Armageddon General Discussion Board

Should you OOC for consent if you're going to talk dirty to someone but not emote dirty to them?

Decent question, actually. I say yes. Because whats the difference between;

emote fucks you.

and

say "I'm going to spin you around and fuck you right up the asshole and you'll be thrashing and love it. I'll spit on my dick and glide right into that puckered hole of drov and you'll cry for more."

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on December 15, 2014, 07:13:47 PM
Decent question, actually. I say yes. Because whats the difference between;

emote fucks you.

and

say "I'm going to spin you around and fuck you right up the asshole and you'll be thrashing and love it. I'll spit on my dick and glide right into that puckered hole of drov and you'll cry for more."

OMG that was YOU?

I think anything of a graphic sexual nature should require consent.

Quote from: Molten Heart on December 15, 2014, 07:23:34 PM
I think anything of a graphic sexual nature should require consent.

What in RL would be considered sexual harassment, if unwanted, I -personally- do not see a need to ask for consent: flirting, commenting on someone's sexual appeal (or lack there of), hugging, kissing, "casual" suggestive touches (such as brushing your hand over someones hand/arm/leg/etc.)

Anything that IRL could be considered sexual assault, if unwanted, needs consent: Feeling someone up under or through their clothing, penetration, reaching under someone's clothing.
Verbally doing anything in list #2 should also only follow consent, because, after all, this is a -verbal- game, and there is no OOC difference to the player's exposure, and consent is solely an OOC consideration.

My Kadian got an account note for fondling his employee's tits once, so I would imagine yes.

Note: I voted yes - consent needed for "sexy-time" talk.

The CONSENT helpfile already answers this doesn't it?

Quote
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 off stage.

I always just ask for consent to 18+ RP.

I suppose if you're graphic, sure.  But if it's just 'oh man I'd totes bend you over that table,' I don't think so.

Interesting question. I don't really talk dirty on my characters so I have little personal experience to draw on... but if it's something that I think might be graphic and wouldn't want said in a PG-13 film, I'll probably ask for consent.


Alternatively, I can take the Patton Oswalt "clean filth" route (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuK9IUK5I5I) (NSFW)

Okay, so if people said yes to this... Would you need to OOC for consent before stripping for ginka wrestling?

Not unless you were extremely graphic about it

Quote from: slvrmoontiger on December 15, 2014, 10:49:05 PM
Okay, so if people said yes to this... Would you need to OOC for consent before stripping for ginka wrestling?

You don't need OOC consenet for nudity, otherwise we'd be breaking that rule every time we took off our pants. You do need ooc consent to roleplay doing the helicopter with your dick.

Quote from: slvrmoontiger on December 15, 2014, 10:49:05 PM
Okay, so if people said yes to this... Would you need to OOC for consent before stripping for ginka wrestling?

OOC: consent for titty-twister?

Implement Shaleah's suggestion that consent status be a flag you can check on a player so that interrupting with OOC isn't required. I've been in her camp on this issue for a while.

That sounds like a bad idea for some IC and OOC reasons.

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 16, 2014, 12:31:01 AM
That sounds like a bad idea for some IC and OOC reasons.

YEah, there was a long thread about that idea and some people are really against it -- thinking it would lead to discrimination in RP and stuff -- but I still think it's a good idea. ANyway, pretty sure we're sticking with OOC, which means scenes will have to be interrupted by OOC, and at varying points, with a lot of grey area of when to do it. Something I'm not a fan of, but *shrug*

emote lifts his eyebrows suggestively, in an obvious request for consent.

George costanza backs away with wide open eyes, declining consent.

Account notes or OOC consent for  feeling up Kadian tits feels a bit excessive.
I would not have liked ooc to intrude on the scene below.
Do you think this is in the grey area? Or is it well in the clear?





Chuckling darkly as he studies you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak says to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Yeh dun' listen to well, do yeh, rat? No wonder yeh standin' out so."

The 'rinth rat's shoulders slump.

In a thin voice, you ask, in sirihish:
     "How do you mean, Mister?"

Darkly staring upon you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak says to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Yeh goin' teh be eatin' tha' shit, one handful, now."

The 'rinth rat reaches slowly into your sack.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak gets his smelly pile of allanaki coins from his smelly shabby basket.

You get your smelly fist-sized ball of dung from your smelly sturdy canvas sack.

The 'rinth rat looks up , watching the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak.

Casually regarding the many coins in his hands, the stench almost unbearable, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak asks you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Fer fuck's sake.. rat, at least be keepin' yeh coins clean, aye?"

Shoving it in, you eat your smelly fist-sized ball of dung.

Snickering as he looks to you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak asks you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Tha' tastin' alright there?"

The 'rinth rat chokes and swallows.
You nod.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak tosses his smelly shabby basket at your feet, wandering behind you and at a -very- close distance.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak drops a smelly shabby basket.

You think:
     "it was true what they say."

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak puts his pile of allanaki coins into his tightly-woven sash of dark sandcloth.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak looks down at you.

Looking at the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, you pick up a smelly shabby basket.

The 'rinth rat stays half crouched.

Leaning close to your ear from behind, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Wha's yer name?"

In a whisper, you say, in sirihish:
     "rat"

At first his gloved hands coming to the waist, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak slips them next along your backside with a ginger touch, before slipping one hand into a pocket of your pants.

Slipping them into a pocket, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak gives you 128 coins.

The 'rinth rat blinks and grins uncertainly.

You say to the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, in sirihish:
     "I know Mr Doshek."

Dark, soft and warm on the back of your neck, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Ain' tha' nice. Now whatcha goin' teh be doin' fer me, rat?"

You ask the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, in sirihish:
     "Can keep my eyes open..in the stables like?"

Discreetly, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
     "Somethin' like tha'. Run off, clean yeh mouth fer teh next time, yeh goin' be suckin' meh ......."


I don't think you need to ask consent for getting naked, especially for ginka sauce wrestling.

I think you do need to ask consent if you start talking dirty about people's bewbs and dicks and toms and janes and stones and ogling and/or groping, or graphically talking about their man and woman bits.

Quote from: bracken on December 16, 2014, 03:48:07 AM
Account notes or OOC consent for  feeling up Kadian tits feels a bit excessive.
I would not have liked ooc to intrude on the scene below.
Do you think this is in the grey area? Or is it well in the clear?

Code Select Expand




Chuckling darkly as he studies you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak says to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Yeh dun' listen to well, do yeh, rat? No wonder yeh standin' out so."

The 'rinth rat's shoulders slump.

In a thin voice, you ask, in sirihish:
    "How do you mean, Mister?"

Darkly staring upon you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak says to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Yeh goin' teh be eatin' tha' shit, one handful, now."

The 'rinth rat reaches slowly into your sack.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak gets his smelly pile of allanaki coins from his smelly shabby basket.

You get your smelly fist-sized ball of dung from your smelly sturdy canvas sack.

The 'rinth rat looks up , watching the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak.

Casually regarding the many coins in his hands, the stench almost unbearable, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak asks you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Fer fuck's sake.. rat, at least be keepin' yeh coins clean, aye?"

Shoving it in, you eat your smelly fist-sized ball of dung.

Snickering as he looks to you, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak asks you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Tha' tastin' alright there?"

The 'rinth rat chokes and swallows.
You nod.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak tosses his smelly shabby basket at your feet, wandering behind you and at a -very- close distance.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak drops a smelly shabby basket.

You think:
    "it was true what they say."

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak puts his pile of allanaki coins into his tightly-woven sash of dark sandcloth.

The tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak looks down at you.

Looking at the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, you pick up a smelly shabby basket.

The 'rinth rat stays half crouched.

Leaning close to your ear from behind, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Wha's yer name?"

In a whisper, you say, in sirihish:
    "rat"

At first his gloved hands coming to the waist, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak slips them next along your backside with a ginger touch, before slipping one hand into a pocket of your pants.

Slipping them into a pocket, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak gives you 128 coins.

The 'rinth rat blinks and grins uncertainly.

You say to the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, in sirihish:
    "I know Mr Doshek."

Dark, soft and warm on the back of your neck, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Ain' tha' nice. Now whatcha goin' teh be doin' fer me, rat?"

You ask the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak, in sirihish:
    "Can keep my eyes open..in the stables like?"

Discreetly, the tall figure in a dusty black, hooded militia dustcloak whispers to you, in southern-accented sirihish:
    "Somethin' like tha'. Run off, clean yeh mouth fer teh next time, yeh goin' be suckin' meh ......."


Should've asked consent.

See the help file.

And no, I don't think a note is excessive for groping without asking for consent. It isn't a mood-breaker, or a scene-killer. Just ask for consent, they'll probably say yes anyways.

... depends, really. In most cases, I'd say no, but again, depends on how graphic you're getting. Otherwise I'd have to OOC for consent every ten minutes or so.

What freaks me out is when people consent to "anything". It makes me want to .... Nevermind.

Quote from: Is Friday on December 16, 2014, 10:48:40 AM
What freaks me out is when people consent to "anything". It makes me want to .... Nevermind.

Some of us breeds prefer not knowing if a scene is going to proceed into sex, torture, or maiming.

The consent rule is not in place to protect you from dirty language.

This is an adult game.

If you can't handle dirty language, this game isn't for you.

It is obvious what the consent rule is for. It isn't to protect you from seeing the word, "Fuck", and it isn't so that staff will have to answer fifteen complaints a week about someone using, "bad words I had to see".

This is an adult game. The only reason rape isn't even in the game anymore is because people kept complaining about it to the point it was creating a ton of work for staff to handle the complaints.

Foul language complaints and "dirty talk" complaints are so absurd as to garner at best an eye roll from me.

Quote from: Desertman on December 16, 2014, 12:43:27 PM
The consent rule is not in place to protect you from dirty language.

This is an adult game.

If you can't handle dirty language, this game isn't for you.

It is obvious what the consent rule is for. It isn't to protect you from seeing the word, "Fuck", and it isn't so that staff will have to answer fifteen complaints a week about someone using, "bad words I had to see".

This is an adult game. The only reason rape isn't even in the game anymore is because people kept complaining about it to the point it was creating a ton of work for staff to handle the complaints.

Foul language complaints and "dirty talk" complaints are so absurd as to garner at best an eye roll from me.

/me agrees

Quote from: Desertman on December 16, 2014, 12:43:27 PM
The consent rule is not in place to protect you from dirty language.

This is an adult game.

If you can't handle dirty language, this game isn't for you.

It is obvious what the consent rule is for. It isn't to protect you from seeing the word, "Fuck", and it isn't so that staff will have to answer fifteen complaints a week about someone using, "bad words I had to see".

This is an adult game. The only reason rape isn't even in the game anymore is because people kept complaining about it to the point it was creating a ton of work for staff to handle the complaints.

Foul language complaints and "dirty talk" complaints are so absurd as to garner at best an eye roll from me.

I dunno.  I'm under the impression < 18 year olds play, and there's no "must be over 18" warning / statement on chargen.  I personally just prefer to think in terms of the ratings system for Hollywood movies, and I'll usually just ask "consent to 18+ rp" if the talk gets to the point where it would be rated R.

I also like to get the ooc consent out early, because it makes me laugh sometimes how people react to it.  For instance, sitting having tea talking about the weather, he's totally playing it cool, then I'll whip out the "ooc consent 18+ rp", and he'll suddenly just drop the small talk and be like: shit, she's DTF, "consent granted", then I'll fade.  Muhaha.

