Posts made by HelloRaptor

Maybe, but it really sounds as if they're just redefining 'Sleepwalker' as 'a non-mage who doesn't influence Paradox'. i.e. everyone but 100% vanilla mortals.

@Thenomain

else then Vampires could take "Sleepwalker-Only" Merits and I sincerely doubt that.

Maybe they can. Everyone was originally a human in some form or fashion, across the game lines. Apparently anything that makes you no longer a pure vanilla 100% natural and pristine human also means you're considered a Sleepwalker. A minor template like ghoul, or a major template like vampire, or a supernatural merit like psychic powers or thaumaturgy, all sound as if they make you qualify as a Sleepwalker.

So it's essentially just the exact opposite of those merits that say they can only be taken by 100% pure vanilla mortals.

I'm sure someone will think to ask about that sooner or later, though, and we'll find out.

From Mage 2.0: Supporting Cast

Any inherent magical power, be it a minor or major template, or even just a single Merit representing something about the character herself, also makes that character a Sleepwalker.

Fucking set out in a way nobody can fucking weasel out of. Fuck every single person ever who contributed to the ridiculous 'Wolfblooded can't be Sleepwalkers.' or immortals or any of the other weird corner cases who somehow counted as Sleepers yet couldn't take the Sleepwalker merit. Fuuuuuuuuuuuck all of you. >_<

Edit for also:

Some Proximi are born spontaneously, but most come from long family lines of magical heritage called Dynasties, protected, nurtured, and employed by one of the Orders.

Hopefully the bolded bit will get more emphasis and elaboration. The nWoD SL book that covered Proximi in more depth indicated that spontaneous Proximi were totally a thing, but places only ever wanted to allow Dynasties, boo.

Rape is banned from thread titles for the good of the community(TM).

@Trundlebot

Experiences may vary but I have absolutely never heard of a rape storyline creating fun and interesting RP for anyone.

I have. See above re: anecdotal evidence being the best kind etc.

Only if we're ignoring issues of scale and other variables. Maybe the other roleplay doesn't cause as much distress and drama and/or has other features that justify allowing it.

Like, maybe IC politics cause more ooc distress and drama but they're also often embedded in theme and also creates lots of opportunities for fun.

Yes, IC politics was totally the parallel drawn. Not other stuff people routinely find squicky, like child abuse, torture, PTSD, physical and emotional abuse and torment, etc. Just IC politics. You totally nailed it on the head.

@Cirno

what with users circa 2003 cracking jokes about "no girls on Internet"

People still do that in 2015, and it boggles my mind.

@Ganymede

Sure, you can call it that, but that's not what the word means.

Banning a subject of roleplay for the stated reason that it causes people OOC distress and drama, while engaging in roleplay that causes people OOC distress and drama, seems pretty spot on.

Saying that people shouldn't drive cars because they're bad for the environment, while driving a truck, is still hypocrisy regardless of the fact that you're not actually driving a car.

@Coin said:

@HelloRaptor said:

We need a better acronym for Onyx Path so it doesn't read like Original Post(er). >_>

OPP. Onyx Path Publishing.

There's no room for relationship there's just room to hit it?

@Miss-Demeanor said:

@HelloRaptor said:

Even better would be seeing it at a similar place around us after 6pm where nobody under 21 is allowed, even with parents. ;D

Sadly as nice as that is, it's not as awesome as the super BigD theater we're seeing it in, nor is the audio as amazing.

They HAVE showtimes for only the 21+ crowd... but my kids would kill me in my sleep if I went to see it without them. XD Since I rather enjoy being alive, I'm settling for the second best!

Fair enough. Reason #293058028352 why I'm glad I don't have kids. >_>

@tragedyjones said:

Oh for those who did not notice, Mage made it through the major revision process and is back to being sneak previewed. It should be out, by my reckoning, in 2015.

Yesssssss.

Maybe creative thaumaturgy won't be like having your fucking teeth pulled while filling out forms in triplicate, like virtually every nmage sphere ever. >____________<

We need a better acronym for Onyx Path so it doesn't read like Original Post(er). >_>

@Three-Eyed Crow

I would probably consider a 'We don't have rape plots just 'cause we don't' rule a good sign for my own personal enjoyment of a thing, for what it's worth.

An absence of rape related plots or roleplay would do the same for me, but as a rule I try not to consider very personal tastes and preferences (even my own) a basis for game policy about what other people can do in terms of roleplay.

@Cobaltasaurus

Because most places don't say "please don't RP murder"? The truth is most places do ask that. They ask that by not allowing antagonist spheres. They ask that by typically not approving PCs who only goal is to go after other PCs and force them to play being killed by another PC.

That's kind of a false equivalency. I don't think anybody (certainly not me) would object to staff putting a foot on the neck of someone who app'd a character as a self-described serial rapist and saying no.

It's especially false as a statement if you consider how often people on games, and on forums discussing those games, go out of their way to champion the idea that if you're going to PK someone you should roleplay through it. Games even sometimes give bennies if you murder them through a scene instead of telenuking.

