Coercion, manipulation, and sex.

[mansa]

...
Also, here's your 'Buyer Beware' warning for the kind of roleplay and experience you're purchasing with your time on Armageddon - At any time you might be killed for the dumbest of reasons. You might be having the time of your life and it took you 3 months to get there and someone will murder you without any emotes just because they don't like the color of your hair, or you might die because your internet dropped for a minute while you were outside hunting.

The act of combat, of killing another character in the game, are all mechanical devices which the game engine takes care of, and every player of the game has already opted into the resolution the game engine determines.

Imagine that every time you wanted to engage with another character you needed to roll the dice, and it would respond with what action you're allowed to roleplay with that character.  i.e. You rolled a 20/20, which means you're allowed to harass them, or you rolled a 2/20 so you attempt to become their servant/lacky.

If our players didn't agree with the mechanical aspects of combat and death, the players would probably move on to another game format that allows for alternative outcomes in combat and death.

[Robespierre]

Why in krath would you, in this situation, NOT FADE? If you don't like or enjoy ERP, but your character would totally be cool with this situation and wants all the sweet loot. You FADE! If the other PC does not treat that exactly the same way (e.g. the characters had a blast) then that would be complaint worthy. A fade should be entirely equal to a played out scene in terms of using it as currency...for a character.

I think the reasons people think fading isn't sufficient are two-fold:

1) Some people don't want to play the aftermath of being coerced into sex, and that's fundamentally different from not wanting to play the aftermath of being tortured or robbed. Indeed, my read of "help rape" is that players are allowed to avoid even having to fade in this circumstance. A command like "POOC [target]" would give players a chance to opt out without having to OOC chat, where there may potentially be other people.

2) If your boss or whoever is asking to sleep with you like 20 times, you can't fade past that. Without being able to stop it OOCly, you just have to RP being harassed.

[Malken]

This conversation is getting confusing...

Ama's hypothetical situation is that her boss is offering her eternal happiness if she agrees to sleep with him... Not only does she agree but she's going full mudsex-until-dehydration mode. The boss then tells her that she was super lame in bed and doesn't want her around. Now Ama's character is pissed so she tells people about it and the boss decides to kill her off for it.

Now Ama thinks that she just wasted her time with that plot... and.... wants that kind of attitude banned?

Ama states that

We should try to keep it fun for everyone. The hurdle with fun in a dark, gritty theme is there's a multitude of scenarios that can leave you feeling used and slimy.

I totally agree with the first part but I'm not sure I understand the second part... You're going to end up feeling used and slimy on Armageddon.

I'd be totally fine with her scenario if the scenario went more like.. Her boss asks her for sex each time she logs in, she tells him to backoff OOCly because it's starting to creep her out, but the boss continues, she complains to the staff and staff has a serious talk with the boss.

[Ama]

I never said anything about wanting anyone banned in that situation.

The morale of that story is do not consent if it's iffy.

And the conclusion I've come to is not every situation is going to be fun. I've seen people killed for really trivial reasons. Sometimes it's as simple as they're X and I'm Y. With adult scenes though, there are at least some safety nets.

[Malken]

The morale of that story is do not consent if it's iffy.

Ahh, that makes more sense!

Sorry if I misunderstood your point.

[Saiseiki]

I don't have much to add, other than to say I'm glad this conversation is taking place.  It's been both helpful and enlightening for me.  I do agree the helpfiles should probably get some sprucing up, as from what I can tell the "Overton window" has shifted significantly over the years/decades (I still consider myself a new player, as I haven't been playing nearly long enough to "get" much of the deeper dynamics and culture that undergird this singular game).

[Ama]

The morale of that story is do not consent if it's iffy.

Ahh, that makes more sense!

Sorry if I misunderstood your point.

We good!

Re-reading it, not the best hypothetical and my point doesn't come across entirely clearly. There's not going to be perfect protection for feelings and part of it is on us, the players, to control our own narratives. It's definitely on us to at least prompt to see if others are comfortable. Even in the bad examples, Goolash might be played by a perfectly cordial person who likes to read some smut every now and is doing the best to portray the character the way they've made them. Given the choice to fade, he or she likely wouldn't mind because most people, maybe 99% even, would do so without qualms.