I'm fine with people asking for consent if they feel they want to for personal reasons. Doesn't bother me at all. I just don't want to see a rule implemented about it.

In a game where the only medium is text, I don't really see any difference between ICly describing the way you're going to fuck someone and emoting how you're going to fuck someone.

The problem here is involving another person. If you're talking about an vNPC you just fucked, go ham. If you're creepily describing the way you're about to fill someones love-canal with giggle-cream, you should probably ask for consent.

Quote from: RogueGunslingerIn a game where the only medium is text, I don't really see any difference between ICly describing the way you're going to fuck someone and emoting how you're going to fuck someone.

I see what you mean, but there is a difference, not in how "graphic" it is, but in how much of a violation it is. If you sex someone up without OOC consent, you're forcing them to play the sexual situation and the aftermath. It's way more of a violation.

It's like power-emoting; there's a big difference between saying "I'm going to slap you" and pulling an "emote slaps you, causing you to double over in agony!"

Also, if you feel someone is crossing a line or about to, OOC to let them know or leave.
Don't just sit there and watch the scene only to file a player complaint later on. That's just bad form.
Following that advice, I don't see how consent complaints even happen. 

If someone is told to drop a scene (assuming it actually falls within the purview of the consent rules) and doesn't, that's just fucked up, and they should probably be permabanned.

With the abolishion of rape plots, does staff ever consent violation complaints?

Quote from: Is Friday on December 16, 2014, 10:48:40 AM
What freaks me out is when people consent to "anything". It makes me want to .... Nevermind.

Consent to spooning only.

I agree with DMan... Changing it to add in flirting and dirty language will only put staff back into the position of being massively overwhelmed with stupid complaints, when they could be doing better things with their time.

Lame.  Take care of yourself.   What do you do irl if someone is a creeper?

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 21, 2014, 04:33:19 AM
Lame.  Take care of yourself.   What do you do irl if someone is a creeper?

Chop the motherfucker up with a steel sword?

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 21, 2014, 03:50:23 PM

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 21, 2014, 04:33:19 AM
Lame.  Take care of yourself.   What do you do irl if someone is a creeper?

Chop the motherfucker up with a steel sword?

Someone gets creepy with me? Hey, that's -my- game! It's on, fucker!

I've seriously had some big, scary dude with prison tattoos clawing at my passenger side door begging me to stop the car before and let him out, after he continued to touch me and make advances at me after I politely informed him, numerous times, that I wasn't interested, although I did thank him for the compliments. Ok, want to get creepy with me, now it's my move. I guess, alternately, I could have just stopped giving creepy people rides home, but then, nobody else would have, and they were creating a disturbance and the whole situation was just unhealthy for everyone, and someone would have called the cops and someone would have gotten fucked over. Nope, not if I can help it.

Quote from: Fujikoma on December 21, 2014, 04:08:21 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 21, 2014, 03:50:23 PM

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 21, 2014, 04:33:19 AM
Lame.  Take care of yourself.   What do you do irl if someone is a creeper?

Chop the motherfucker up with a steel sword?

Someone gets creepy with me? Hey, that's -my- game! It's on, fucker!

I've seriously had some big, scary dude with prison tattoos clawing at my passenger side door begging me to stop the car before and let him out, after he continued to touch me and make advances at me after I politely informed him, numerous times, that I wasn't interested, although I did thank him for the compliments. Ok, want to get creepy with me, now it's my move. I guess, alternately, I could have just stopped giving creepy people rides home, but then, nobody else would have, and they were creating a disturbance and the whole situation was just unhealthy for everyone, and someone would have called the cops and someone would have gotten fucked over. Nope, not if I can help it.

What?

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 21, 2014, 05:00:54 PM
What?

Oh, that's what I do IRL, luckily it doesn't involve hacking people up with a steel sword, and leaves the other person with some knowledge of what it's like to be creeped out, if they've never experienced it before. Not saying anything else, trade secrets.

Can we stay on topic?

You don't need consent if you aren't power emoting or saying you are gonna rape them.

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 21, 2014, 11:51:07 PM
Can we stay on topic?

Ok...

I pre-mudsex dirty talked your mom.

Fuji really likes to share. Kinda makes it hard to talk with him at times but it's great that you can share anything you want in return.  ;)

Quote from: Harmless on December 22, 2014, 05:01:05 AM
Fuji really likes to share. Kinda makes it hard to talk with him at times but it's great that you can share anything you want in return.  ;)

LMFAO

I'd try to find some way to deny that, but, na, too tired to think up a clever lie.

As resident expert (yeah, I went there, let the mudsex0r jokes begin) I prefer to ask consent once there is dirty talk started and returned a few times. Hey you look sexy in that kalasiri is wayway different than telling someone an x rated version of what you'll do once that kalasiri is off.

If there is flirting/innuendo going on at some point it crosses into the next level. Consent should be asked. When is entirely up to personal comfort levels. 

The consent rule exists to prevent people from having to roleplay out things happening to their characters and the after affects of those events. The two things included in this category are sexual RP and torture RP.

If we want to now constitute having to hear bad language as "happening" to our characters, where does that end? Will we then slip into a consent rule being put in place if someone tells us how they are going to torture us?

What is the difference if this is the new precedent being established for the reason for "consent"?

How is....

"Oh yeah baby, I can't wait to bend you over and blah blah blah blah my man parts and your girl parts and blah blah blah eat my man mustard."

Different from...

"If you don't turn over the name of the killer, I am going to use my sword to cut your fingers off, one by one, while laughing while you scream in horrible agony. I will break your legs with my mace, and cut off your nose, and then let you live with the scarring and go through life as a freak. Now, we can do this the easy way, or the hard way.".

Should I have to ask for consent to talk to someone about torturing them if I have to ask for consent to talk to them about banging them?

If the idea is, "People shouldn't have to even hear about these sorts of things in detail without consent.", and the two things we have consent for are sexual RP and torture RP, then it HAS to apply to talking to them about torture and unwanted physical harm as well. You can't really justify "protecting" people from one without the other. Is torture somehow less mentally scarring than sexual interactions? Who makes that call? If someone does want to make that call, I would love to hear their reasoning. I will argue that torture is worse than being told someone is going to slip you the ole' tandu sausage, but suddenly I need consent to talk to them about sexual things but not about digging their eyeballs out with a granite spoon?

That is not the Armageddon I want to play.

I'd like to make people ICly uncomfortable, rather than OOCly comfortable.

Asking for consent doesn't ruin anything. It's making sure the other party(parties) are interested in the line of RP you are pursuing OOCly.

It's a personal preference thing -- It seems you think the game is being ruined by OOC sensibilities and politeness. I'm not advocating a softer game by any means, just one where we acknowledge there is a player on the other end of those PCs who may not to hear how you are going to stab their body with your dick and climb all up in that ass.

Torture is not likely something that people who play Armageddon have been through/endured (though there are probably exceptions to this). Sexual abuse, on the other hand, is likely much more prevalent, and engaging in dirty talk may not be something people are interested in having slapped at them.

I think there are exceptions that can be made, rather than thinking the consent rule is going to somehow change. If someone OOCs that they aren't interested, perhaps it shouldn't be pursued, but I also don't think we should be stopping every 5 seconds and asking for consent.

If you're OOC uncomfortable with my PC, probably ought to find somewhere else to go until they leave. Won't be long before my PC gets run off anyway. Things that upset me, put me at a disadvantage, make me uncomfortable are still done and on the rare occasion I submit a complaint I'm told to "get over it and play the damn game", which I would consider sound advice (must have misread the quickstart guide, I keep looking for my mistake but I don't see it, is why I submitted an idea for a helpfile on "gender" spelling out just how serious gender equality is, but people simply pay it lip service and turn around and do something else). If you can't hack it, don't thrust yourself in the middle of it. No one cares about my sensibilities, obviously, so why should I care about anyone else's? I agree with Dman, also.

And what Shaleah says seems like generally a good idea, may wish to just get it out of the way early, and I think it's an excellent way to approach the situation, and seems reasonable and moderate, yet, don't think it should be a -rule-. Wasn't all that long ago that rape plotlines were banned, to those who think it should be a rule to ask for consent before simply engaging in slightly graphic conversation or dropping euphemisms, please don't justify the slippery slope argument others warned about as it was discussed immediately after the banning... also, I don't want to have to ask consent every time I stumble into a conversation because I have no idea what my PC might say in the middle of it.

Quote from: Down Under on December 22, 2014, 12:57:57 PM
I'd like to make people ICly uncomfortable, rather than OOCly comfortable.

Asking for consent doesn't ruin anything. It's making sure the other party(parties) are interested in the line of RP you are pursuing OOCly.

It's a personal preference thing -- It seems you think the game is being ruined by OOC sensibilities and politeness. I'm not advocating a softer game by any means, just one where we acknowledge there is a player on the other end of those PCs who may not to hear how you are going to stab their body with your dick and climb all up in that ass.

Torture is not likely something that people who play Armageddon have been through/endured (though there are probably exceptions to this). Sexual abuse, on the other hand, is likely much more prevalent, and engaging in dirty talk may not be something people are interested in having slapped at them.

I think there are exceptions that can be made, rather than thinking the consent rule is going to somehow change. If someone OOCs that they aren't interested, perhaps it shouldn't be pursued, but I also don't think we should be stopping every 5 seconds and asking for consent.

Edited: My initial reply may have sounded accusatory to some degree after I re-read it and that was not my intention.

Suffice to say I agree. I don't mind if people ask for consent. I just don't want there to be a new rule about talking dirty or talking about torture (which would indeed go hand in hand).

If you subdue and then start talking dirty, consent may be required.  lmao. 

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 23, 2014, 01:56:12 AM
If you subdue and then start talking dirty, consent may be required.  lmao. 

Nah, that's ban-able man. No more rape plots.

Quote from: bcw81 on December 23, 2014, 02:01:03 PM

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 23, 2014, 01:56:12 AM
If you subdue and then start talking dirty, consent may be required.  lmao. 

Nah, that's ban-able man. No more rape plots.

So long as you don't physically sexually assault them, it wouldn't break this rule.

Quote from: Desertman on December 23, 2014, 03:12:36 PM

Quote from: bcw81 on December 23, 2014, 02:01:03 PM

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 23, 2014, 01:56:12 AM
If you subdue and then start talking dirty, consent may be required.  lmao. 

Nah, that's ban-able man. No more rape plots.

So long as you don't physically sexually assault them, it wouldn't break this rule.

You're subduing them while talking about sexing them.

Quote from: bcw81 on December 23, 2014, 03:52:30 PM

Quote from: Desertman on December 23, 2014, 03:12:36 PM

Quote from: bcw81 on December 23, 2014, 02:01:03 PM

Quote from: chrisdcoulombe on December 23, 2014, 01:56:12 AM
If you subdue and then start talking dirty, consent may be required.  lmao.  

Nah, that's ban-able man. No more rape plots.

So long as you don't physically sexually assault them, it wouldn't break this rule.

You're subduing them while talking about sexing them.

Talking about sexing them is not sexing them. If you threaten to rape them, that would be a violation of the rape rules. Subduing them and talking about sexing them is not a violation of that rule.

For example...You are playing someone obsessed with someone...Crazily so.....You subdue the one you are obsessed with.

"Yes, yes my sweet, I am going to woo you with time, you shall see. You will grow to long for me just as I long for you, and once you do, yes...we will make sweet love. You will father my children. I will make you the happiest man to ever set foot into a bed chamber. I can do things to your body you wouldn't believe, and I'm going to, when the time is right. No...no...don't struggle my Little Jozhal Man. Let Bertha-Jak hold you. Let Bertha-Jak love you. Yes...our time is coming."

