The SA In Games Thread (Good Luck)

MisterBoring

@Kestrel It’s gonna be okay.

Meg

Quick someone tell me what CVC is and why I should care about this new term. I am not making any apology for any of this.

My preferred term is playfighty.

Tez

@Meg Character vs Character as opposed to Player vs Player.

Meg

@Tez I figured that out right after I posted, but now I think it’s funnier never to know.

Sorry, I don’t understand and I can’t read.

Wizz

@Roz said:

buddy i don’t know how to tell you that the CHARACTERS are not the same thing as the PLAYERS. the CHARACTERS are not secretly into it. the CHARACTERS are experiencing a horrific nonconsensual trauma.

it isn’t a misunderstanding. it’s such a hardcore RPI community thing, blurring the identity line and doing it deliberately, in the name of “realism and immersion” or what have you, and 1000% of the time it is crazy toxic and weird. we’ve had other visitors with this mindset on display and it really is a fundamental difference in how games have been approached for a long time.

Roadspike

@Kestrel Okay, this made me laugh loudly enough that I then had to explain the thread (carefully, my kid is in the room too) to Blu, and then read through the form. Brava.

voiceinthevoid

I could care less about what kind of role play consenting adults engage in behind closed doors.

If people are doing SA role play ethically imo nobody will even know who doesn’t want to know.

I also don’t mind dark stories (with full consent of everyone involved) that include the existence of SA from the view point of fighting evil and saving victims.

SA role play being forced into role play by coded game mechanics is gross. Even with the option of fading to black I find it icky. That player still has to deal with the consequences of SA. Just because someone is okay with SA entering role play in some circumstances doesn’t mean they want that storyline with any person who pulls out the SA dice.

Having that code is likely to attract players who enjoy forcing past the boundaries of other players. There is a possibility that some players might end up there who aren’t comfortable with that code or capable of handling that kind of role play. It opens the door for abuse and will attract creepers imo.

TLDR: fully consensual role play especially private role play that involves SA themes is fine. Coded non consensual SA role play is disgusting.

Gashlycrumb

@Wizz There was a sort of faction of MUSHers who were into this in the '90’s. They called it ‘Immersion RP’ and were snobby about it. They didn’t want to talk OOC with anybody for any reason but mechanics necessity and some would get all mad if you paged them. They’d do stuff like wait for +time to say it was 7:20 am and grid-walk from their IC home to their IC work, pausing a set amount of time at each room and arriving at their IC work at 8, and so on. Some of those early WoD MUSHes were really heavy into this sort of model-world-building.

I can kinda see the appeal, but to me the real metagame that gaming is about is the friends we make along the way, so I have no actual interest in gaming styles that distance players or encourage them to disregard non-imaginary people and their non-imaginary feelings.

Pavel

@Gashlycrumb said:

pausing a set amount of time at each room

I remember more than a few games basically requiring you to do this part, and if there was anyone in those rooms you had to basically stop, engage in brief “passing through” roleplay and then continue. What a quality experience that was.

Wizz

@Gashlycrumb said:

Some of those early WoD MUSHes were really heavy into this sort of model-world-building.

it’s always kinda reminded me of…remember how big Second Life was? and how some people were actually interviewed by mainstream media at the time about how they really did “live” through their avatar and game client and it was all really woo-y and glaze-eyed and weird?