I'm glad the conversation is taking place, too. I feel generally better about this community because of people like Malken, mansa, 7DeadlyVenoms et al, and the willingness to have this rather tough dialogue.

[Blanc de Ocotillo]

The line of where you must request consent has moved slowly over the years and, bluntly, I think that it is absolutely ridiculous. Consent for anything is a silly idea. The entire world in which we play is a horrible place - if you can't handle that, you should likely be playing a different game instead of wanting more and more restrictions here.

Lots of us don't agree and would like some boundaries on our harshness. There are however games that explicitly allow rape in the RPI community if you want to go there instead.

I would wager he is talking about torture not rape

[Malken]

Lots of us don't agree and would like some boundaries on our harshness. There are however games that explicitly allow rape in the RPI community if you want to go there instead.

There really isn't so let's stop pretending that Armageddon is some kind of Paragon of Virtue when it comes to a healthy community and a spotless reputation because it really isn't. We have almost 30 years of abuse and nasty behaviors that many of us have agreed to continue to play through and turn a blind eye to even though we all knew what was happening, what was allowed and what some of our fellow players went through.

The best we can do is try and repair the terrible reputation we have both as a community and as an example to follow and that's a good start but I guarantee you that nothing we're deciding today hasn't been done in other communities YEARS ago.

Many of you have been playing for 20+ years even when there wasn't any rules against rape so it's cool that you want to change all of that now but again, let's not gang up on Magnate for playing the way Armageddon has been until only very recently.

Let's not be hypocrites.

[Katima]

So I'm going to chime in ever so briefly to point something out, because I saw it fly around a bit on a previous page and it doesn't look like it was ever addressed. If I've missed some correction of the thought process, I apologize, but I'm just offering information.

The act of even threatening to rape someone ICLY is absolutely not allowed. Also not allowed is accusing someone of rape ICly. See here, which I copied and pasted directly from the help rape helpfile:

This also extends to accusations of rape, as well -- You
may not accuse another PC or NPC of raping your PC or another PC (or an NPC
for that matter). Direct threats of rape or sexual torture - that is,
explicit statements of immediate or future rape or sexual torture directed
at a single individual (by name or otherwise) are also not permitted. If
you do so, your character will be stored and a discussion will be opened
via the request tool as to further action.

And here:

You may speak of rape, or being raped, but it can never lead to a PC
or NPC being accused of that rape or being raped by anyone.  You can assume
that if someone is talking about being raped or raping someone, that it
was with a VNPC.

I'm pretty sure I saw someone state that the accusation ruined a PC, and perhaps that situation predated the rule, but then I think I also saw a post saying this shouldn't be allowed, and simply wanted to make it clear that it actually isn't allowed. If I am mistaken, carry on.

[stoicreader]

Leadership characters are in a position where they may unwittingly rape someone less powerful.

This happens all the time in real life with physicians and lawyers despite them getting mandatory training on it.

If highly educated professionals dont get it. Players in a video game certainly wont get it.

It is easy as hell to create a coded system to prevent this. Consent flags that can be on or off.

or...

It can be HARD AS HELL to try and educate, AND enforce, consent rules with every leadership PC.


This happened to me in-game and I would NEVER report the character because in order to defend themselves they'd say, "Well she consented." And that's super embarrassing! And well yes, while I did consent OOCLY, it was under a perceived threat ICly

So... Even though many of you make REALLY good points about the PROBLEMS with a consent flag, and I AGREE with you, it's really a good thing for the game in it's evolution. I'm the kind of person who is NOT woke. I don't believe men and women are equal, or being sensitive to everything and everyone is lame AF...But something like this... would be a great MATURE move of the administrators and staff to add into the game.