This is a game for adults played by adults, I still find it a distraction when I have to remind myself to ooc for consent. I'm thoughtful of what might offend those around me, usually based off the feel of the players I'm around. In those cases where I'm unsure, I ask for consent. If you can't handle a pc talking dirty to you in a tavern though, it's your responsibility as much as theirs to let them know it's an issue IMO.

It is even within the rules to threaten them into being your bed mate. The guiding rule is that you can't physically force them. You can coerce them through threats of violence all day long until they decide to willingly go along with your desires, you just can't force them physically.

"You see, Joylit, as a nobleman, I have needs. Strong needs....Oh, what's that? I do hope Gurth-Thok my giant guard is not holding you too tightly. Gurth-Thok, a bit more gently please, we don't want to bruise sweet Joylit. Anyways, as I was saying Joylit, I have strong needs. Carnal needs. As my aide, I expect you to fulfill those needs. If you choose not to, that is fine, that is your decision...but, let's just say, I will no longer have need of an unwilling aide who does not happily do the things I need of her...of course, Gurth-Thok may have to make the pile in Meleth's just a bit bigger, but, that is unavoidable.".

Completely within the rules. Joylit has a choice and isn't being physically forced into anything she doesn't want to do. She has a choice to make sure, but, that is her choice to make.

See, that totally seems like you'd totally be charged with rape IRL if that situation went down. Have sex with me or I will kill you. I'm not going to force you to have sex with me, of course. winkwink nudgenudge

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 23, 2014, 07:04:51 PM
See, that totally seems like you'd totally be charged with rape IRL if that situation went down

I agree, but that's not how the rules of Armageddon are written. Coercing someone in to sex is still valid under the rules. We hashed all this out months ago when the change went in, sheesh. Just for the love of god ask consent early and clearly or else you're going to make a real headache for everyone involved (esp staff).

I don't think we hashed this particular part out because the thread got locked whenever everyone started accusing each other of being nazi rapists. I digress. I will send in a request to ask about it I guess.

That's specifically addressed in the help file for rape.

So if they refuse they. . . you have to. . . ? ugh. nevermind. back to dirty talk discussion.

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 23, 2014, 07:15:36 PM
So if they refuse they. . . you have to. . . ? ugh. nevermind. back to dirty talk discussion.

Quote from: the rules
In situations where a power imbalance between two characters exists and said imbalance is used as leverage for an adult situation, consent must be sought at the earliest possible juncture. Refusal by the 'weaker' party requires the instigator to adjust their intent or desire to avoid a sexual situation.

Grabbing someone's ass doesn't count against the rules. I'd wager neither does talking extremely dirty to someone... but asking consent for anything you think might make people uncomfortable before doing it is a quick, easy and courteous thing to do.

Quote from: BadSkeelz on December 23, 2014, 07:20:18 PM

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 23, 2014, 07:15:36 PM
So if they refuse they. . . you have to. . . ? ugh. nevermind. back to dirty talk discussion.

Quote from: the rules
In situations where a power imbalance between two characters exists and said imbalance is used as leverage for an adult situation, consent must be sought at the earliest possible juncture. Refusal by the 'weaker' party requires the instigator to adjust their intent or desire to avoid a sexual situation.

Grabbing someone's ass doesn't count against the rules. I'd wager neither does talking extremely dirty to someone... but asking consent for anything you think might make people uncomfortable before doing it is a quick, easy and courteous thing to do.

I'd assume refusal to consent in this situation works much like consent for mutilation...

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 23, 2014, 07:10:13 PM
I don't think we hashed this particular part out because the thread got locked whenever everyone started accusing each other of being nazi rapists. I digress. I will send in a request to ask about it I guess.

Yeah, in my memory that discussion didn't succeed at all in clarifying much of anything. I also have to chime in that it was really disconcerting that so many people would make ad hominem attacks when some of us were asking valid questions, myself included. I've never started a rape plot, and yet the insinuations that I was some kind of creeper for even asking about what was still possible came out. All in all, it wasn't pretty, and I still have a lot of unanswered questions. This thread is rapidly demonstrating that I'm not alone.

I'd be all for Arm straight up saying "We're for adults only, and a lots of nasty shit goes on here. Deal with it or leave."

I'm with Majikal in that having to OOC consent is irritating, and takes me out of the moment. I've forgotten to ask for consent for gruesome things before, and everyone was fine and just kept playing, having fun. That's how it should always be. If you don't want to be raped go play somewhere else.

But that's not what staff want. They went in the opposite direction, giving complainers a voice(even if that wasn't the intent) and limiting roleplay options in order to not have to deal with a whiny people and extra work. Because of that you've opened things up to all sorts of vague areas that can lead to issues, like this one.

I think it need to go extreme one way or the other. Either you allow everyone to do what they want as long as it's RP and realistic, or you need to have Consent cover everything in order to limit these vague, poorly understood facets of the rules. Otherwise you'll just end up with more staff work trying to decipher whether something is "okay" or not, per the games rules.

in the niche subculture of fantasy video game text characters, depictions of a sexual nature are considered especially heinous. they are handled by a unit of overworked volunteer staff known as the Producers. these are their stories.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP3MuUTmXNk

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 23, 2014, 09:56:40 PM
in the niche subculture of fantasy video game text characters, depictions of a sexual nature are considered especially heinous. they are handled by a unit of overworked volunteer staff known as the Producers. these are their stories.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP3MuUTmXNk

Looks like the perp dropped a herp in his derp... round up all character reports from the last month that indicate a history of rape fetish roleplay, and dust that bone sword for prints.

I try to be polite. Like when my bard sang, "Henny Has a Big Ol' Penis" at the Gaj. I asked for consent! You never know who might not enjoy your taking liberties, I suppose. Though... I don't imagine many prudes play this game.

FTB

em says some naughty words, including the F word.

murder, thievery, torture, corruption, and what ever else have you is fine, but I draw da line at sexy talk, sir

The difference between that situation happening IRL and that situation happening in game, is that in this situation, you are only losing a character that you can re-make in a few hours if you refuse said nobleman's/noblewoman's advances. The player is not making a life or death decision.

You aren't actually getting killed. IRL your situation would be, "If I don't have sex with this person, they are going to kill me.".

This isn't real life. This is a game. Here, your only real decision is, "Would my character decide this actually is a pretty good deal, or would they stick to their guns and prefer to die?". That is the only decision you are making. You aren't making a life and death decision behind the keyboard. You are making a, "What would my PC do?", decision behind the keyboard.

Either they are the type of PC that would decide that it wasn't such a bad thing, or they aren't and they would hold their resolve to the grave/pile, which is absolutely their choice, because they are NOT going to be forced physically, because that's the rules.

Will some people not like the idea of making that decision? Sure. But, the key here is it is absolutely their decision to make. They WILL NOT be forced into something they don't want to do sexually, but they may be given some rather difficult choices.

I like games with difficult choices.

They can always freak out, try and break the subdue, draw their weapon, and try and kill said nobleman/woman and/or run away and plot their revenge, their sweet sweet revenge....or not. There are a thousand choices. The "coercing party" in this situation is just presenting some options.

i think dman's described scenario is indeed allowed in the rules.

the simplest form of coercion isn't even do this or die. it's do this or we won't be allies.

That's actually a condition really, not coercion.

Anyway that's all allowed and fine. Happens commonly. Again, adult game. And plotting revenge is just as allowed. Killing is legal outside cities so it isn't even all that hard.

Also, Harmless touched me inappropriately once. I still have nightmares. They are a dirty, dirty, individual. Save meh.  :-[

Quote from: Desertman on December 24, 2014, 10:12:32 AM
Also, Harmless touched me inappropriately once. I still have nightmares. They are a dirty, dirty, individual. Save meh.  :-[

(http://38.media.tumblr.com/f245835937b51797f83131639bba25ce/tumblr_mhf1scka6f1s4wlbio1_400.gif)

OOC Consent to being gently caressed, perhaps cuddled, but not too aggressively. Please post trigger warnings for all the trigger warnings of any new behavior. :3

In all seriousness, consent is a chore, and I'd honestly prefer a flag system. Being grappled and pinned down, about to have a limb violently removed, should never, ever, have the flow of the scene interrupted with 'consent for physical mutilation?' Especially if that scene is just going to be cut short with 'no, just ftb and kill me outright.' I'm not unsympathetic to the existence of people with PTSD, or the factor of free will in deciding what one wants to be exposed to online, or advocating power-emoting. I'm saying your agency is enacted when you decide to play a game about murder, corruption and betrayal where a minimum of two of the playable races are primarily a result of rape. You made the choice to play this game, no one else. Disrupting the flow of the game and exposing yourself to material than makes you uncomfortable (and that you are unwilling to expose yourself to) just makes a less enjoyable experience for everyone involved.

It makes it a less enjoyable experience for you, perhaps, but not everyone involved. I don't see consent as anything but a necessary hiccup to make sure both parties are acknowledging and accepting the direction of the scene, like adults.

Quote from: Down Under on December 25, 2014, 01:13:39 PM
It makes it a less enjoyable experience for you, perhaps, but not everyone involved. I don't see consent as anything but a necessary hiccup to make sure both parties are acknowledging and accepting the direction of the scene, like adults.

I'd rather see ooc used as a brake for things that get out of control rather than a necessary hiccup, personally. Folks like Asche have suggested flags you could toggle, this would help people cut through the bullshit early in their interaction with players and the idea provides nothing but convenience for the players.

I once put clan wide effort into capturing a particular pc with the only intent being a torturous death, with everyone in the clan excited about the idea. Upon an elaborate capturing of the mark, we brought them to our secret hideout only to be told "I don't consent to torture, please kill." I think the player was being salty, but we obliged, much to the disappointment of 5 other players who's plot revolved around the said enjoyment of injuring the individual. The plot was overly elaborate and put pc's at risk for the effort, had we had a flag that would have told us torture was not consented too early on, we could have guided things in a different direction.

That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

Using OOC to "withdraw consent" is valid, is in the rules, and should be accepted maturely, as much as the requirement to ask for it in advance. Even if consent was given sometime earlier, when the situation seemed innocent.

Scenario/example:

Amosette, The tall, muscular woman sits next to the doe-eyed male youth, smiling. "Hello there, fella." (pleasantries exchanged). "You are quite beautiful for a man, unlike most I see here." "Thank you." (more compliments exchanged.)

The tall muscular woman says, out of character, "Requesting consent for adult-oriented RP in general?"

The doe-eyed male youth says, out of character, "Consent granted."  ((He is not sure what he is consenting to but doesn't want to end the scene.. yet. He COULD say "Consent granted for now" but he shouldn't have to. Consent is always implied as a temporary state until revoked.))

Later, Amosette gets creepy:

The tall muscular woman whispers to you, her hand cupping your behind, "Yes, yes my sweet, I am going to woo you with time, you shall see. You will grow to long for me just as I long for you, and once you do, yes...we will make sweet love. I will give birth to your children..." (Thanks Desertman for the writing.)

(Staring eyes gawk at the scene all around. Though maybe in other conditions, this would have been okay for the doe-eyed male youth, and would have been okay for the doe-eyed male youth's player, the public nature of the actions are a trigger for the player. The player is uncomfortable, and recognizes that they do not like playing this character right now, etc. They don't consent anymore. The exact reasons why don't matter. The scene closes with a fade:)

The doe-eyed male youth says, out of character, "I withdraw consent, and request a fade to our characters parting ways."

