Posts made by Arkandel

@wildbaboons It wouldn't do anything if the other person doesn't reciprocate though.

And if they do, you CAUGHT THEM! They like you! Mwah-hah-hah?

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

Think about this realistically for a moment and you'll likely begin to see the real scope of the problem: "I am feeling gross and pressured, I went to staff to ask for help, and instead of helping, they called me a bad player and enabled the creeper who has no respect for my player-side limits."

Oh that's true. But as you already pointed out, if you can't trust staff on a game you are screwed either way.

What I'd like to try and do is, assuming we're neither dealing with assholes or bad staff, to try and figure out how to systematize these things. I'll even risk @Thenomain's snicker and ask, naively, whether this is a social problem we can solve through code.

Maybe we could apply a Tinder approach to this? The left/right swipe thing.

So I meet Jane IC. I don't know if her player wants to TS.

I type something like "+interest/ts Jane". There's no notification unless Jane has done the same from the other side (+interest/ts Arkandel). If so we both get a message we want to e-shag!

And so from that point on all the other boxes (heh, sorry) can be checked the same way (preferences, inclinations, kinks, whatever) without people having to broadcast their TS related whitelist since that might attract the wrong kind of attention.

Squicks can and should still be public and not subject to this system.

Thoughts?

@lotherio When are the murderbot character generation rules getting added to the wiki? Asking for a friend.

@surreality said in Let's talk about TS.:

It never failed to stun me how many people would try anyway if told this, up to and including using dice to attempt to force the issue, regardless of the reason. It similarly never failed to stun me that they'd be stunned I would want nothing to do with them after that.

Yeah, there are assholes everywhere and also in the hobby. I think in that light it's a good thing we continue to beat the ol' dead horse of "state your limits and stick to them" since clearly someone, somewhere is still getting away with it or they wouldn't still be trying the 'ICA=ICC' gambit of throwing the dice then forcing others to TS-or-else-they-are-bad-players.

in metapose (in the same way that player behavior would annoy me in any other context), at which point I will say something, and I will say something the first time it happens. If it happens again, I'm out, and I'm done.

I guess it's a male thing but I never had that issue - sometimes a partner will refer to their own character in assorted ways but never mine. But it doesn't ever bother me unless it gets amped up to really comical levels.

#4. I like the prefs setup I've described various times to be a good first step. It gives people neutral ground for basics without awkwardness or confrontation. If people have questions, they have a place to start the conversation, if one is needed, and having a place to start is a huge help.

The only thing I don't like about setting preferences is the expectations some might think come implied with it, since it can be taken as a signal that TS isn't just a possibility but an actual goal that comes with a checklist attached. Kind of... "I like walks on the beach and blindfolds" becoming "but I BROUGHT you to the beach and here is a goddamn scarf, so why aren't you putting out?!". Dunno.

The squicks list though is definitely a good thing, especially since it goes beyond TS. "I don't want pregnancy RP" applies to FTB as well, for example.

@magee101 said in Let's talk about TS.:

One the relationship shifted from monigomy to friends with benefits and we still did other rp and lead up rp. The other person we ended up going our seperate ways ICly and OOCly but not on bad terms.

Yeah, that's fair enough. Part of a conversation like this definitely is the possibility they might say "nah, sorry, this isn't for me" and walk away. It's another reason to have it early, though, since that way some of the risk is mitigated if the RP ends up having to be aborted.

-However- there have been times that you speak with someone and learn they are into say harder stuff and if I feel like my character would be ok or already has some experience in this area it wouldnt be hard for then to do it with a new partner.

The way this has worked for me at least is to have a list in my head of things a character is willing to or interested in doing as well as what I'd find fun myself. It's kind of a double whitelist, if you will. Still, it's far easier for a PC to be adjusted especially given the circumstances they are often in; I can see a stressed werewolf suffering from PTSD being eager to channel his emotions in ways that actually open up character growth venues for him, for example, if the right opportunity comes along and even if it's not how I originally designed his personality.

Ideally TS is 'just like any other kind of RP' in at least that way - it should give me the chance to change, expand and make the character more interesting.

