilation).

[HeeBeeGB]

I don't think a player should lose their character if they don't consent to a particular scene, unless there are absolutely no alternative and the IC consequences warrant a PC death. There's also alternative methods of creative punishments that can be vetted out to the PC in question, without the PC dying. I am speaking as someone who's also played a Byn Sergeant, and has been faced with scenarios where a PC has to be punished ICly. I don't think there's anyone that said no to a whipping, but there's also been other forms of punishment that isn't just execution or the whip (or even mutilation).

Right I guess I'm saying if it's between punishment V death, it's entirely up to the victim player to decide if they want to go through with the coded torture/punishment, or death. If they decide they'd rather choose death, that's up to them. When I'm in a position of power like that, I have no qualms honoring their wish. The same could be said of antagonistic conflicts between Raider V Victim. If they choose the way of pain/death, that's usually up to the victim, not the Raider.

There are obviously other solutions -- exile/banishment, kicking out of a clan, stripping them naked (though in this line of thinking, that might require consent too). When someone's done Enough Bad for either maiming or death, well. I feel it's up to the rules to decide what is kosher -- If it requires OOC consent, that should obviously be obtained. If it doesn't (as is currently with whipping, the Cuddler, the Nursery, or even a Wezer Dome), then I suppose either the rule should be changed, or we should abide by it.

[BadSkeelz]

I don't think a player should lose their character if they don't consent to a particular scene, unless there are absolutely no alternative and the IC consequences warrant a PC death. There's also alternative methods of creative punishments that can be vetted out to the PC in question, without the PC dying. I am speaking as someone who's also played a Byn Sergeant, and has been faced with scenarios where a PC has to be punished ICly. I don't think there's anyone that said no to a whipping, but there's also been other forms of punishment that isn't just execution or the whip (or even mutilation).

Disagree, especially where torture is concerned. If my PC has to torture yours, your PC has done something to warrant it. Refusal of consent makes me question what their reaction after the torture will be, so for safety's sake best just to kill your PC and then arrange your corpse in to a suitable example.

[Vex]

Refusal of consent makes me question what their reaction after the torture will be, so for safety's sake best just to kill your PC and then arrange your corpse in to a suitable example.

You make it sounds like, people who refuse to engaging in graphic torture scenes, are dodgy players, or something.

[BadSkeelz]

I assume all players are dodgy players.

[BadSkeelz]

And while I can't speak for why others do it, my PCs have only ever resorted to torture (or discipline, which is the source of the complaint in this thread) when other PCs have required correcting. If I'm torturing your PC, your PC has done something to earn it. I'm usually torturing you for information, to send a message to you and your friends, or to punish you for a transgression without having to resort to killing your PC.

[Rathustra]

My post has prompted several replies with a few hypothetical scenarios so I'd like to quickly address them:

~ Death is always an option when it comes to torture. Though whipping does not fall under torture insofar as consent is required  - there is the following caveat in 'help consent':

Code Select Expand


   Armageddon is a game with some mature themes, and included among those are things that some players may find more or less appealing to play out for any number of reasons. If you find yourself in a situation that does not go against the rules listed above, though you would rather not play in that situation you still have a recourse available to you: You may WISH ALL to request direct assistance from staff (please provide applicable information and see HELP WISH). When possible we will offer an avenue out of the scene, and when not we will offer a swift end to your PC. (In situations that call for a swift end.) None of this will be done without confirmation from you, the player, first.


Though this does require staff to be present and able to respond (not guaranteed). Staff also reserve the right for the resolution to be simply death, storage, or staff puppet your PC until such a time as they are stored post-scene. This alternative is here to avoid you playing through something you don't want to - it isn't there to invalidate the game world.

~ If you are whipped you are expected to RP appropriately - in just the same way you are expected to RP in response to other coded and uncoded parts of the world. If poisoned you cannot RP that you are not poisoned. If close to death, you should not RP being hale and at full physical capacity. Consent rules are not in place to protect player agency from the game - but from the RP of other players  when deemed graphic or gratuitous. A PC's response to being whipped can be as graphical as they like - but their PC has still been whipped.

~ Using OOC to ask someone to tone things down is acceptable - especially if the scene is breaking the rules on consent. When these rules aren't being broken, it falls to individual players to choose whether to respond to such an OOC message. As I said in my last post, consent is sometimes requested for things like whipping as a courtesy - this is fine and I think its good practice to treat other players kindly, even if you horribly abuse their PCs.