The tall, muscular woman says, out of character, "That's too bad, but alright."

The tall, muscular woman glares at a tavern-goer when they gawk at her hand, smack their fists on the bar and then turns away from the doe-eyed, male youth.

The tall, muscular woman says, bluntly "Ehh, you weren't my type anyway."

The tall muscular woman stands up from the bar.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

This is acceptable as per the rules.

Quote from: Majikal on December 25, 2014, 02:51:08 PM

Quote from: Down Under on December 25, 2014, 01:13:39 PM
It makes it a less enjoyable experience for you, perhaps, but not everyone involved. I don't see consent as anything but a necessary hiccup to make sure both parties are acknowledging and accepting the direction of the scene, like adults.

I'd rather see ooc used as a brake for things that get out of control rather than a necessary hiccup, personally. Folks like Asche have suggested flags you could toggle, this would help people cut through the bullshit early in their interaction with players and the idea provides nothing but convenience for the players.

I once put clan wide effort into capturing a particular pc with the only intent being a torturous death, with everyone in the clan excited about the idea. Upon an elaborate capturing of the mark, we brought them to our secret hideout only to be told "I don't consent to torture, please kill." I think the player was being salty, but we obliged, much to the disappointment of 5 other players who's plot revolved around the said enjoyment of injuring the individual. The plot was overly elaborate and put pc's at risk for the effort, had we had a flag that would have told us torture was not consented too early on, we could have guided things in a different direction.

The interesting thing is people have said if there were flags that it would modify other PCs actions too much. In the last big thread on this topic, this was stated as being bad. But I don't know if it's necessarily bad or not. I think that it's potentially good, because then a more interesting scene for the victim can be devised, where the lead-up to the kill that will happen (instead of torture) can be made more interesting.

If you intend to torture someone, you treat them differently -- you threaten to kill them but do not. That's the point.. "I have the power to kill you, but I am dominating you by keeping you alive, but suffering." That's the definition basically.

If someone doesn't consent to torture, fine -- then the game changes. If you just snap them up and kill them, then they probably will not be happy. But people who intend to kill play a different game... they make the victim wonder, are they going to be killed or not? Or, they take heavy, pained steps to make the kill SECRET. That's fun too -- it's a different kind of gameplay, with different objectives and tasks involved.

I think it's a good thing if people make it clear early on, "No, you can't torture me. I don't want that kind of roleplay." No problem -- now people will simply plot to kill you. This means everyone has more fun, and plots still happen.

So yeah, the "consent flags, good or bad" debate is one that's interesting. Some are staunchly in the "no" camp. I'm in the "Yes, give us flags" camp.

Quote from: Harmless on December 25, 2014, 03:19:07 PM
Using OOC to "withdraw consent" should be just as valid a move as the requirement to ask for it in advance.

For the record, the current rules on consent already allow for consent to be withdrawn.

Quote from: Nergal on December 25, 2014, 03:26:31 PM

Quote from: Harmless on December 25, 2014, 03:19:07 PM
Using OOC to "withdraw consent" should be just as valid a move as the requirement to ask for it in advance.

For the record, the current rules on consent already allow for consent to be withdrawn.

Yep! I was aware. I should have specified that in my post (I edited it a little to reflect that fact, thanks!);

The main point of my post above is that people should be "cool" with that, and roll with it ICly in a simple way as I tried to illustrate. This kind of interaction should be common, and people should not feel "bad" about using that rule, etc. Normalizing.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

I think a lot is getting lost in all this here. The rules don't require you to -not- torture another character, if consent is rejected. They only require that you not act it out. You can fade to black torture scenes and jump to the end result.  If that torture would normally result in permanent maiming, then the victim can ask that the result be death. If you have only a toggle for on/off consent, what - exactly - are you consenting to, if you have it toggled on? What - exactly - are you rejecting consent to, if you have it toggled off?

Consent to end up with a missing arm, but not a missing leg please -
Consent to end up maimed, but please fade to black the details of the event leading to the maiming.
Consent to a torture scene but if there's maiming please kill off my PC.

There are WAY too many variables for a simple toggle to accommodate.

But none of this has anything to do with whether or not you should ask consent when your character wants to talk detailed sexual talk to another character.

In my opinion - there's no difference between:

>The tressy tressed woman goes down on your blah blah blah blah throbbing yada yada yada pulsating veins etc. etc...

and

>The tressy tressed woman tells you, in sirihish,
"I'm going to go down on your blah blah blah blah throbbing yada yada yada pulsating veins etc. etc...."

The details are still "dirty text" - the mud equivalent of text porn. Some people are into it, some don't care one way or another, and some would just as soon not have to see it scrolling up their screen.

I feel it still falls under the consent rules for sexual scenes, and should require consent. Way conversations are another matter entirely - since psing "ooc" is theoretically frowned upon, I'm not sure who would need to break character - the person about to psi dirty-talk to someone asking consent, or the person receiving the talk asking the sender to cease after the fact.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 05:19:24 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

That scenario when you do this:

Emote goes through a lengthy torture process, taking their sweet time to make sure you suffer the greatest possible amount, reviving you multiple times before finally you succumb to pure agony.

Kill [person].

Unlike rape roleplay, torture RP still happens behind the fade. You and all your buddies still got their IC torture, so at the very least the characters should be happy, even if you as players aren't.

I think the above is a good argument therefore that flags denoting what your consent views are would not impact the outcomes of plots.

The torture happens regardless of the victim's consent status.

So if you saw someone had "no torture" in their consent flag status, you could still pursue torture and complete that plot, just expecting to do fades when it comes down to it.

Since rape never happens regardless of consent status.

Again, Harmless and RGS, that has nothing to do with whether or not you feel "dirty talk" as described in this thread should require consent.

We're sort of drifting off topic here.  I'd split off a torture-consent topic, but I don't have dual monitors where I'm at so it would be more difficult than I'm used to  :-\  Does someone want to make a thread?

Sorry, I didn't mean to drift off topic..I guess at the start of the thread, I was trying to make the point that "dirty talk wouldn't be an issue if we had a consent flag, because you'd know before initiating it." But if you feel that doesn't apply to this "problem" of when consenting should be done, then you're welcome to relocate my posts.

Consent does not exist to prevent you from having to see dirty talk/dirty text.

If you feel that consent exists to prevent you from having to see bad language and sexual language, you are mistaken. Nobody cares how sexual talk or "text porn" makes you feel at the end of the day. The rule is not in place for that reason.

The only reason consent exists is so that you do not have to play out the affects of sexual things happening to your PC. We do care about the fact some people will not want to roleplay their own characters, that are often emotionally extensions of themselves, in sexual situations if they do not want to be part of that. This includes having to roleplay their characters being involved in other people's sexual situations.

If the player behind the keyboard just doesn't want to have to read dirty words, well, I sympathize on a personal level, but on a policy level, too bad so sad.

Most likely the reason consent doesn't extend to all dirty talk and sexual talk and "text porn", is because staff would have to handle ten requests a week from people who are simply too sensitive for an adult oriented game. It would be far too open to interpretation. You know and I know that there would be a few requests every week where someone is complaining someone, "said they fucked a beetle" or "talked about how they fucked this whore and used the word cock and pussy". People would complain about little things like that, because it would leave things far too open to player interpretation of the rules.

The fundamental difference between consent for "dirty roleplay" and consent for "text porn" is one is enforceable in a semi-possible manner, and the other is ridiculous on every realistic level to ever consider actually implementing said rule.

I take that back, we could put in a rule to protect the innocent from "text porn". But, that rule would have to follow the same guidelines as the rape rules. Meaning, the only way to actually enforce it that didn't result in a silly number of frivolous requests from the super-sensitive, would be to remove it entirely.

We saw it with rape. We would see it many times worse with any such "text porn" rule. The only solution would be removal of the demon.

This means the only solution that would make this enforceable on any realistic level would be the removal of dirty talk, foul language of a sexual nature, and anything similar from the game.

I don't want to play that game.

I do not consent to being chopped up with bone swords.

ooc will not eat cheese sam I am.

Again, the actual point of the OP is getting lost. Desertman, you didn't read the topic. It isn't about using foul language, or using certain words, or not using certain words. It's about context.

I'll give an example again, more explicit this time, which will hopefully convey the intent of the OP's question:

>The green-eyed man slides a finger into your rectum and starts pumping it in and out.

vs.

>The green eyed man tells you, in sirihish:
"In one hour, I will slide a finger into your rectum and start pumping it in and out."


If you consent to the first, there's no problem with the second. But if you do NOT consent to the first, then you might also NOT consent to the second. The player does not want to read about what might or might not be happening to their character. If I object to the first, then I, personally, would object to the second. Maybe you wouldn't, but I would. I consider them equally pornish, for the exact same reasons, using the exact same text.

A fade might be "In one hour, I'll have your butt rocking like a noble's easy chair for more."

or something to that effect. But the details of the action being conveyed, will be obscured.

In other words: You could theoretically have a complete, minutely-detailed text-sex session in Armageddon, without using the "emote" verb at all. You would only need to use "tell," "whisper," or "psi." The concern of the OP is whether or not this should be subject to the consent rules.

I read the topic.

I also consider them "equally pornish". Absolutely. But, there is an extreme fundamental difference between being told some dirty words, and having to roleplay dirty things happening to your character.

If being told some dirty words, and someone forcing things onto your character physically that you don't want to roleplay, are equal to you....well....we will just have to agree to disagree.

I personally don't think having to read some dirty words is equal to people roleplaying sexing your character physically.

My point to the OP was that consent exists to protect players from having to roleplay being physically involved in sexual situations. It does not exist to protect the players from having to see dirty words since there is a good chance you are going to see a ton of dirty words any time you visit any tavern in the game Allanak  ;).

Edited to Add:
I completely sympathize with the fact you personally wouldn't want to read those things regardless. If I encountered you in game and you OOC'ed, "Hey bud, I really don't want to read that, can you tone it down a little for me?", I would be absolutely cool with not subjecting you to that, and I'm sure every other person that plays this game would too. I just want to make sure the OP understands that the rule in fact DOES NOT cover that, is not intended to cover that, and nobody reading this thread should start shooting out a dozen player complaints because they saw some "text porn" they didn't consent to first.

I agree with Desertman about the difference.One requires that you respond and participate. The other is something that happens to your pc in a game where bad things happen to your game. If you have some particular sensitivity that makes hearing those things in some way particularly unpalatable, maybe you need to excuse yourself from the situation. Personally, if I were oocly making someone uncomfortable and they ooc'd asking that I stop, I would be happy to do so, but I don't think the outliers need policy.

I've always thought about the whole thing as being on a sliding scale of advisability.

On the one hand you have things that are black and white against the rules (requiring consent for sex), then you  have things that are really similar but not quite the same (requiring consent for grossly explicit speech), and then you have the crude jokes that might mention sex but at their core aren't really sexual rp.

The first set of behaviors requires consent; says so right in the rules.

The third set of behaviors never requires consent. You can tell dirty jokes on this game, or make offhanded mentions of sexual behavior.

The second set of behaviors occupies a bit of a grey area. I treat it as something that's allowed, but not always a good idea. Grey areas like this depend a lot on unspoken social contracts between players about what is acceptable. If the other player thinks you've crossed the line and is really uncomfortable with what's happening in game, what's to stop them from ignoring their end of the social contract? Maybe you want to talk about sticking your finger in their anus, and the player on the other side is like "well then, I'm hungry time for lunch." and throws out a three word emote before getting up to go make themselves a sandwich. Five minutes later they're back, barely read anything you've typed and throw out another three word emote before stuffing their face and surfing cat videos for another five minutes.

