View Full Version : Consent Balance
11-18-2000, 12:35 AM
As I'm sure that you've discovered, we have a fairly elaborate consent system in Castle Marrach, that requires the approval of the receipient for 'intimate' actions. This prevents someone who does not respect personal boundaries from being a masher.
We have been reluctant to overuse the consent system for other commands that are a bit more "armslength". In particular, these include the socials 'hit', 'kick', 'spit', etc. Someday (hopefully soon) they will be part of a brawling combat system, but for now, they are just socials like kiss and bow.
After a few complaints, I have turned consent on for many of these more armslength socials. This may cause some problems. For instance, I briefly tonight turned consent on for 'pet', and it meant that people could not pet cats.
It only takes a few minutes to adjust these, so comment here on any fine adjustments that you'd like to see. Are we turned consent on for too many commands? Should we require more to have consent?
-- Christopher Allen
11-18-2000, 02:48 AM
I had wondered if there would be a brawling combat system.
Though I think it is unfortunate that things have gotten to this point, I am glad you did turn it on. It just seems that as soon as the laws were posted, characters have just gone nuts about hitting, kicking, punching, slapping. 90% of it unprovoked at that.
While I'm all for good rp and appreciate the few insane people (like Ignus, Lysaer, and Church), this rash of unprovoked violence just ruins the game for me, as I'm pretty sure it does for others. It has gotten quite annoying. As I posted a response on the rape issue, all this fighting was one of the reasons Erin logged off early the other day.
I'm not saying everyone should be shiny, happy people (sorry, couldn't resist that one), but there's just too much of it. It's been hard for Erin not to go into a rage of her own as she's not that kind of character.
But she really does not take too kindly to seeing others being hit for no reason.
For things like the spitting, gesturing, those I don't mind so much, what gets me are the physical ones.
Granted characters are going to have flared tempers and they will fight, but I think it should be consentual ooc as much as ic.
Thank you so much for your very quick response. http://www.skotos.net/ubb/smile.gif
11-18-2000, 07:06 AM
I'll admit that I did have some fun "abusing" the slapping capability, although it was against NPCs rather than PCs. I thought it was pretty halarious to be able to slap the tailor and demand he give me a different color pants.
Mischievousness aside, I do think such commands should require consent where player-characters are concerned. As for NPCs, it would be nice to see some reprocussions for slapping a guard, or even attempting to slap a guard. Asking for a NPCs consent (and nothing happens aftwards) kind of defeats the purpose. However, I do realize there is only so much you can (and should) do where a NPC is concerned.
In my opinion, the ability to permanently allow censent to someone offsets the amount of commands that need consent. For instance, if I know I can trust another player, and I turn on consent for them, it is not tedious at all if they want to whisper to me, or sit by me, etc. It's a sad fact that a consent system is very much in need. Experienced roleplayers will use consent responsibly, and the OOC command will allow those who are unsure whether to allow consent to discuss it beforehand.
I am sure there is a definitive line between too many and not enough commands requiring consent. My opinion is that if you are doing something "to" another player (including slap, hit, stomp, etc) then consent is needed and useful. Other commands are harmless, such as pointing or glaring at someone.
Thank you for considering my opinion =)
11-18-2000, 08:30 AM
For now, I think turning on consent for these more agressive actions is probably correct. While a pain sometimes to get consent in a crowded room, there have just been too many instances of players acting more agressive than the game world warrents, and being sorry later. If they needed to get consent, the players could be ooc'ed an have their motives questioned.
Now, with that, I have another request. Would it be possible to get a more temporary way to add people to consent lists? I'm thinking of a consent list like the current one that only lasts while both people are in the same room. So I could add someone to my consent list if we were RPing out a fight (which Martel has done before), but not have to add them to my more long term list. With whisper for example, it isn't that big a deal, since once you get to whisper range you can keep whispering without consent. BUt with kick or punch, everyone may require consent, and that would get tiring really fast.
-=- Matt aka. Martel
11-18-2000, 08:33 AM
Since the cats seem to enjoy being pet, and are able to dodge kicks aimed their way easily, can the cats be programmed to give consent for those actions that they have a response to (pet, hold, kick...)?
That way, we can all pet the cats and still deny others to pet us.
11-18-2000, 09:25 AM
I don't really think there's anything wrong with the current consent system, except that it's a little too visable. I don't think we should be able to see when other people give consent for things. For instance, if person A types "kick person b," and person B consents, then we should only see "Person A kicks person B" Rather then "Person B allows Person A to kick him. Person A kicks person B." It makes it seem like everything is scripted out.
11-18-2000, 09:26 AM
Seidl, that's an awesome idea... kind of like "consent room", where until you leave the room you consent to everyone.
Having repurcussions occur for assaulting the AI NPCs is a great idea as well, and if I'm not mistaken it exists already to a minor degree. I have seen cats hiss at people who abuse them too much. I'd like to see something similar with the Guards, for example they will *restrain* the character so they cannot leave and announce the action to the castle, so that a Watchman can arrive. The only problem would be if no Watchman were online, that the person would be stuck there until the time someone walked by and learned of their plight, then could fetch a Watchman when one logs on (then again, that would also be funny as heck).
In response to the common abuses, such as kick, slap, etc... The Watch does not tolerate that behavior in the least (just ask Andrew) and will arrest anyone who assaults another. Hopefully, things like punch and kick will eventually be part of a brawl system. At that point, those actions will have in-game effects that will show them to have greater consequences (punch someone and they go unconcious, etc.). Maybe then things will calm down a bit, because people will take them a bit more seriously.
11-18-2000, 01:57 PM
I prefer consent to become a matter of actual respect as a result of being able to cause physcial harm to those who act like bullies. Until the brawling system is enabled, I think the consent for things like kick is unfortunate, but probably needed. One of the things that I plan for my own game - Qigung, if you haven't been reading the articles, you should http://www.skotos.net/ubb/wink.gif - is to have consent becomes a process of natural selection. I fully expect a certain level of chaos at first, when players realize they can slap other people around. But eventually, consent and respect will become automatic after enough big bullies get rubbed out by some tiny, harmless-looking kung-fu master. You'll never be sure if the person you just insulted can kick your butt. Or turn you into a toad, for that matter.
11-18-2000, 06:45 PM
I've been wondering about this (as indicated in other post, some of which were dreadfully written by me--especially in the 'Can O' Worms' topic).
As for the 'voice' system I also enquired about; this, as fantastic as it sounds, is a actual computer program that allows you to dictate messages to your computer without the hassle of using a keyboard (which for a person like me, who never could touch type at all, would be a benifit if I could 'say' the command--especially in combat siturations).
Getting back to main subject, the consent feature is a excellent program to have installed--providing for some rather interesting role playing, especificly between specific characters. Especificly between those who are gentlemen, who will always ask a lady.
11-18-2000, 06:50 PM
How about creating a series of restraining and subdueing commands for dealing with 'violent' characters.
An adept enought charater could quickly bring to a end any violent altercation when they occur--if a Armsman isn't available..
Of course, this will mean speaking to the Armsmen as to why such action occured--which in turn would create a interesting bit of roleplaying.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.