~ Using OOC to threaten people is not acceptable. Just file the complaint - but be willing to hear out staff's rationale either way. If you feel consent has been broken, using OOC to shut down the scene is acceptable. But so is wishing up for assistance.  We are not going to alter the rules on consent to cover coded aspects of the game.

~ Some torture devices in-game can only be operated by PCs of certain clans and those clans have documentation on their use. 'The Cuddler', for example, requires consent as it codedly cripples - but not to death - a PC. If a PC does not consent to the Cuddler, it cannot be used.

~ There are a legitimate discussions around creative alternatives to murdering PCs as a punishment. Exile (with or without gear), being attacked to unconsciousness and dumped somewhere, etc. are all good examples. However, whipping is also an example - as is other corporal punishment such as being severely beaten. In a situation where physical torture must be consented to, the help file states that the victim can make no negotiations over alternative punishments. It falls to the PC doling out the punishment to decide how to act. But also how graphic and gratuitous to be.

~ Consent is not required to strip another PC. Consent is required to emote around that nudity in an adult way: being nude is not inherently sexual, however references to genitals and secondary sexual characteristics are inexorably tied to adult content. In a scenario where a PC was being stripped and thrown in the desert, such a scene could be portrayed in a non-graphic, non-gratuitous way and thus doesn't require consent.

---

All in all, the rules around consent exist to help balance a player's ability to avoid content produced by other humans (staff or PCs - you can refuse to consent to torture by a staff-animated NPC just as much as a PC) that can vary wildly in graphic content against the theme of the world: a violent, dystopian, post-apocalyptic material and psychological wasteland. Armageddon is not a MUSH: there is no expectation of PC sovereignty over what they experience, what scenes they encounter and how the world treats them - these things are mediated by coded means, augmented through RP. There are areas of the game where there are few coded features and more activity is mediated through RP - such as social interactions - so it is here that the consent rules naturally become more important. However at the end of the day you are expected to be willing to experience all the possible coded content of Armageddon when you log in and that includes being forcibly restrained and whipped. Staff will strive to ensure that the coded content avoids reveling in gore or being graphic for the sake of shocking - and if that falls short, a staff complaint will prompt a review. However, nasty things can and will happen to PCs.

The caveat to consent mentioned above - where you can wish up to extricate you (the player) from a situation exists as a release valve to this - but it is unreliable and has the potential to be fatal for a character. Again - this is an OOC solution to an OOC situation - where a player wishes to disengage from a situation their PC cannot.

[Hauwke]

I'd like to point out that not giving consent to torture, does not nullify the  torture, it removes the need to RP the process of the actual torture.

[Lizzie]

Isn't there something called the nursery or cuddler that also have coded torture echoes?

Sure, there are other forms of 'coded death or torture' that could similarly ask for OOC consent before using. There is the executioner (Templar, in that case). They can ask OOC for consent to kill them using the Nursery or the Cuddler. If the offended party (the victim) decides they would rather be unceremoniously killed by half giant NPCs, I would say grant them the unimaginative death they desire.

The problem with requiring consent for that, is that if it's a newish player, or one who has simply never seen either of these things in action, they'd probably want an ooc explanation of what the thing is and what it does to the character. In other words - it would stop all roleplay while an OOC explanation and possibly give-and-take conversation happens.

I'm personally not a fan of the cudder or of the nursery. But then I also quit out during an arena exhibition when a quirri or rantarri was set on fire and we had to watch the coded echoes of its thrashing an caterwauling in agony. I know MY limits. I had nightmares about that for a week. I still don't feel the game should change to accommodate MY sensitivities.  I just step aside and let those things happen while I'm "off-camera", and return when those things have finished. Problem solved.

[Harmless]

Some comments:

Someone in this chaotic thread posted that sexual torture was outright banned. This kind of upsets me because I kind of always hoped I might be able to one day give consent to having a character being sexually tortured and now I won't be able to. I have no problem with the rape ban because rape is something that is by definition non consensual. But people in RL consent to sexual torture all the time. For a RL media reference to how this is possible, see the classic Japanese movie "Ichi the Killer."

Also, I want to say I don't read every post here but I took note of Rathustra's explanations and I am happy he explained things thoroughly and I accept all his explanations, they make sense. Yeah, if all that was done to me was a non consenting use of the whip object I wouldn't have thought to file a complaint either. That wasn't clear in the OP.

Oh and sometimes I do what was just said and step away from scenes too. I didn't want a lot of detail once about dying to the cuddler either so I ooced that I just wanted a quick coded result and that is what was given to me. I ooced I needed to break from a different execution scene once also when I felt my personal anxiety go up and then I came back and finished the scene thankfully and I felt fine. The game gets very real and players I find are very understanding of that. It is a mature environment.