So while you might not /need/ permission to talk dirty to another player, it might be in your best interests not to ignore it if you're obviously making them uncomfortable OOCly.

Hey guys? Guys... cool it on the butt-fingering talk, ok? I didn't consent to this thread. Now I'll have to go wash myself with scalding water to get the sin off of it.

EDIT: :) I guess I have to post that to indicated that I'm joking, or perhaps :P

I don't honestly think it will be a problem 99% of the time. But I wouldn't put it past the rare (sometimes painfully unrare) shithead to push the line and start sending dirty psi's to an unconsenting character. To the point where it crosses ooc boundries. I think at this point it would be worth a player complaint and staff would be justified to squash it.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 05:19:24 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

The case I was thinking of broke no ic information rules and was discussed several years after the death of the character. But on another level don't you think that molesting the corpse of a character that did not consent to be a sneaky way to get around the consent rule to begin with? Wouldn't you be pretty skeeved out if you learned (regardless of ic info sharing) that someone did this to your character?

Quote from: Jingo on December 27, 2014, 07:36:02 AM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 05:19:24 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

The case I was thinking of broke no ic information rules and was discussed several years after the death of the character. But on another level don't you think that molesting the corpse of a character that did not consent to be a sneaky way to get around the consent rule to begin with? Wouldn't you be pretty skeeved out if you learned (regardless of ic info sharing) that someone did this to your character?

I don't think so. The player didn't have to watch or participate.

Quote from: Barzalene on December 27, 2014, 10:14:09 AM

Quote from: Jingo on December 27, 2014, 07:36:02 AM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 05:19:24 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

The case I was thinking of broke no ic information rules and was discussed several years after the death of the character. But on another level don't you think that molesting the corpse of a character that did not consent to be a sneaky way to get around the consent rule to begin with? Wouldn't you be pretty skeeved out if you learned (regardless of ic info sharing) that someone did this to your character?

I don't think so. The player didn't have to watch or participate.

So you mean to tell me that this person either hated me so much or was so crazy that after my game character was dead they roleplayed having the sex with the meat lump? Ahahahahahahhahahahah.

Not only would I not be angry, I would tell everyone and get many laughs. That is some next level "death story" stuff for Armageddon.

If I did get angry about it, I would have about three seconds of self reflection, have a good laugh at my own expense, and go back to playing the game with my new character.

being the kind of person to roleplay out a rape scene is one thing. being the kind of person to roleplay out necrophilia is another.

Quote from: Desertman on December 27, 2014, 10:57:19 AM

Quote from: Barzalene on December 27, 2014, 10:14:09 AM

Quote from: Jingo on December 27, 2014, 07:36:02 AM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 05:19:24 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 25, 2014, 04:46:17 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 25, 2014, 03:17:54 PM
That's when you kill them then defile/butcher/desecrate their bodies.

I could see this being a problem actually. I remember when some shitheads would post about doing shit with dead body parts and naming the character of said parts.

In such a case, their OOC communication would have been the problem (and also rule-breaking), not their IG actions.  But even then, it has nothing to do with the issue of consent.

The case I was thinking of broke no ic information rules and was discussed several years after the death of the character. But on another level don't you think that molesting the corpse of a character that did not consent to be a sneaky way to get around the consent rule to begin with? Wouldn't you be pretty skeeved out if you learned (regardless of ic info sharing) that someone did this to your character?

I don't think so. The player didn't have to watch or participate.

So you mean to tell me that this person either hated me so much or was so crazy that after my game character was dead they roleplayed having the sex with the meat lump? Ahahahahahahhahahahah.

Not only would I not be angry, I would tell everyone and get many laughs. That is some next level "death story" stuff for Armageddon.

If I did get angry about it, I would have about three seconds of self reflection, have a good laugh at my own expense, and go back to playing the game with my new character.

Huh?
I didn't say anything about you. I said this doesn't violate consent rules because the player was not there when it happened. In fact the character was not there when it happened.

You are required to get consent of PCs and NPCs in order to roleplay scenes of a sexual nature with them.
Objects do not require consent.
Dead bodies are objects.

Some people get butthurt (pun intended) when things don't go their way in game.  Just because you don't like what happened does not mean the other person broke a rule.

Quote from: Rules
5. Complaints of unfairness will not be given an audience. If you think your character's situation was unfair, too bad. Live with it or don't.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 27, 2014, 02:36:51 PM
You are required to get consent of PCs and NPCs in order to roleplay scenes of a sexual nature with them.
Objects do not require consent.
Dead bodies are objects.

Some people get butthurt (pun intended) when things don't go their way in game.  Just because you don't like what happened does not mean the other person broke a rule.

Quote from: Rules
5. Complaints of unfairness will not be given an audience. If you think your character's situation was unfair, too bad. Live with it or don't.

So? That doesn't answer any of my questions. I don't care about hard rules or what your definition of an object is. I'm discussing principles.

Previously, players would use rape plots etc. to sexually harass other players. They can still do it now in a roundabout way with necrophilia plots.

And yeah. To answer my own questions, I could see people getting skeeved by this nonsense to the point where they are put off of armageddon altogether.

I did answer your first question.

Quote from: Jingo on December 27, 2014, 07:36:02 AM
But on another level don't you think that molesting the corpse of a character that did not consent to be a sneaky way to get around the consent rule to begin with?

No, because the PLAYER was not involved, therefore their consent is unnecessary.  The rules clearly state out what requires consent.  This does not.

Quote from: Jingo on December 27, 2014, 07:36:02 AM
Wouldn't you be pretty skeeved out if you learned (regardless of ic info sharing) that someone did this to your character?

I wouldn't, no. I would probably just think "ewww...? and move along, as I would anytime I were confronted with the idea of necrophilia.  However, if simply hearing that something like this happened to a frictional character (as opposed to having to actually experience the scene in detail) traumatizes you, you probably have some deep-rooted psychological issues concerning the separation of fantasy and reality (or should simply make sure your fantasy-input is from a constantly PG-13 source).

Also, if you are having bad experiences through the sharing of in-game details outside of the game, don't.  Some people can handle that shit and it not affect them and the way they play, some can't.

The consent rule exists to protect you from graphic content that you would rather have censored out (this is where FTB comes in in some situations) or not participate in.  It does not, does not, does not exist to protect your character from bad shit happening.  This would be the equivalent of being personally offended by a traumatic event in your characters virtual past before you started playing him/her.

From an OOC perspective, there is no difference between a character putting their cod in your PC's corpse or putting it in your PC's codpiece.  To complain about such is

Quote from: Rules
Complain[ing] of unfairness [which] will [and should] not be given an audience. If you think your character's situation was unfair, too bad. Live with it or don't.

Also, (again) if you are having bad experiences through the sharing of in-game details outside of the game, don't.  Some people can handle that shit and it not affect them and the way they play, some can't.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 29, 2014, 01:12:51 AM
 However, if simply hearing that something like this happened to a frictional character (as opposed to having to actually experience the scene in detail) traumatizes you, you probably have some deep-rooted psychological issues concerning the separation of fantasy and reality (or should simply make sure your fantasy-input is from a constantly PG-13 source).

You're silly to believe that people don't actively invest in their PCs. I mean hell, even though I'm on PC #152, I've recently experienced a heavy heart over some stuff. I made the decision to get my PC killed and the manner in which they were killed was absolutely terrible. I found out later through IG means what had happened and every time it was mentioned it was hard for me to deal with--even though I made the decision to let it happen.

Bad things should happen to PCs, but c'mon man. You're just living in an Orwellian dream if you think people can turn off their feelings like that after investing a bunch of time into roleplaying a character.

QuoteI wouldn't, no.

Don't assume everyone is like you then.

QuoteHowever, if simply hearing that something like this happened to a frictional character.

Are you suggesting people that don't want to deal with the above are mentally ill? Or are you just telling me that since someone doesn't find it specifically traumatizing that they should just shut up and take it regardless of abuse?

Either position is weak.

QuoteFrom an OOC perspective, there is no difference between a character putting their cod in your PC's corpse or putting it in your PC's codpiece.

What the fuck? There sure as shit is when consent rules apply. And I'm the one trying to keep consent rules transferable after the death of the PC. I think you're confused m8.

QuoteTo complain about such is...A COMPLAINT AGAINST UNFAIRNESS AND ROOL 5 SAYS YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN AGAINST THE UNFAIR

Clearly if we don't like the idea of our character's corpse being molested we just can't handle the pure distilled harshness of ArmageddonMUD. It's actually a old as fuck rule meant to protect players from complaints of IC deceitfulness and not from complaints of being an OOC shithead.

QuoteThe consent rule exists to protect you from graphic content that you would rather have censored out (this is where FTB comes in in some situations) or not participate in.  It does not, does not, does not exist to protect your character from bad shit happening.

Basic reading comprehension would support your argument.

QuoteThis would be the equivalent of being personally offended by a traumatic event in your characters virtual past before you started playing him/her.

Actually there is a huge fucking big difference here. It's one of player agency. I can chose my character's background. I can't chose what happens to my character after they die.

According to you, I should not be able to dis-consent if my character is to be raped after they die; supported by some weakass arguments about consent, armageddonmud rules and some ontological horseshit about corpse-objects.

Hey guys, this is a hot topic and all that jazz. Please keep the conversation civil.

If you get to decide your character can't be sexed after they are already dead and you aren't there, you also get to decide if your character is dismembered, disfigured, or otherwise tortured after they are already dead.

While I personally sympathize with someone's desire to not hear about their character getting the ole' wam-bam-slappy-time after they were dead, if you are going to implement rules that say it can't happen due to consent guidelines, then it has to apply to torture as well.

Some people might really hate the idea of finding out their character was dismembered, disfigured, or otherwise tortured after they were already dead. I loved my character, it would really hurt me emotionally to learn someone cut their ears off and their eyes out and wore them as a necklace but not before packing their skull with salt and keeping it as a souvenir.

You can't babysit one consent issue and not have the same guidelines apply to all consent issues due to, "My feelings.".

If you can't slip them the ole' tandu sausage after death without consent, you absolutely can not disfigure, maim, or otherwise torture after death without consent either.

You create a field of inequality and compassion to some people without the same consideration to others if you do anything else.

Are you guys trying to desensitize the playerbase over the GDB or something?

But in any case, D-man is right. And I did NOT touch his PC. Unless his PC touched mine first.

I'm pretty sensitive. I would ftb on torture. I hated being asked to consent to rape (I found it depressing.)
But those things require my participation. If those things happen when I'm not at the screen its all good. Even if I logged in to be told my PC had bad things happen that would be fine. This gs that don't require me to be there don't require consent.

Quote from: Desertman on December 29, 2014, 11:42:37 AM
Some people might really hate the idea of finding out their character was dismembered, disfigured, or otherwise tortured after they were already dead. I loved my character, it would really hurt me emotionally to learn someone cut their ears off and their eyes out and wore them as a necklace but not before packing their skull with salt and keeping it as a souvenir.

Hypothetically... of course.

Quote from: whitt on December 29, 2014, 12:00:59 PM

Quote from: Desertman on December 29, 2014, 11:42:37 AM
Some people might really hate the idea of finding out their character was dismembered, disfigured, or otherwise tortured after they were already dead. I loved my character, it would really hurt me emotionally to learn someone cut their ears off and their eyes out and wore them as a necklace but not before packing their skull with salt and keeping it as a souvenir.