[Cabooze]

It is easy as hell to create a coded system to prevent this. Consent flags that can be on or off.

and a command to check consent of a character

Consent levels (leveled 1-5): None, Sex, Torture, Rape, All

>A blue eyed man is here
>A red eyed man is here

>Check blue.man

>A blue eyed man is consent level 2 and 3

>Check red.man

>A red eyed man is consent level 1

There would be no more need for contention over the rules, because you won't be exposed to a thing if you don't enable it in the settings: And if it is forced on you even then, the offending player will absolutely get taken care of.

[Maso]

There seems to be some confusion amidst this thread.

Firstly, there are two levels of consent. There is IC consent and OOC consent.

It is possible to have IC consent but not OOC consent in most scenarios, this equals a fade.

It is not possible to have OOC consent but no IC consent (that would be defined as rape).

For the purposes of most scenarios...torture, consensual sex, non-threatening/violent coercion from a peer, then no consent OOC would ultimately be a fade. In this instance, it should be assumed that the said act did in fact happen. There is absolutely no reason you should feel like you have to act out something you find distasteful, just because your character would get involved. The IC consequences/results should be exactly the same whether you fade or not.

In the case of IC non-consent to torture or coercion (from a peer) etc, your character can also choose to stand up for themselves (if appropriate) and face the consequences. Sure, it could be death. But your character risks death every time you log on to Arm and there are worse ways to go (e.g. lost to a nameless scrab).

In the instance of coercion with a power imbalance (e.g. superior to underling), the rules are very clear. Consent should be requested as early as possible, once romantic intentions are known. And players of underling characters are able to OOC that they are not comfortable with the plot line at all (and SHOULD if that is the case), and the superior character has to adjust their intent or desire (basically retcon it), which should be mean no negative consequences to the underling character.

Know this. Own it.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Lots of us don't agree and would like some boundaries on our harshness. There are however games that explicitly allow rape in the RPI community if you want to go there instead.

There really isn't so let's stop pretending that Armageddon is some kind of Paragon of Virtue when it comes to a healthy community and a spotless reputation because it really isn't. We have almost 30 years of abuse and nasty behaviors that many of us have agreed to continue to play through and turn a blind eye to even though we all knew what was happening, what was allowed and what some of our fellow players went through.

The best we can do is try and repair the terrible reputation we have both as a community and as an example to follow and that's a good start but I guarantee you that nothing we're deciding today hasn't been done in other communities YEARS ago.

Many of you have been playing for 20+ years even when there wasn't any rules against rape so it's cool that you want to change all of that now but again, let's not gang up on Magnate for playing the way Armageddon has been until only very recently.

Let's not be hypocrites.

While this is a good point, I think it's important to note that many of us, during our two decades (good grief, we've been here a long-ass time) of play, have also matured both mentally and socially. Some of us were kids, and now we've got grey hair. We've got kids - in fact, in that span of time, some of us have had kids and seen them off to college or whatever. We've gotten more caring as a community. The real world has changed around us.

We've evolved.

Some of us don't see the need for the game's social rules to evolve as much as they have, and some of us wish the game's rules had evolved more than they have. And I personally think that both of these view points are valid.

Old hands like Magnate and me worry sometimes that the game will be washed down, that the harshness will slowly be eroded through continual steps towards more "No. You can't do this, this, or this." We worry that society has created players who can't disconnect themselves from their characters. We don't want to force people to RP in detail these travesties, but we don't like that these travesties can't happen in today's game.

Other people draw correlation between the "harshness" of the game, and emotional scarring of the players themselves, and really want to make the community a more friendly place. These people are much more worried about the players themselves than the characters. And during this discussion, I've found myself dealing with some points that kind of make me take a step back from my previous position of, "Well, there must be consent, but don't ban anything."

In this very discussion, I've evolved some. So I think we're pretty safe from hypocrisy, in reacting to viewpoints like Magnate's. I think we're just ... evolving, figuring out how we, as individual players, have grown, and figuring out how much we, as individual players, care about the other souls in our corner of the sands.

[Shabago]

I do not see flags working as put forth here.

Imagine the Gaj, with some thief caught and about to lose a hand and 6 PCs are present to see such.

Templar/Sarge: OOC Consent?
1,2,3,4,6: OOC Given.
5: OOC no thanks.