4. Those boundries: so yeah, set them, but dont be afraid to explore. A properly "good" or perhaps better phrased respectful TS partner will thank you if you do try something and be cool with ftb or retconning if you dont enjoy it after testing.

There are hard limits and there are... reservations. There are things I won't do in RP simply because I don't like them; it's not that I find them wrong (in terms of doing them in RP, that is), they are just not enjoyable on any level for me. So for example I might play an asshole who's a flawed human being in all kinds of illegal or immoral ways and that doesn't bother me if my partner is OOC okay with it, but I wouldn't have him beat the crap out of his girlfriend because... I just don't want to.

I have "suffered" through what I consider suboptimal TS bc I really enjoy the player and it is decent enough that beside my own poses I can still imagine the scene well enough to enjoy.

I chalk this under 'bad RP I endure' whether it's TS or not. Sometimes I'd rather stay around for a little bit longer and finish the scene than offend the person I'm playing with as long as I like them otherwise. After all I don't need to play with them often/again if it's bad enough.

I like to be very descriptive in my poses but I also try to make every detail in some way add to the erotic imagery. In some ways smut is my most creative moments, but if there isnt a spark I can fail to get the flames going at times. I am a very open person once conversations have begun and while I do think some things are weird and def dont want to do them bc of upbrining and personal beliefs I dont look down badly upon anyone for their particulars.

Those who know me are aware I'm not very chatty OOC during scenes since I find it interrupts the RP's flow and it could even be interpreted as crossing the IC/OOC line, and that goes double during TS. But yes if it's going into a particular direction buttons might be pressed I'd be compelled to check up on them and make sure they're okay.

Last but not least 5. Frequency: So for me, it becomes a thing that if my character is young its something they want to do a lot, if they are older less frequently. Sometimes it depends on what is happening. If there is little intersect in the lives of the two characters then sex it is, but if there are other things they share in common then lets go do some of those things from time to time! Admittedly I really do enjoy my 'omg we survivied a thing' fucks.

One sometimes overlooked function TS plays is giving people something to do during downtime. Between PrPs, when there aren't many people online or scenes happening... that's when it thrives. Conversely it's also why so much is reportedly happening on sandbox or stalling games since there isn't anything else to do, and it's easier to come up with the circumstances leading up to someone's pants dropping than some thematic arcane puzzle that has to be solved.

The path of least resistance, yo!

@jaded said in Good TV:

@arkandel
I think his role most certainly had less meat to it and I felt it was deliberate since the series presumed that many of the audience already knew Daniel's story.

I think what the series direly needs at this point is a good villain. There's no one for them to fight at least uh, karate-wise.

Wojak.

I still don't know if Ralph Macchio is getting out-acted or if it's just his role that has less meat to it. Although they certainly gave Daniel some things to struggle with, he's still privileged and acts from a position of relative privilege.

@templari The song is such an earworm... I first listened to it when WoW first launched and at any given time I can replay it in my head

@kestrel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWEjvCRPrCo

@peasoupling There's probably an argument for squicks to be a thing even on non-sex based games. I mean... I don't see what they could hurt.

If you never want pregnancy RP just stick it in there. Wait, are we doing phrasing?

@lordbelh said in Let's talk about TS.:

3. Never stopped playing with someone over TS.

This reminds me - we talk a lot about limits here, which are basically blacklists.

On some games, and obviously Shang is one of them, folks sometimes use whitelists instead; people will only play with you if you check certain boxes. For example years ago - and I don't mean this in a judge-y way, just to give an example - I met someone who had a perfectly fun idea about RP (which wasn't even about TS per se)... only it had to involve shrinking her down to size to be a few inches tall. The plot wasn't even about her being miniscule, it was completely unrelated, which is the main reason it didn't go any further... but it serves to show sometimes the kinks want what the kinks want.

And when they do people will not play unless you match them.

@sunny said in Let's talk about TS.:

I will bolt like a thing that bolts

@ganymede said in Let's talk about TS.:

For you, this may be the case, but it's not the same for everyone. Hence, the part where I said that you should set up clear boundaries and then expectations.