Hypothetically... of course.

Of course, of course...I'm not saying I ever did anything like this....*cough* *shifty eyes*

One of the concepts I've always wanted to play was actually a human with a vendetta against elves, desert or otherwise, taking their ears for a big-ass necklace. Probably not original, but it would be fun. This was before I realized there was a significant portion of the playerbase that looks at harsh rp and says 'not for me.' I dunno, I spend a lot of my time playing characters with little power, martial or otherwise. Arm feels the most Arm to me when I'm being oppressed, and treated unfairly. Can't get into some of my best examples because less than a year has passed if my memory serves, but I can say that if I made an absolutely brutal character concept, I'd be more than a bit dissapointed to not RP out my concept because someone was squeemish. I don't mean to put anyone down when I say that if you don't like that sort of thing, you probably shouldn't play a game where the docs say torture, rape, oppression and racism ARE THE NORM. Its uncomfortable for you, and inhibiting the accurate presentation of the culture presented in the docs. Again, I'm not saying I'm not sympathetic, I'm saying you're actively PUTTING YOURSELF into circumstances where this is a real possibility, and saying 'WHAT, DON'T I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE TREATED LIKE A DECENT PERSON?' Sure. You exercise that right by choosing not to play. I can honestly say I hope to be in more situations where I'm brutally tortured to death IC. More actual murder and betrayal would improve the game for me substantially. What people are comfortable with should never be the standard for what is allowed or prohibited, in ANYTHING. Your inability to establish a disconnect between you and your character, or to handle roleplay about concepts that hit too close to home in a realistic manner for the setting (IE, not treating rapists like the scum of the earth, unless they're humans and elves), is, put brutally, not my problem. And you shouldn't serve as the standard MY roleplay is dictated by.

I'm not advocating that arm should be softer or kinder. That's clear, right?

Id just like to put in my If I found out my previous (even if it was long-lived, one I invested myself into)
PC's corpse was mutilated/defiled/raped in some way, Id just think it was cool that someone loved me
enough to involve my PC in their plot/amusement even post-mortam.  This being said, I have a warped
sense of what is considered affection.  ;D

WanderingOoze is right.

Quote from: WanderingOoze on December 29, 2014, 03:13:11 PM
Id just like to put in my If I found out my previous (even if it was long-lived, one I invested myself into)
PC's corpse was mutilated/defiled/raped in some way, Id just think it was cool that someone loved me
enough to involve my PC in their plot/amusement even post-mortam.  This being said, I have a warped
sense of what is considered affection.  ;D

Same here. I'd be quite ambivalent, I'd be sad -and- flattered.

Quote from: WanderingOoze on December 29, 2014, 03:13:11 PM
Id just like to put in my If I found out my previous (even if it was long-lived, one I invested myself into)
PC's corpse was mutilated/defiled/raped in some way, Id just think it was cool that someone loved me
enough to involve my PC in their plot/amusement even post-mortam.  This being said, I have a warped
sense of what is considered affection.  ;D

+1

I dont think this is an issue most of the time...but use your brain. I have been in a situation with another PC whom my own PC was frequently forced to be around because of our IG jobs,  whom I had to ask oocly several times to tone it down. I wont go into details but they actually made it uncomfortable for me to play and my asking them to knock it off oocly didn't seem to discourage them. Its the first time I felt the need to report someone to staff  :-\

Quote from: FantasyWriter on December 30, 2014, 09:22:10 AM

Quote from: WanderingOoze on December 29, 2014, 03:13:11 PM
Id just like to put in my If I found out my previous (even if it was long-lived, one I invested myself into)
PC's corpse was mutilated/defiled/raped in some way, Id just think it was cool that someone loved me
enough to involve my PC in their plot/amusement even post-mortam.  This being said, I have a warped
sense of what is considered affection.  ;D

+1

+2


Lets face it, if you've managed to get your PC to the point where a PC or two has to mutilate/defile your corpse or whatever, you did a pretty good job.

You're talking as though defiling/mutilating a corpse is a logical progression or escalation of force.

Quote from: Is Friday on December 30, 2014, 05:21:16 PM
You're talking as though defiling/mutilating a corpse is a logical progression or escalation of force.

lol, exactly.

This is obviously a touchy subject for a lot of people for various reasons, and I have trouble taking sides.  HBO's shows are generally grittier than AMC's, to good effect, but not everyone wants to risk their RP devolving into one of the rape scenes from Tales from the Crypt (I'm sure some do).


(http://www.rdinn.com/show_comicfile.php?comicid=65)

But one thought experiment is to imagine that we are all playing Armageddon around a (big) table as a pen and paper RPG.  Now imagine somebody's character dies - maybe you killed them - and they leave the room to write up a new character.  You decide to announce to everyone at the table that your character will begin to molest the dead body...

Can you see yourself doing that if you weren't behind a computer?  Would you really hold it against someone at the table if they said "can we just skip this?"  Would you accuse the player of having psychological issues if they were bewildered and offended when they came back into the room to hear what you were describing?

(For the record, I would still play Arm even if it were uncensored and if anyone could do anything to me - in fact it would be exciting and scary in a creepy kind of way - so, like I said, it's impossible to take sides.)

This conversation has inspired me to be less considerate of the corpses of others. Before I would cry and hold their head in my lap and stroke their hair, for IG days, saying, I wish it hadn't had to turn out this way, you know, I really, really didn't want to do this...

But now I think I'll just skip all the foreplay. You have only yourselves to blame.

And yes, I would tell people, this is how I RP, if you don't like it, find someone else to run a campaign with... but most people don't complain, despite excessive brutality and mutilation, in fact it makes them laugh, I've found... probably that kind of hysterical laughter that's the only means of coping with something amazingly horrific.

So I didnt read the OP of this thread. I didnt read any of it, I just skipped to the very last posts.

Title of the thread: Pre-Mudsex Dirty Talk

Latest topic of conversation: Mutilating Corpses.


... Only in Armageddon.

Quote from: Dar on December 31, 2014, 12:06:56 AM
So I didnt read the OP of this thread. I didnt read any of it, I just skipped to the very last posts.

Title of the thread: Pre-Mudsex Dirty Talk

Latest topic of conversation: Mutilating Corpses.


... Only in Armageddon.

I tried to sig this... too damn long.     :(

I believe three simple words provide the ward you seek: Deal with It.

Quote from: Fujikoma on December 31, 2014, 01:50:10 AM
I believe three simple words provide the ward you seek: Deal with It.

This is how Ive approached the game so far. And Ive had nothing but enjoyment. 

Perhaps its because I'm too much of a no0b to be jaded.

Or Im just insensitive enough of a person IRL to really -get- the spirit
of this experience.

But to complain that in a world of fucked up individuals (and this is just how i've summarized the docs and stuff)  that something Fucked up has happened to a PC after death or even during their lives, seems like a fish complaining the ocean is a bit moist.

I began this journey with the full expectation of some crazy/violent/senseless shit would befall my creations, and his only served
to make me hope and wish for stuff like this to happen. But Then I see threads be-moaning the fact that really bad stuff happens. From a relatively new players perspective, isn't this the point of playing this game?  To create a Concept that creates enemies that hate your PC So much as to wish to harm their corpse in a creative way, To be a part of something larger and crueler than yourself?  This is why I signed on. But Now Im confused. Is depravity frowned upon? ICly? If So, This isn't what I thought this game was. I had assumed it was a sanctuary for those of us who wanted an outlet for our creativity, no matter how weird and sadistically slanted it may be. As long as it jivved with the constrictions of the world we all agreed to play in, It seems more and more I see a bunch of people being OOCly uncomfortable With an environment that at least -I- Agreed to play within.

Im fully aware that Im probably wrong, this is a common occurrence.  I don't mean to come off as flame-ey or anything, but These are my thoughts. Im not trying to purposefully offend anyone, I just dont know any other way of expressing my self.

Just throwing in that I have DM'ed for the same group of folks for many years.

They once collectively raped a fetus. Raped....a.....fetus.....(this is only one of many things)

Even as the DM all I could do was shake my head as they laughed like savage animals.

Yeah, not much bothers my tabletop group. Most of the time I feel they do things just to try and throw a wrench in my storyline. I also always get blamed for, "being the NPC's" that kill them.

Many times I have heard, as they get a good roll on an attack against an NPC, "SUCK IT DESERTMAN."......"I'M NOT THE NPC'S!!!"...."YES YOU ARE!!!".

We have good times.

Rolling up corpse molester now, tell me when you are mad.  Have any of you even had a necrophiliac character?  Do you even necrophilia bro?  LoL, this is too funny.  I have never seen anything or heard anything like that in game.  Did something happen or is this all hypothetical speculation?  

I could care less about what happens to my character's body.   I don't even care  what happens to my dead body irl.  Why someone would want to do that seems odd to me, but hey...who cares its a work of fiction.  That means its not real.   Don't want to see a corpse defiled, don't be friends with a  corpse fucker.

I had one PC who had sex with corpses virtually. I never actually roleplayed the act out in game. It always happened with his VNPC victims behind the scenes, but I still got to roleplay the mindset and get the reactions out of people I wanted.

I did use a PC's corpse I had just killed as a pillow once as well with the same PC in front of a lot of people.  :)

There'll never be another like him.

Use common sense.  If your PC says something IC that would get you labeled as weird, a pervert or a freak, in a real life situation, then be kind and ask consent. Also then expect your PC to be labeled as such IC.

If your PC is just being flirtatious, or saying something that would only earn the label "jerk" in real life then don't worry.

Asking consent does not cost anyone anything. Not asking could cost the other player some duress and disgust and who knows what else. It could cost you a complaint and it could cost staff the time to deal with the complaint.

Neverdo aanythingppotentially offensive to someone else'sssensibilities without consent is what I'm gleaning

Quote from: Norcal on December 31, 2014, 12:53:02 PM
Use common sense.  If your PC says something IC that would get you labeled as weird, a pervert or a freak, in a real life situation, then be kind and ask consent. Also then expect your PC to be labeled as such IC.

If your PC is just being flirtatious, or saying something that would only earn the label "jerk" in real life then don't worry.

Asking consent does not cost anyone anything. Not asking could cost the other player some duress and disgust and who knows what else. It could cost you a complaint and it could cost staff the time to deal with the complaint.

I have nothing against this concept. I just don't want there to be a rule that says, "You have to ask for consent if you might hurt some super-sensitive person's little feelings.". I am all for, "Ask for consent out of the kindness of your heart.", so long as there is no rule saying you have to.

I don't want this rule because I don't want there to be fifty player complaints a week from said super-sensitive people, because there would be.

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 31, 2014, 01:29:01 PM
Neverdo aanythingppotentially offensive to someone else'sssensibilities without consent is what I'm gleaning

which is probably not very useful to you at all.

The consent helpfile cites 'adult situations', which is a (probably purposefully) vague term.  But there are a number of coded things we can do that would probably require consent if they were to be emoted out instead:

- stabbing another human viciously in the neck during combat is fine, but you'd probably need consent to emote such an act during an interrogation.

- shitmugging someone shouldn't require consent, but if you emoted out dumping a pot of human waste on someone's head, there's probably a slim minority of players who would feel you crossed a line.

- drugging someone, dragging them into your apartment, and stealing all of their equipment is totally fair play.  Emoting the vivid details of stripping your helpless victim is probably going to require consent...

The big difference is that the code provides summary detail.  By contrast, two people emoting out a scene back and forth for half an hour is going to be a much more visceral experience for both parties, with many more uncomfortable details.