Two choices, now:

1) 5 - Leave.
2) Everyone BUT 5 leave and continue on.

Simple and sorted inside of seconds. Scene rolls on in one fashion or another.

Now we get into flags.

Templar/Sarge: Check PC 1, pc 2, pc 3, pc 4, pc 5, pc 6
Templar/Sarge: Oh, okay... PC 2 doesn't want to see this.
Templar/Sarge: say (motioning to everyone but 2) "Follow me."
PC 2: Why am I being cut out? I have no idea what is happening here. OOC: Why am I being left out? OR Player complaint. OR they were in a scene earlier they set the flag for and forgot to turn off and are now shafted from a scene.
Templar/Sarge and crew exit and go to the cells - Recruit 7, Private 8 enter the scene.
Templar/Sarge: Check 7, check 8, ...Okay, 8 doesn't want to see torture.
Thief: OOC: Could this not take 30 minutes, I need to go in 15?
Templar/Sarge: OOC Could you leave 8?
Private: OOC: Why?
Templar/Sarge: OOC Torture scene?
Private: OOC: Oh, right. Sure.
Templar: Starts to carry on with the scene.
Templar 2 walks in mid-way:
Templar 2: Check 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Templar 1: check Templar 2 who has torture off.
Templar 1: OOC We're doing a torture scene here, could you step out?
Templar 2: OOC: Why? I'm fine with it.
Templar 1: OOC Your flag is off?
Templar 2: OOC Oh, sorry, forgot about that default off thing - On now!
Thief player, now 20 mins into a scene that was done in 2 mins back in the Gaj: OOC I gotta go.

[Shabago]

Further, this desired addition will result in countless, impossible to enforce thought and speech complaints.

Player 1 wants to be an aide. They have flags off.
Noble 1 takes them on, has all the flags on.

Player 1 is always with Noble 1.

Noble 1 to random PC that has the flags on. "Quite a lovely shape on you, you're rather on par with my well dressed aide."

Intent/Context:
1) Noble wanted to flirt and or compliment random.
2) Noble wanted to INSULT their own aide for looking like some random commoner.

Player 1 now feels Noble has suggested they have a great body, like random, despite their flag being off and files a complaint against Noble 1.

We take action, Noble is not OOCly insulted as that has zero to do with their intent/context.
We don't take action and player 1 assumes staff is taking the side of the 'abuser', don't honor our own flag system, etc.

[SpyGuy]

I think flags might be able to work if there was a command that pinged visible PCs in a room but if that's not in the cards fine.  It's pretty tedious currently to see public torture and need ooc consent from 6+ people.

What I would like to say is that whatever we decide on for rules regarding coercion and harassment (and I do believe they could be strengthened to ensure consent) we shouldn't ban behaviors like flirting or lewdness or even IC sexual harassment outright.  Sometimes that's the character you play, a low class (or even highborn) perv who is constantly making sexual jokes.  That's the world we choose to inhabit.

What does need some attention imo is players who can't take no for an answer and push it constantly.   I can't imagine how tiring it would be to have a PC that every time they interact with another PC is getting 'wooed'/begged for sex/slut shamed or whatever.   There should be a way for someone to OOC/put in a request and have it respected that another PC will drop their attempts to pursue that character.  Rejection should still be able to have IC consequences as it's natural for hunans to sonetimes take rejection badly though if you kill a PC just for rejecting your sexual advances you're the lamest sort of player.

There are virtually thousands of attractive vnpcs in Allanak.  Just because a PC is attractive to your character doesn't mean your (general you here) PC needs to pursue them.  And if you're pushing it to such a degree that you're making the other player's experience a negative one then they need a widely accepted outlet to tell you such and make it stop.

[Robespierre]

What does need some attention imo is players who can't take no for an answer and push it constantly.   I can't imagine how tiring it would be to have a PC that every time they interact with another PC is getting 'wooed'/begged for sex/slut shamed or whatever.   There should be a way for someone to OOC/put in a request and have it respected that another PC will drop their attempts to pursue that character. 

