[Awaiting Decision] [SUGGESTION] 2.8 discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
3,665
Points
685
Location
Sheffield, United Kingdom
What rule do you wish to Edit/Add:

2.8 Sex Role-Play

In order to help preserve gameplay, sexual acts may not be role-played or displayed in a public setting.

Your version of the rule:

2.8 Sex Role-Play

In order to help preserve gameplay, sexual acts may not be role-played or displayed in a public setting. Additionaly, players may not force other players into sexual roleplay via gunpoint or any other use of weapon.

Why do you believe this rule should be Added/Edited:

Because no one wants to have to be forced to ERP where they're not allowed to resist due to 3.4. ERP, as I think alot can agree, is dumb and quite disgusting to roleplay. So when you're forced into a situation where you MUST ERP, it's kind of uncomfortable and not very fun to just go along with it.
 
Last edited:
-Support What the professional Baggers said. Nobody uses enough detail. Those who say with dirty detail are not right EDIT: Mentally wrong, disturbing and shouldn't be on the server (never seen it before happen) but those who says the simple things like /me sucks cock are not baddies. Also adding that implementing this idea gets rid of one of the laws of the land.
 
Last edited:
I agree with this fully and only checked the rule discussion area to make this suggestion myself. While it's "realistic" depending on where you live, you may or may not be breaking the law by forcing someone who is a minor to be placed into this situation. This is a server and is intended to be fun for everyone. This form of roleplay is disgusting to me and many other players. It has no place here in my opinion.

EDIT: Lets say you were over 18. If you put me in an ERP situation, and caught be the police (The real police not PLPD) you could be permanently marked as a sex predator in the registry because I am a minor. Not only is it disgusting, it is occasionally very illegal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top