So maybe a better rule of thumb is this:

If you're planning on acting out some adult situation in substantially greater detail than the corresponding code would, you should ask for consent.

Addendum: if you're planning on threatening someone with an act, don't describe that act in substantially greater detail than the code would, unless you have consent.

I've had staff dump so much poo on my characters. I'm not even kidding. I can't count the number of times. They seem to delight in describing it in extreme detail.

I've role played stripping lots of people. So long as you aren't finger banging them or something while doing it...it doesn't require consent. I did squeeze a boobie once while doing it that I can recall...I asked for consent, it was given.

I'm fine with certain things being a "Rule of Thumb", or "Not actually a rule but more of a unspoken guideline because we are nice to each other".

So long as it's not an actual rule and people can't use it to try and report everyone who hurts their personal sensibilities I'm all for it.

What I get from this is.. use coded actions to do things to people all day long sure, but heaven forbid if we role play? Unless we go OOC to do so?

Murder, Corruption and Betrayal brought me to this game along with the promise of a harsh playing environment. I read the documentation and made a conscious choice to play here. I thought everyone else did too, honestly?

I can understand wanting consent if things start going into Saw territory with a torture scene or if the sexy talk starts getting rated X or moving into a full-on grope-fest, but in general an innocently dirty joke isn't going to hurt anyone. Do you bother a person telling one in real life at a bar? No, generally, you roll your eyes and ignore it or move to a different section of the bar.

The only thing I'll say about after death things is that after your character dies, I think it pretty much becomes an object until the corpse is gone and then it becomes an NPC. If that makes sense and you see what I'm driving at. Mutilate it or whatever, but after the object is gone, the rules should probably apply as if the person had become an NPC?

Can i rape another player's vNPC family

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 31, 2014, 03:38:02 PM
Can i rape another player's vNPC family

I would say no because that would include another PC in the plotline, which is against the rules.

Rape plotlines can only include the rapists and VNPC's, it can not include other players, and in this case it would be directly including other players to an unreasonable degree in regards to the rule.

What if my vNPC family does it instead

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 31, 2014, 03:50:23 PM
What if my vNPC family does it instead

I would imagine you would have to get approval through staff to control the VNPC world ahead of time since players do not have that authority.

You would need the same approval to make VNPC's do anything.

Quote from: WithSprinkles on December 31, 2014, 02:48:00 PM
What I get from this is.. use coded actions to do things to people all day long sure, but heaven forbid if we role play? Unless we go OOC to do so?

Murder, Corruption and Betrayal brought me to this game along with the promise of a harsh playing environment. I read the documentation and made a conscious choice to play here. I thought everyone else did too, honestly?

I can understand wanting consent if things start going into Saw territory with a torture scene or if the sexy talk starts getting rated X or moving into a full-on grope-fest, but in general an innocently dirty joke isn't going to hurt anyone. Do you bother a person telling one in real life at a bar? No, generally, you roll your eyes and ignore it or move to a different section of the bar.

When I'm writing these posts, I'm trying to imagine the most fragile and sensitive people I know.  And so, in general, I really can't disagree with anything you've written above!  I do want the world to be as harsh as we can make it.

I guess my point was that coded actions (which actually do count as RP, but I understand what you're saying there) tend to abstract away a lot of the morbid details that are more likely to make people uncomfortable.

Stabbing someone in the neck and stabbing someone in the neck while emoting like Cormac McCarthy about their jugular bursting apart like a blood-filled water balloon are categorically different, but at the end of the day both are pretty harsh things to do to someone. :)

I found out a couple of years after the fact, that one of my characters had some pretty gruesome sex-related disgusting things done to her corpse after she was killed. It was roleplayed out, from what I was given to understand.

The fact that she was assassinated was known to me at the time of her death, but not who did it, why it was done, or what happened after it. Not until a couple years later when I happened to be playing in a clan with one of the people who played one of my previous characters' killers and we recognized each others' RP styles and commented OOCly about it in PM.

Personally I thought it was hillarious. The fact that I /wasn't/ there to see it while it was happening, is why I was able to appreciate it for the macabre comedy that it was. Ask consent for permission to do something with my character's corpse? Hell no. If my character is dead, then I'm not logged into the game. Do with it whatever suits your fancy, have a blast, ask consent of anyone else who is actually there, to make sure that acting out the sexually explicit details is kosher for everyone.

It wasn't just explicit, it was really REALLY disgusting. Like, beyond gross. But it was SO over the top that it wasn't believable, and therefore crossed the line into comedic gold. Like a dozen dead baby jokes all wrapped up and bundled into the glove compartment of a VW bug.

Personally I wouldn't want to witness that first-hand, and if I was one of the killers I would've asked to either a) fade or b) be excused from the act ICly so I could go to another room and do something else while the others were having their fun.

One can only hope that the *players* of these characters would have enough restraint as to not describe this in gory detail ICly to anyone, without asking consent for the explicit descriptives. But damn if anyone tries to turn Armageddon into Disneygeddon or Nanny-state-geddon by dumbing down the perversions for the sake of sensibilities.

Sensitive people shouldn't play Arm. That should be a given, there shouldn't be any room for discussion on that. It's a no-brainer.

Quote from: CodeMaster on December 31, 2014, 02:14:03 PM


The consent helpfile cites 'adult situations', which is a (probably purposefully) vague term.  But there are a number of coded things we can do that would probably require consent if they were to be emoted out instead:

- stabbing another human viciously in the neck during combat is fine, but you'd probably need consent to emote such an act during an interrogation sex.

(It's not really more correct. I just felt that it should read this way instead.)

I'm sensitive.
I play Arm.
At some point during my filthy talk I'm going to ask for consent. Sooooo much easier than someone breaking character in the midst of what you thought was okay to say "hey! Where's consent?!".

I once had a newb break character cause my Bynner checked out his ass in a hemote he caught.  No lie.

Does anyone actually think that basic civility with regards to interactions with another PLAYER is going to result in the disneyfication of Armageddon?

If the answer is yes, then my next question is how far your head is stuck up your ass right now?

Quote from: Jingo on December 31, 2014, 06:18:06 PM
Does anyone actually think that basic civility with regards to interactions with another PLAYER is going to result in the disneyfication of Armageddon?

If the answer is yes, then my next question is how far your head is stuck up your ass right now?

I think the general worry is that some people are going to expect other people to adhere to their opinion of what "basic civility" is and file reports against them for not having the same belief structure.

For example, someone said previously you might want to ask for consent to emote stripping someone knocked out.

I don't agree with that. I think it is absolutely within the confines of basic civility to not ask for consent just to strip someone...but obviously...someone disagrees.

I prefer actual rules, not opinions open to interpretation.

Quote from: Jingo on December 31, 2014, 06:18:06 PM
Does anyone actually think that basic civility with regards to interactions with another PLAYER is going to result in the disneyfication of Armageddon?

If the answer is yes, then my next question is how far your head is stuck up your ass right now?

seems to be advocating basic civility, then asks how far your head is stuck up your ass if opinion differs

lolwtf

I think the only time you should have to ask for consent is to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed scenes.

Quote from: TheWanderer on December 31, 2014, 06:25:11 PM

Quote from: Jingo on December 31, 2014, 06:18:06 PM
Does anyone actually think that basic civility with regards to interactions with another PLAYER is going to result in the disneyfication of Armageddon?

If the answer is yes, then my next question is how far your head is stuck up your ass right now?

seems to be advocating basic civility, then asks how far your head is stuck up your ass if opinion differs

lolwtf

Really the only person who would disagree with the decency crowd would have to be some kind of dog-kanking Nazi war-criminal psychopath who likes to wear high heels when they think no one is looking, and so it's a valid question. *arches an eyebrow*

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 31, 2014, 06:35:31 PM
I think the only time you should have to ask for consent is to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed scenes.

I'm also in favor of the actual topic consideration: Consent to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed discussion.

Is a flag for automatic consent to potentially disturbing roleplay under actual consideration? It seems like it would be a nice, useful thing with the caveat a player can stop a scene with an OOC request at any time.

Quote from: aeglaeca on December 31, 2014, 08:25:59 PM
Is a flag for automatic consent to potentially disturbing roleplay under actual consideration? It seems like it would be a nice, useful thing with the caveat a player can stop a scene with an OOC request at any time.

It keeps getting proposed every time this topic comes up. It's been like that since I started in 2010.

Quote from: Lizzie on December 31, 2014, 08:19:39 PM

Quote from: MeTekillot on December 31, 2014, 06:35:31 PM
I think the only time you should have to ask for consent is to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed scenes.

I'm also in favor of the actual topic consideration: Consent to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed discussion.

This

I've said it before and I'll say it again, slippery slope, folks, and I'm not the only one that thinks it. Be nice if an admin chimed in here to give some opinions on the removal of rape plotlines LAST christmas, and why it was done again... it wasn't meant to protect your delicate sensitivities, it was meant to reduce staff workload -because- your delicate sensitivities simply could not be removed from the equation, for whatever reason.

Quote from: Fujikoma on December 31, 2014, 07:55:53 PM
Really the only person who would disagree with the decency crowd would have to be some kind of dog-kanking Nazi war-criminal psychopath who likes to wear high heels when they think no one is looking, and so it's a valid question. *arches an eyebrow*

an' dat was the day I learned da entire internet was ruled by da Nazis.

should clarify point: you don't preach against dog-screwing Nazis, then go strap on your Nazi uniform and screw a dog.

So glad those dumb rape plots were taken out.

Quote from: Is Friday on December 31, 2014, 11:38:59 PM
So glad those dumb rape plots were taken out.

If you'd play a male character, then I would have pursued one eventually... nope, can't do it now. :P

Less censorship.  More deal with it. Barring time restraint or children present while you play I think consent as a wholeshould be ununnecessary.  Then again I'm not offended by much

What about background sex?

The figure in a brown hooded cloak sits at the ledge here, being fellated by a male.

(Mod edit: took out PNSFW comic drawing of fellatio.)

If I put that as my change ldesc, do I have to constantly spout:
>OOC for consent! I'm getting a BJ!

or could I just keep it until someone with the flag that says they don't want explicit content on shows up, then I end the scene and tuck my junk.

(btw. this pic kinda turns me on.)

Quote from: Majikal on January 01, 2015, 04:25:04 AM
Less censorship. 

It's not censorship. You have the privilege to express yourself here. Not the right.

QuoteMore deal with it. Barring time restraint or children present while you play I think consent as a whole should be ununnecessary.

This is probably not the game for you then.

What's going on in this thr-
(http://i.imgur.com/NTMRuDa.gif)

This thread is not about whether consent is necessary in the game, or whether the players of dead PCs should be asked consent before necrophilia, or the ban on rape and sexual torture plots, or whatever else this thread has veered into. It was about one simple question:

"Should you OOC for consent if you're going to talk dirty to someone but not emote dirty to them?"
And the question was answered, actually by the OP: "I think the only time you should have to ask for consent is to roleplay explicitly sexual or gruesomely violent and detailed scenes."

The consent rules are very clear-cut when it comes to matters in which consent is needed, and what RP is allowed and what isn't, regardless of the sensitivity of players. The consent rules are well in-line with MUDs similar to our own - RP MUDs with adult themes and adult players. If you want to discuss the consent rule in general, and believe you can do it in a way that doesn't accuse other players of being oversensitive children, then do so. If you can't, then the thread will be locked.

So you're saying that yes, you need to consent for dirty talk?

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on January 01, 2015, 09:00:32 AM
So you're saying that yes, you need to consent for dirty talk?