Agreed. I think this is why a private command is preferable to a flag. One could even make a lewd or offensive comment, get the command thrown, and make no more such comments, so the effect on theme would be minimal. On the other hand, if character A is making those comments to character B every day, the private command would and should stop it.

Also, my understanding is that this only applies to sex. If it's violence, psychological torture, extortion, (inter-species) racism, classism, xenophobia, robbery, lying, infanticide, or any other terrible thing, I advocate the only option for the victim should be FTB. If you elect to play an elf, law enforcement can and should be able to assume you stole something because of the shape of your ears.

In the instance of coercion with a power imbalance (e.g. superior to underling), the rules are very clear. Consent should be requested as early as possible, once romantic intentions are known. And players of underling characters are able to OOC that they are not comfortable with the plot line at all (and SHOULD if that is the case), and the superior character has to adjust their intent or desire (basically retcon it), which should be mean no negative consequences to the underling character.

I think in practice, some people feel coerced or are at least getting constantly harassed by their superiors. If simple awareness of this rules solves the problem, great. If OOC chat poses limitations because of comfort levels and immersion breaking for third parties, a private command could work.

[Malken]

In this very discussion, I've evolved some. So I think we're pretty safe from hypocrisy, in reacting to viewpoints like Magnate's. I think we're just ... evolving, figuring out how we, as individual players, have grown, and figuring out how much we, as individual players, care about the other souls in our corner of the sands.

The7DeadlyVenomz, you had to edit a bunch of players in this thread first telling me, then Magnate, to fuck off and go play our rape fantasies elsewhere. If you had left all of the posts unedited, that would have been a better representation of the "community" I'm talking about in general

But I agree that we should evolve, grow up and be better ambassadors of a healthy gaming community in general - I just don't think that the holier than thou attitude is fooling anyone, especially since most of what goes on in Discord these days are old players constantly remembering the time they were complete assholes to each others. "Do you guys remember the time I fucked a ginka fruit in all it's glorious details and in public" Hur hur hur, yes we do, it was awesome man!" Do you guys remember the time I kidnapped a baby and ate it whole? Hur hur hur! Yes, we do, it was so awesome!"

Anyway, I'm out of this conversation because I'm really not sure what I'm arguing for or against now at this point. It looks like we have 20+ staff and the playerbase isn't -that- big, so I'm not sure why it can't be handled on a case by case basis. If someone is a complete creep and in a leadership position, surely the staff in charge of that player would notice and have words with him. If staff constantly promote creepy players to play in positions of leadership then that's on them.

People are telling me that Armageddon is pretty cool these days and like I said, I trust 99% of the staff so I know they're doing the best they can with the players they have.

Thanks for letting me say my peace and for making the GDB a little more interesting than just the constant vote reminder spam that it had turned into recently! 

[Shabago]

Seems a character and player separation is the issue.

If a PC says or does something you don't like to your PC - Your PC doesn't like it. You the player are not the PC. The PC who said it, is not representing themselves, but a concept.

If someone is playing a leering, swearing, sociopath in game, and your PC hates leering, swearing sociopaths, you have IC actions to take:

1) You can avoid them/not work for them.
2) You can tell them to knock it off.
3) You can beat them senseless to knock sense into them regarding your PC
4) You can gather other PCs that like you and cut them off socially.
5) You can have them killed for being a pain in your ass.

All of these generate interaction and role play, due to conflict. Good. This game is about conflict.

Now, when it comes to the PLAYER on either side of the screen, this has been and will continue to have safeties in place.

1) If you feel the PLAYER is harassing you the PLAYER, player complaint.
2) If they are pursuing a relationship with you as a boss/superior/leadership to your employee self, they are expected to OOC consent for it, before it crosses into R territory. That is in the very paragraph that has been quoted here.

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.

This means if you the PLAYER do not wish for this to happen... it doesn't. End of story. It isn't FTB'd. It does not happen.

And #3, in help consent, rather than help rape:

If someone is instigating roleplay that
makes you uncomfortable, please OOC that they should stop.  If they
continue despite being told to stop, please wish up.  This rule is not meant to be abused in order to allow characters to escape the consequences.

So, where is the issue yet remaining here?