This takes all of 5 minutes, and saves you a whole lot of later stress, presuming your partner isn't lying. Then you have a difference issue entirely.

I suspect you're right. It's just tricky to start a conversation like "Hey, so just because my character is banging yours it doesn't mean other characters of mine won't bang other people" without feeling like I'm basically insulting the other person.

On the other hand I suppose I would feel much more comfortable discussing how or if our playing hours would match if our characters are going to be attached (which might not be a function of TS at all) which could, from a certain point of view, turn out to be similar in practical terms. "You can't play with other people!" isn't that much different than "you have to play with meee!".

@kestrel said in Let's talk about TS.:

You didn't do anything wrong by e-banging someone's wife. She (and her husband) did something wrong by not communicating properly between themselves and declaring their own boundaries to you.

I agree, even if in retrospect I could have also handled that much better - I was young and clueless. Even so though from a certain point of view it doesn't matter since my RP was still greatly impacted.

YMMV of course, but generally speaking TS related issues are very hard to recover from. Like, when things actually go badly players don't stay in cordial terms afterwards.

@kestrel said in Let's talk about TS.:

In my experience I'm almost alone in this within the MU* community (or maybe alone in being honest about this?) but most of my RL partners have been fully aware of my text-hobby and would consider TS cheating.

What you probably never want to do is be on the flipside of that.

In the late 90s I had an IC relationship with someone's RL wife who was also playing on the MUD, and he was having TS as well... until his regular partner dumped his character. Things went poorly after that, and in fact it was one of the few instances of real drama I ever encountered. This was beyond my control, and it's even arguable communication wouldn't have helped as by the time anyone (including my own IC partner) was aware there was a problem it was too late to resolve it or salvage a lot of ongoing RP which ended up having to be basically scrapped.

On every occasion when someone disrespected my request (e.g. attempted to initiate sexy stuff after I'd specifically said I wasn't cool with that), it was abundantly clear that they had serious mental health issues and that I should avoid engaging with them regardless, so I wasn't sorry to cut them loose.

What I don't want to communicate is stuff that should be self-evident.

For example there's no such thing as OOC exclusivity, jealousy, any of that. Basically if these things need to be explained then there really won't be a need for them to.

Even my time (and not just for TS) is my own, within limits; sure, if I suddenly stop playing for two weeks I should let people know, but I don't want to explain myself about not logging on one night when I was tired or went to bed early.

In my experience at least such things were usually implicit rather than explicit. It was more reading the room - what are my partner's poses like? what verbiage are they comfortable with? - and responding instead of having a direct dialogue to set the record straight.

On Shang of course - when I played there - all such things were rendered moot. You could get a list of someone's preferences right off the bat and there was almost zero ambiguity about it. Then again communication was really skewed in the other direction - the questions people ask there are very direct, very forward and very explicit. Hell, even back then I had to stop a few times to get a clarification for some of the Japanese/hentai stuff since I had nfc what I was being asked.

It surprises me - since I hadn't seen that outside of this thread - that anyone puts TS related preferences on wiki for non-sex MU* though. I don't think I've ever noticed any.

@ganymede said in Let's talk about TS.:

1. Set boundaries: You have limits. Declare your limits.

Absolutely agreed. I liked your earlier comment too - once you know what your limits are, don't change them. Not for anyone. Not even and especially if they push.

3. Then set expectations: How often do you want TS? Is it a garnish or the main course when you come online? (Yes, double-entendre there, har har, GTFO.)

That's a tough issue to bring up, I think. A poster here brought up in a recent thread she had someone as-a-joke-but-not-really-hah-hah complain about the regularity of TS, and I've been shared pages in the past by people who explicitly state that's what they're on the game for.

Basically this whole thing works - shockingly! - when both people involved want the same thing. What I'm wondering is how often folks are honest, either to themselves or to their partners, about how often they do want this to happen. Is it a fallback on a rainy day when not much else is happening or the, as you aptly put it, main course?

4. Then discuss what you like: Do you prefer the grinding, descriptive, purple-prose TS, or the light-hearted, fun-having TS that leads to injuries and escapades?