None of which has any real bearing on roleplaying rape, but the quoted statement does not support its premise.

@Cobaltasaurus

I'm not entirely sure why it becomes "ZOMG HYPOCRITES! FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION!" when someone says "please don't RP rape".

It's never been anything about freedom of expression, but given that I've more than a few times seen people who decry rape RP, in particular people responsible for game policies about it, either engaging in pretty fucked up (but not rape so it's okay) RP or responding to complaints by people exposed to such RP by reading them the 'This is a WoD game that deals with adult themes, you're free to log off or excuse yourself or fade to black but these sort of things happen in the game you're playing.' line? Yeah, hypocrisy is a reasonable description.

Rape is not the only fucked up, traumatic thing that happens to people. It's not even the only fucked up, traumatic thing that happens to a significant number of people. It is, however, pretty much the only thing people seem generally comfortable banning from games as if they're doing a public service. That they do so without banning other fucked up, traumatic things that people take issue with, is usually hypocrisy.

@Ganymede

There's nothing hypocritical about finding one form of RP more disgusting, disturbing, and unacceptable than another, and therefore prohibiting it. It may be unreasonable in your opinion, but it's not hypocritical.

Most games are ultimately in the hands of one or two people, who are ultimately responsible for game policy. If said person(s) wanted to ban a particular line of roleplay because they personally had issues with it and didn't want to deal with it there's not much I could say. But to pretend that's not what it is, and act as if that very specific sort of subject matter deserves to be stepped on because it makes some nebulous percentage of the population too uncomfortable to allow while virtually every other subject matter that makes some nebulous percentage of the population uncomfortable is A_OK? Meh. You can say unreasonable, but I'm fine with calling it hypocrisy.

The truth is that if you started banning roleplay that even a significant portion of the game population found objectionable, distressing, or uncomfortable to deal with/be exposed to, the list would be entirely too long. The World of Darkness has included examples of violence and molestation against children, cannibalism, truly gruesome and inhuman torture, physical and emotional abuse of family and friends, bestiality, and worse.

Shit, there are people who won't play, or play with Vampires, because the descriptions of the central element of their survival have often been far too close to rape. Whether or not others feel that's the case, there are those who do and that discomfort keeps them away from an entire sphere. If a show of hands were to indicate that the number of people who felt that way was significant, would anyone who didn't feel that way think it reasonable to excise the vampire sphere from a game? Probably not. I mean, except me, because I'm always down with banning Vampire. It is such a shitty game.

@Ganymede

While one can make a philosophical or sociological statement regarding the harshness of the penalty, and I don't mind discussing that, that does not mean I, as staff, do not have the authority and discretion to deal with what I believe to be inappropriate behavior harshly and with prejudice. I am old and mature enough to deal with the consequences.

The harshness of the penalty isn't at issue, the hypocrisy of singling it out as if it's special is, along with the absurdity of the alternative which is spreading the umbrella to cover 'You may not RP anything which will cause other players on the game OOC distress or force staff to deal with uncomfortable OOC drama because of that distress.'

Even better would be seeing it at a similar place around us after 6pm where nobody under 21 is allowed, even with parents. ;D

Sadly as nice as that is, it's not as awesome as the super BigD theater we're seeing it in, nor is the audio as amazing.

@Arkandel said:

@2mspris <sobs>

You'll see it before I do, @Arkandel, I'm not going till Sunday morning at 12:40. Er, I guess that's noon not morning.

I really like the Changeling thing, small blurb that it is. I agree with one comment below there, that I like how it's focusing heavily on how you escaped/fought free as a defining element of your character, not just 'this is what you were made into'.

@Arkandel (for sure this time)

Playing such obsessions out appeals to me, as I've no interest at all in healthy IC relationships. Those can't go anywhere because what's left for the PCs to do after they've hooked up and everything is working out just great for them?

That doesn't really seem to follow. I mean, if an IC relationship is the primary focus of your storytelling interest, that would be true but a relationship is only one part of your life. Other shit can still go terribly wrong, even when you're in a healthy relationship, can't it?

@Ganymede

But people who seek rape RP from unknowing or unwilling participants need to cut that shit out.

Truth.

@Sunny

Not so, with rape. Fuck, if I say 'I don't want to deal with childhood sexual abuse as a plot' people are like 'oh okay no big deal', but if I recoil from rape RP 'but it's the world of DARKNESS'.

You need to stop associating with such shitty people, then. Anybody who gives you shit for not wanting to participate due to OOC/RL discomfort is a shitty person, regardless of the subject matter.

Putting 'violence' on the tin, okay, maybe I should go play Harry Potter instead of The Greatest Generation if I'm dealing heavily with war related PTSD. I don't get to do that about rape!