With a literal reading of the rules, bearing in mind I struggle to take any argument on this subject seriously:

The rules, I assume, don't exist to protect characters. We can assume they exist for the benefit of players and of staff.
Armageddon is a text-based game where what is read as an emote and what is read as 'dialogue' both appear the same outside of some minor formatting concerns.
If actions and words are interchangeable in the game medium then it's arguable that when words are indistinguishable from actions then the same rules should apply to both.
This depends heavily on context. As a rule of thumb I'd say the two become indistinguishable when instead of summarising/discussing/alluding to the act in question you are describing the acts themselves in a direct or mechanical way.

As an example:
"I'd probably take it in for a tune up, get a full check up and, if I get a good price, trade it in."
vs.
"I'm going to pull up to the station and watch as the mechanic pops the hood and roots around under the bonnet. Each piece is going to be properly removed, oiled and replaced."

Or whatever.

So, if you may as well be emoting - then yes, I'd say you should ask consent.

Quote from: Fujikoma on January 01, 2015, 02:04:32 AM

Quote from: Is Friday on December 31, 2014, 11:38:59 PM
So glad those dumb rape plots were taken out.

If you'd play a male character, then I would have pursued one eventually... nope, can't do it now. :P

I know that you're joking, but this is in bad taste. And I know bad taste jokes. I'm a Marine.

Well, the next time I walk into a really crowded tavern with my gritty mercenary and say to the girl with the big tits at the bar:

"Hey'a wench, why don't you'n me get on back ta' my room so I can slam my meat stick up in yer' axe wound and feed ya' my man jelly."

.....I'm going to gladly accept the player complaints.

If I play the sort of game -now- where saying that with my extremely crude characters, (which I have done a thousand times probably, I've played many crude characters), is worthy of a complaint, the game just changed a lot.

I've played characters where I would have to "OOC Consent to my character talking dirty?" every time a new person walked into the room just so they could walk past my table.

I hope you don't get any complaints about that D-man! Comical euphemisms are awesome. When I need/want to FTB on sex scenes that's my preferred fade RP (the "ok we had sex, you came, I didn't, we're dressed now, scene over" thing is SO boring). But yeah I consider that fade material, not explicit sexual scene/discussion material.

I hope I don't either. I'm not trying to be a dick. I'm just pointing out that if we allow people to file complaints for dirty talk, there WILL be some who file complaints for a lot of my characters because they have and will continue to say things like that regularly.

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 09:42:58 AM

Armageddon is a text-based game where what is read as an emote and what is read as 'dialogue' both appear the same outside of some minor formatting concerns.

If actions and words are interchangeable in the game medium then it's arguable that when words are indistinguishable from actions then the same rules should apply to both.

This depends heavily on context. As a rule of thumb I'd say the two become indistinguishable when instead of summarising/discussing/alluding to the act in question you are describing the acts themselves in a direct or mechanical way.

So, if you may as well be emoting - then yes, I'd say you should ask consent.

If the new guideline is, "If you would have to ask for consent to emote it, you should ask for consent to say it.", we just opened a new can of worms.

For example, I would have asked for consent every time to emote:

The tall, muscular man gropes your breasts roughly, flicking the nipples before sucking on them with vigor.

Now I have to ask for consent to say:

"I groped her breasts roughly, flicked that gals nipples, then sucked on'm with the vigor of a chalton calf!".

.......lol wut?

Nobody replied to my question about sexy ldescs and my sexy pic was censored.

If you consent to being awesome then PM me for the image that was modded.

There was no penus in that pic btw so nsfw = not safe for wisconsin i guess

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 11:55:01 AM

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 09:42:58 AM

Armageddon is a text-based game where what is read as an emote and what is read as 'dialogue' both appear the same outside of some minor formatting concerns.

If actions and words are interchangeable in the game medium then it's arguable that when words are indistinguishable from actions then the same rules should apply to both.

This depends heavily on context. As a rule of thumb I'd say the two become indistinguishable when instead of summarising/discussing/alluding to the act in question you are describing the acts themselves in a direct or mechanical way.

So, if you may as well be emoting - then yes, I'd say you should ask consent.

If the new guideline is, "If you would have to ask for consent to emote it, you should ask for consent to say it.", we just opened a new can of worms.

For example, I would have asked for consent every time to emote:

The tall, muscular man gropes your breasts roughly, flicking the nipples before sucking on them with vigor.

Now I have to ask for consent to say:

"I groped her breasts roughly, flicked that gals nipples, then sucked on'm with the vigor of a chalton calf!".

.......lol wut?

No, Rathustra is saying you should ask consent for:

"I will grope your breasts roughly, flicking your nipples, then I will suck on them with vigor."

Also, I'm saying that rather than put yourself into a situation where consent isn't a definite yes or no, you might use your "description of what I did to someone else, that I'm telling a third party" rather than the less humorous, more "steamy" version. One constitutes humorous narrative. The other implies explicit erotica.

Honestly Dman, you're nitpicking and being pedantic. Anyone who is seriously not understanding the difference should do a google search on "erotica" and "third-person narrative" and just accept that if your text falls out of the fun-fade category and into the "erotica" category, they should either lighten it up, or accept that someone might complain if you don't ask for consent.

If you want to avoid the complaint - whether deserved or not - then pick a less erotic implementation, and something closer to your idea of the narrative. As I said, I personally found it humorous though others might not - but it's LESS LIKELY to garner complaint than if you went full-on erotica.

I think I'll just play the same way I have for going on 20 years and see how that goes for me.

I think Rath was saying exactly what I said he was saying. I guess that is the problem when you have rules of thumb and guidelines that are open to interpretation and not just rules.

Once again, use common sense. The less restraint you show from within, the more must be added from without.

"Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites...in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters."
Edmund Burke

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 01:25:00 PM
I think I'll just play the same way I have for going on 20 years and see how that goes for me.

I think Rath was saying exactly what I said he was saying. I guess that is the problem when you have rules of thumb and guidelines that are open to interpretation and not just rules.

But we have rules.

Quote from: help consent
If you choose to roleplay adult situations, that is fine. However, before instigating such an act with another player, you need to OOC to make sure that the role play is consented to, in each scene it happens.

"Instigating such an act" would be a sexual act. Bragging to Amos that your PC did something to Tressy is fine without consent because Amos isn't being interacted with sexually. A "phone sex" sort of format to the says or psis to Tressy would be pushing it across the line of needing consent. Sexual emotes with Tressy clearly need consent.

If you want a list of specific situations where consent is required or not, well, that's not going to happen, because the possibilities are too numerous.

The distinguishing factor when asking for consent is: is/are the player(s) I'm interacting with the subject of my adult RP or not?

cool, so i can be fellated in a bar all I damn please, especially if I'm not throwing too many emotes out, because no player is being subjected to the emotes directly. If someone who doesn't consent to seeing my shit shows up (boo) then they should OOC that they'd like me to tone it down then I can, of course

good to know. let the public fellating begin

I'd advise everyone to play how they've been playing for 15 years 20 years and we'll deal with any problems as they arise as adults.

Quote from: Harmless on January 01, 2015, 01:42:42 PM
cool, so i can be fellated in a bar all I damn please, especially if I'm not throwing too many emotes out, because no player is being subjected to the emotes directly. If someone who doesn't consent to seeing my shit shows up (boo) then they should OOC that they'd like me to tone it down then I can, of course

good to know. let the public fellating begin

Isn't this how the rules are read anyway? If you consent to mudsex in a back alley and someone turns up then surely this has always been the case? If you're somehow slightly out of phase of reality and in the middle of the gaj mudsexing - as long as you and the other ensign who was in the transporter accident with you is ok with it (through use of consent) then everyone who can perceive the mudsex has consented and bam, it's fine.

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 01:43:13 PM
I'd advise everyone to play how they've been playing for 15 years 20 years 17 years and we'll deal with any problems as they arise as adults.

Roger that.

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 02:12:46 PM

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 01:43:13 PM
I'd advise everyone to play how they've been playing for 15 years 20 years 17 years and we'll deal with any problems as they arise as adults.

Roger that.

To put a positive spin on what was perhaps an unfair play on my part - the 'we' who will be dealing with these problems is everyone. When we get a complaint we don't just read the log we're provided with by the accuser - we check our records, consider related reports and requests and try to get a better idea about what exactly happened. Hopefully the next step after that is contacting the person being accused and ask for clarification, or outline what rule we feel has been broken and ask for an explanation.

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 02:24:42 PM

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 02:12:46 PM

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 01:43:13 PM
I'd advise everyone to play how they've been playing for 15 years 20 years 17 years and we'll deal with any problems as they arise as adults.

Roger that.

To put a positive spin on what was perhaps an unfair play on my part - the 'we' who will be dealing with these problems is everyone. When we get a complaint we don't just read the log we're provided with by the accuser - we check our records, consider related reports and requests and try to get a better idea about what exactly happened. Hopefully the next step after that is contacting the person being accused and ask for clarification, or outline what rule we feel has been broken and ask for an explanation.

Yar yar. I'm not trying to be a poo poo head. I don't actually think staff would get bent out of shape over my example above if you saw it in a player complaint.

My concern is you guys will end up with fifty player complaints for silly things like that because the playerbase is going to have a bit more of a wide ranging ability to interpret that guideline within their own sensitivities.

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 02:43:24 PM

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 02:24:42 PM

Quote from: Desertman on January 01, 2015, 02:12:46 PM

Quote from: Rathustra on January 01, 2015, 01:43:13 PM
I'd advise everyone to play how they've been playing for 15 years 20 years 17 years and we'll deal with any problems as they arise as adults.

Roger that.

To put a positive spin on what was perhaps an unfair play on my part - the 'we' who will be dealing with these problems is everyone. When we get a complaint we don't just read the log we're provided with by the accuser - we check our records, consider related reports and requests and try to get a better idea about what exactly happened. Hopefully the next step after that is contacting the person being accused and ask for clarification, or outline what rule we feel has been broken and ask for an explanation.

Yar yar. I'm not trying to be a poo poo head. I don't actually think staff would get bent out of shape over my example above if you saw it in a player complaint.

My concern is you guys will end up with fifty player complaints for silly things like that because the playerbase is going to have a bit more of a wide ranging ability to interpret that guideline within their own sensitivities.

qfmft

For what it's worth, player complaints make up about 1.5% of all requests in the request tool, which goes back to 2006. To put it in perspective, there are 5 times more player kudos requests than there are player complaints.

For the average player, the judgment of other players should not an overbearing concern, because 99.9% of the time, players are following the rules and bringing their best abilities to the table. Staff often catch complaint-worthy behavior before players do though, so that's something to consider.

cool. i feel like now that the admins have weighed in that I have no lingering concerns about the OP. thanks staff!

Quote from: Harmless on January 01, 2015, 07:55:42 PM
cool. i feel like now that the admins have weighed in that I have no lingering concerns about the OP. thanks staff!

Yeah, so hush! *attempts to slap you violently* stop dodging! Christ, at least let one go through before I start power-emoting!

Yep! Seems pretty well spelled out to me. Ask consent for dirty talk if you don't feel like being a turd. Being a large, brown puddle of waste myself, I only ask for consent during sexy things that actually happen. I will NOT ask consent every time I tell a dirty joke. As annoying as I found the whole concept, I felt the debate really brought a lot out into the open, not that it really needs to be discussed, but awareness, I think, is really important. While I will not be altering my playstyle, some might, which, does, uh, something?

Also, for the record, corpses are objects. Fun!