Another sensitive point here is that in the early stages it might seem presumptious to start the conversation at all. You meet someone you don't know too well OOC yet - maybe you're chatting in pages about video games or whatever, then RP starts heading into that kind of direction... it's a step forward to start busting out the sex questions.

1. Never give out personal information.

Agreed. Not just for TS, for anything online. For me even Facebook is reserved to very very few people.

2. Never talk about RL sex partners, past or current.

I mean, whatever works for people, but it seems like a huge red flag if anyone does. Talking about marrital issues while you're posing bumping uglies isn't just crossing the IC/OOC line, it's more like setting it on fire.

3. Never agree to chat, swap pics, or otherwise interact away from the MUSH of this forum.

Danger, danger!

@ganymede said in Let's talk about TS.:

Maybe I'm lucky?

Perhaps, but...

Maybe I'm good.

That seems more likely! And it's this kind of thing I was hoping to discuss here - what are some good ways to approach this issue? There are certain issues I still insist are uncomfortable to bring up for many people and that's not an assumption - I've been explicitly told about that part.

Maybe we can talk about ways to bring up somewhat sensitive or awkward issues such as limits, vocabulary, FTB-or-not and see if that's the case for most people, or how we all handle those conversations - or even if they take place at all.

@lisse24 said in Good TV:

@arkandel I hear there's some really strong language in it though, which is a shame, because my nephew just picked up karate and would probably get a kick out of a karate show. (See what I did there???)

Har har!

But yes, there is. I think it's a love letter to us 80s kids, so it didn't bother me any, but I can totally see how it'd make it hard to watch for a younger person. It's not just the language, a lot of the themes are pretty adult - bullying, abandonment, alcoholism, etc.

Also! Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. was renewed for a (probably last) season, yay!

For this thread my default disclaimer - that this is in the constructive section and no personal attacks are permitted - will also have an addendum; please do not kink shame others here. This is an adult discussion so let's be adults about it.

It's not about what good TS is. But it is a thread about TS.

So let's break it down a bit! I've been meaning to open this discussion for a while now. As usual I'll offer an original template of sorts for the topic just to make it easier to stay on track, but everyone's encouraged to go off track and talk about any other peripheral issues y'all want to.

With that said:

1. Assuming you're playing with a sort of new partner how do you breach the issue of whether there will be TS - that is, actually posing the act instead of fading to black? Is there an explicit discussion about it or do you play it by ear - for example seeing how far the other person is going in their own poses and responding accordingly?

2. How do you determine the vocabulary involved? When I first encountered TS a long, long time ago it was pretty weird and I actually had a chat with a friend who had already done it (yes, it all felt exactly as awkward as it sounds) since I had no idea if I should plug in the full vernacular or whether I should pose it as a bad romance novel instead. (I picked the latter at the time and it was as hilarious as it sounds). What about you, how do you handle it? What if it's an friend you've known or played with before but haven't had TS with, how/does it change the resolution?

3. What's a good way to determine how much focus is too much? Or too little? Many here have met partners who made TS the focus of RP, but what's a good way to avoid being in that situation? Have you ever not played with someone because there wouldn't be TS involved? Obviously fade to black should always be an acceptable option, but does it make a difference to you if it's the only option?

4. Finally, assuming you're not on a sex game where everyone's preferences are stated in black and white, when is a good time and what is a good way to discuss limits? Do you wait until the last second to see if the other person will break out the whip/turn into a wolf/create magical clones of themselves during sexytimes or... how do you handle that? What if you are about to do anything other than plain vanilla stuff? Do you read the room or do you have an explicit conversation?

Yes, a lot of the answers above will (and should) essentially be "communicate well". But since our community isn't exactly renown for our skills in that area, and since the topic itself is pretty sensitive we might benefit from going into some detail here and share our thoughts.

One final small potential caveat: Let's assume our potential partners here are not total assholes. Obviously if you've ran into a sociopath all bets are off.

@deadempire said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

... Did you not just hear a human voice coming from in here?

Maybe it was Google Assistant!