You sort of focused on the violence angle, but that's really not at all what WoD has presented pretty much from day one. Hell, the flagship game going all the way back was Vampire, a game about predators who use physical and mental domination to take control away from their victims by taking what they want from their bodies while forcing them to experience sexual ecstasy. And that's just the starting line for presentations and implications of sexual violation in the game lines. It is absolutely on the tin, inasmuch as anything is on the tin. The WoD has always described itself as very much like the real world, except with all the terrible things that happen in the real world being cranked up to eleven both in frequency and in horror. How is that not putting it on the tin?

Too late, though. Already twitching.

That's unfortunate, but also not compelling. Do you watch the news/read blogs covering events/etc? Because there's some truly awful things happening out there in the world on the rape front, from college campus creeps to rape camps in other countries. When that shit comes up do you refuse to watch that news channel ever again? If that's too far from entertainment, how about television shows? Most of them don't advertise 'SOMEONE MAY GET RAPED ON THIS SHOW AT SOME POINT', but it's happened on many of them at one time or another. Sure, you have a reasonable expectation that it's not going to happen while you're watching children's television, or an evening sitcom with a laugh track, but if WoD were a television show it's one where something rape-y would pretty inevitably happen. Which... it actually did if I'm remembering my Kindred: The Embraced right.

I can see a lot of harm, and the list of good is.... Well. I can't think of any, but I'm sure somebody else could.

The one person I know RL with combat related PTSD finds the portrayal of combat veterans and their reactions to/portrayal of their personal trauma to range between offensive and triggering, and has ranted at length about Nerve and so many others because of how common the character trope is. These people don't know what it's like, they don't really understand what people really go through or have to deal with when they come back, they're just using an easy to identify trauma for an attention grab and bring it up whenever that attention wanders away from them. So on and so forth.

What good does it do to allow people to play those characters? Hell, what good does letting people play any particular concept or through any particular roleplay actually do, that's true for one type but not another? 'What good does it do?' seems like a false question asked to frame the followup as more important. What good does it do to roleplay sex between characters? What good does it do to sit in bars and chat? What good does any of it do, and how do you even answer that for other people, when the value of any of it will vary wildly between persons?

What harm does people portraying victims of terrible trauma do? Are you injured by someone portraying a combat veteran? I'm not. Animal abuse? Do you shut off your computer and walk away if there's a zoo massacre? There are absolutely people who find even the suggestion of animal cruelty so disgusting that they've exited stage right when it's come up in RP, and even refused to RP with those they felt responsible. There was a rant on the Dunlin channel back when I first started playing Xenos about how terrible it was that they weren't warned ahead of time that it would come up in the PRP. Clearly they felt there was some kind of harm involved, and a cursory glance at the internet suggests they aren't alone. Is your trauma greater than whatever's setting them off? Maybe. There's no way to know without questioning the very thing they don't want to be confronted with.

What harm a subject of roleplay does is entirely dependent on individuals and their particular traumas and issues, just like why someone roleplays a given thing will vary pretty wildly, no matter how much people want to paint with the brush that everyone doing X is just an attention whore/monster.

Again: Rape isn't special. Its victims don't have a monopoly on trauma, or on feeling sick and disgusted at it being used, nor on being offended when it's handled in a shitty fashion by people whose closest experience with it is network television or other truly shitty fictional portrayals.

Personally, child abuse is something I would put on the same level of rape. Please just don't, for the health and comfort of your fellow players.

Should we just have a game-wide vote every six months to get a majority opinion on what can and can't be a subject of role play? How many people have to be 'harmed' by a particular subject for it to be against the rules to engage in it? How will we judge relative levels of trauma to properly weigh the ratio necessary? Is it enough if just one person speaks up? It would be at pretty much any game table, after all.

@SilentSophia

Honestly, call me Prudey McPruderson No Sexhaving but I'm pretty okay with a ban on rape RP on games since the drama bombs are awful.

Please don't use this example. Whatever one's opinions on the subject being used in roleplay, it's got nothing to do with Prudey McPrudeperson, or how one feels about Sexhaving. Not that I believe you think it does, but phrasing. >_>

@Glitch said:

@Arkandel Misquoting is @HelloRaptor 's specialty. He likes to keep his crap in notepad. Or word. Or something awful and it confuses him. I believe @Thenomain actually said it.

That said, sorry @Arkandel, my bad. >_>

@Coin said:

This just in: Age of Ultron was fucking awesome.

@Arkandel, tagged for lulz.

Why for lulz? What? Is he not able to see it or something? >_>

I'm going on Sunday so we can go to the super awesome theater that's like an hour drive away.

@7Wonders

I've yet to see a rape plot device that brought about meaningful, thoughtful RP.

Anecdotal evidence is the best kind of evidence. It's like being technically correct.

Virtually every single thing you said in your post can be, and is, said about a host of other role play choices/scenarios/etc where one character is victimized in some brutal fashion, by someone who has personal trauma, or finds the subject matter distasteful, or even just doesn't like the person who engaged in said RP. Once again, rape isn't singular or special in that regard.