- You are protected, with options as a player to avoid power imbalance.
- You are protected, with options as a player to avoid uncomfortable situations with a peer.
- Zero FTB or 'living with it' comes to pass due to the two quoted help files. They do NOT take place. At all.
- Anyone breaking those rules will be immediately banned from the game.

We do not and will not condone PLAYER harassment of any kind, and thus if that takes place, we most certainly wish to be informed of it.

[Magnate]

Seems a character and player separation is the issue.

This has absolutely been the problem for some time now. People can not separate IC and OOC anymore. Just because you know something, doesn't mean that your PC knows it. Just because you don't like something or wouldn't do it, doesn't mean that your PC wouldn't.

In Armageddon things like gruesome torture, rampant poverty, games where people maim (and kill) one another for entertainment, killing people for a drink of water, extreme racism, slavery, and many other things that we likely consider immoral, inappropriate, or just evil are ACCEPTED and even EXPECTED.

We are playing a role, not avatars of ourselves. This isn't real. It doesn't hurt.

[mansa]

So, I've decided to rewrite the rape policy to something I like a bit better.

Please give any feedback for my changes.



Rape                                                                     (Rules)
Rape within the Fantasy World in terms of Culture and Story:
Like many crimes, rape is a part of life on Zalanthas. Most half-elves are the
result of rape, warfare and raiding regularly result in the act, and the
breeding of muls does not end well for the mother. It is an unfortunate part of
Zalanthan life, but it happens. It is important to remember that if you do run
across a plotline involving rape, that this is not the same as this crime
happening in real life, and you should adjust your attitude and role play
accordingly.

Rape within the Character's Storylines and Player's Gameplay:
Rape/Sexual Torture plot lines are never to be played out in the game. You may
choose to place such plot lines or elements in your character's background at
character creation, however new incidents of rape and sexual torture can not be
played out in the game world. You may not ask for consent to rape a PC or NPC.
This also extends to accusations of rape, as well -- You may not accuse another
PC or NPC of raping your PC or another PC (or an NPC for that matter).

Direct threats of rape or sexual torture - that is, explicit statements of
immediate or future rape or sexual torture directed at a single individual (by
name or otherwise) are also not permitted. If you do so, your character will be
stored and a discussion will be opened via the request tool as to further
action.

Your character can be a rapist, or a product of rape. However, as per the rules
outlined above, you can never rape a PC or NPC character. You may do so to
VNPCs, as well as have thoughts of raping others, but you may never express the
act in game.

You may speak of rape, or being raped, but it can never lead to a PC or NPC
being accused of that rape or being raped by anyone. You can assume that if
someone is talking about being raped or raping someone, that it was with a
Virtual NPC.


Relationships between Characters:
In situations where a power imbalance between two characters exists and said
imbalance is used as leverage (or coercion) for an adult situation, consent must
be sought at the earliest possible juncture. 

Example:
OOC Do you consent to pursue an amorous relationship between our characters?

If any player does not consent, that storyline cannot continue, and the
characters must change their play to avoid a sexual situation going forward,
including any inappropriate touching (grabbing asses, touching thighs, grabbing
breasts, kissing, etc..) or other forms of sexual harassment.



See Also:
Consent, NPC, VNPC, Rules



I clarified certain distinctions of Rape - within the fantasy world, within the playerbase and community, and within relationships between characters.

I clarified the rules between two players with a power imbalance / coercion, and gave an example of how to ask for it.
   I added a rule that says that if any character doesn't want to have a relationship, the storyline must stop and cannot continue in any format, including sexual harassment.

I removed the textbook defintions of rape and sexual intercourse - this can be added back in.

[stoicreader]

I'm still in favor of a coded tool.

I've played another game with a coded tool. And it wasn't so bad.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I think if it was ONLY USED TO DECIDE HOW TO APPROACH SOMEONE, that would be fine. I would absolutely not use it for any other purpose. I would still default to OOC Consent to make sure things were kosher.

[Lotion]

I think consent flags would cause some players to interact with others differently in ways not directly related to the flags which would further harm immersion.