I do think being of age of legal consent in your area should be required to play the game for these reasons. I would hate to find out I was enjoying some mature RP and my partner for the scene was a minor. A lot of players maintain this and I do feel it should be in the documentation.

[tapas]

If someone kills a player for not consenting to torture, I think that's grounds for a player complaint.

[mansa]

If someone kills a player for not consenting to torture, I think that's grounds for a player complaint.

From the consent helpfile:

If someone is instigating roleplay that makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop. If they continue despite being told to stop, please wish up. This rule is not meant to be abused in order to allow characters to escape the consequences. Perhaps a good analogy is the movie ratings system: some people may wish to see the details acted out in a way which would deserve an R rating while another, younger player might prefer that the details be communicated in an OOC fashion and left offstage.
...

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.

...

Armageddon is a game with some mature themes, and included among those are things that some players may find more or less appealing to play out for any number of reasons. If you find yourself in a situation that does not go against the rules listed above, though you would rather not play in that situation you still have a recourse available to you: You may WISH ALL to request direct assistance from staff (please provide applicable information and see HELP WISH). When possible we will offer an avenue out of the scene, and when not we will offer a swift end to your PC. (In situations that call for a swift end.) None of this will be done without confirmation from you, the player, first.



From the rules helpfile:
You must ask for consent from all visible players in the room before pursuing sexual or torture scenes. There is no such thing as implied consent from past consent grants - you must ask every time. If someone does not give consent, or requests that the scene "fade to black" or "FTB", you must honor that. If you engage in a graphic scene that another player did not consent to, your character will be stored and karma reduced, and your account will be banned for a month at the first occurrence, and your account will be banned permanently on the second occurrence.




On one hand, you have the consent helpfile saying that you can't barter or request another type of punishment in a torture situation.

On the other hand, you have the same helpfile saying the staff will allow options to exit the scene.


In my opinion, if someone says "stop" the gameplay should immediately be paused.  Someone should wish up and request an immortal to observe / mediate. 
Perhaps it could even be suggested that if you're about to torture another character you should wish up beforehand, much like the suggestion when you're about to kill another character.

In my opinion, Killing a character for not wanting to play out a scene isn't breaking the rules.  If I was in control of a torture situation, and someone said "stop", I'd give that player options for what to do next, and killing them would be one of them.

[Heade]

On one hand, you have the consent helpfile saying that you can't barter or request another type of punishment in a torture situation.

On the other hand, you have the same helpfile saying the staff will allow options to exit the scene.

I think Rath addressed what they mean by that. They're not talking about giving the character an option to exit the scene, but only the player.

They could do this through means like staff puppeting the character until the scene is over and the character can be stored. The consent rules aren't there to prevent the character from going through something the player doesn't want them to go through. It's just to prevent the player from having to witness it/play through it, as Rath said.

[Malken]

That bahamet npc that is about to gore me for 3/4 of my health in one shot should ask me for consent first, I don't want to have to play a crippling wound for a week after that.

[FamousAmos]

As a Templar, before a punishing scene, I'd ask OOCly for consent. I'd say 90% of consent was given. The other ones we just FTB and assumed it happened (and in case of death, I'd just wish up and staff would beep the PC instantly). Its just a little awkward when you have gathered some PC's for a public punishing/torturing scene (in order to make things happen and interesting for players) and its about to  start off and then we FTB cause we respect the target's wishes.

And I'm going to be really frank here, probably an unpopular opinion: At times, when the above FTB happened, I did think to myself: Why do you play this game, this role, this PC, knowing that there are certain consequences for that particular action, and do not consent to this? It felt, partially, as if the player tried to save the PC's name and pretend it didn't happen at all.

[Khorm]

And I'm going to be really frank here, probably an unpopular opinion: At times, when the above FTB happened, I did think to myself: Why do you play this game, this role, this PC, knowing that there are certain consequences for that particular action, and do not consent to this? It felt, partially, as if the player tried to save the PC's name and pretend it didn't happen at all.

i've ftb a torture scene and I'd ftb torture scenes in the future. i ftb sexy time too. i feel like I have enough stress or garbage in my real life that i don't need extreme ends of the spectrum, like passion or phsycial / mental anguish to enter the equation while i'm playing a game. it's not interesting to me and i have an extremely hard time playing it out. it's a shitload to process and react to and it can take a very long time for me to come up with appropriate responses. so i don't do it.

if my character is a shithead or fucked up or just got caught - great - I'm not protective of the character.. I inflicted that on them. I'm protective of my time and mental energy.