Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Where do you draw the rape line?
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Pages: 1, 2
Member #5177
For the purpose of this discussion I'm defining rape as unwanted sexual penetration. Hopefully, most can agree it is a bad thing when this occurs. I'm wondering how far things can be manipulated before it is not a bad thing.

Like date rape, or chemically assisted by a date rape drug, or in SR by cyberware/bioware and/or magic. What if the person has cultured, tailored pheramones,skillwires and chipjack expert driver running a high rating Seduction skillsoft and a complimentary knowsoft? Without the enhancements the subject is unlikely to penetrate any willing target.

How about possession? Clearly bad? How about Control Actions, Control Thoughts, and/or Influence? Control Emotions?

What about an Increase Charisma spell?

I'm asking because I am thinking of designing a character who was a geek (I guess he still would be) growing up and utilized some of the possibilities available in the SR future. At the same time, I would rather have him come across as pathetic instead of creepy.
Arethusa
Nonconsentual sexual interaction. Penetration as a definition more or less requires a male rapist, and rape can happen with less.

I think it's fairly easy to draw the line with magic. Direct action (possession, et al) is more or less solidly rape. Indirect action (increase charisma) is not.

Pheremones are an absolute landmine. Honestly, I don't like them even being in the game. The designers never gave it the slightest fucking bit of thought, and it is a "simple" concept with incredibly far reaching consequences.
ShadowDragon8685
I think of it this way.

It's not rape if it affects only himself directly. Bio, Cyber, Magic, if it makes him more appealing to the female of the race, it's not rape. Creepy as hell, but not rape.

(Though your point about pheremones is arguable - is it legally any different from a date-rape drug if the drug is being generated by you?)

If it affects her directly, it's rape.
hyzmarca
Tailored pheremones in this case act as an aphrodisiac at the very worst. They may make the person like you more. They may make the person more horny for you. And really it is a crapshoot since they just add extra dice to your test. It is like (in SR4) spamming someone's AR with hardcore porn videos targeted specificly to their tastes and starring you. They still have the ability to refuse even if they are less inclined to do so. Hell, if pheremones are a date rape drug you might as well calssify money as a date rape drug and make it illegal for wealthy people to have sex ever. After all, large amounts of money automaticly make someone more much attrative.

(According to the Maoist International Movement this may be a good idea. Where economic inequity exists true consent is always impossible.)


The two popular "date rape drugs" are rohypnol and gamma-hydroxybutyrate. The former is a tranquilizer that is somewhat more powerful than valium. The later is a rather powerful relaxant.

On its own rohypnal acts like any other tranquilizer and produces effects similar to large amounts of alcohol. Certain patients can become dangerously violent while under the influance and a large dose will cause short-term amnesia (a blackout).
GHB isn't quite as bad. If is were legal it would be one of the best sleeping pills known to man (and it is in some countries.) The illegal variety can be cut with dangerous chemicals and it is fairly easy to overdose when self-medicating. The correct dose of GBH will cause you to fall asleep very quickly and nothing more or less. It is popular as a date rape drug because you wouldn't wake up if an elephant was plowing your ass in the middle of a three-ring circus with all the bells and whistles untill it wears off.
As with any depressants, combining either of these drugs with even the tinnest amounts of alcohol makes their effects immesurably worse.

Pheremones isn't even close to being the same. Alcohol, yes. Pheremones, no.

Possession is a tricky issue. A summoner is always guilty of a sprit's crime but only Free Spirits, Loa, Shedim, and initiate magicians can possess.

Loa cannot possess anyone who is not willing so that obviously cannot be rape. In the case of the summoner then the summoner is assumed to have commanded all of the spirit's actions thus has given consent even if the spirit was acting without consent.
In the case of a Servitor it is slightly more complicated. However, I expect consent would be implicit unless denial was explicit before the possession. If the servitor had a no sex contract then it would be open and shut. If not then the servitor wouldn't have a case.

A Shedim is less cut and dry. The body is the property of the person's estate (or the person if alive). Thus, only the individual or the estate can consent to the sex. If the Shedim had the host's or the estate's permission to possess then it is a-ok without a no-sex clause. If not then squatters rights may still apply. It would be difficult to argue squatters rights in 2064 but some jurisdictions may still recognize them.

Initiate magicians are obvious. The possesser is guilty of illegal possession and is an accessory to rape without a doubt unless there was prior permission (as with the other two cases). The other individual may not be guilty of anything. It was certainly rape if the individual knew that the body was stolen but if not the sexor can make a good-faith claim that his partner was the magician and not the possesse. If the magician consented and the good-faith claim is accepted then he is obviously not guilty of rape.

The good-faith claim itself is tennuous, however. Most jurisdictions do not require intent to rape, only deed. If you have sex with an underaged person who was reverse-leonized to appear to be over 100 years old and carrid a fake ID to confirm it you are still guilty of statutory rape in most jurisdictions, for example.

With a Free Spirit the same thing applies except if it is bound then the magician who bound it is guilty of illegal possession and rape even if the magician was completely unaware of the deed.

Control actions and control thoughts would obviously be llegal for this purpose. Influance would be, as well. Control emotions would be a crapshoot depending on the jurisdiction. If it were of an illegal force then heck yes. If not then some may argue that people don't have to act on their emotions. I would still go with no.


Arethusa, penile-vaginal penetration can occur when the rapist is female. Erection is involunary. Of course, penetration of a female by a male requires a male rapists but most jurisdictions are moving away from that.

Simsense is what produces the biggest problem. It isn't that difficult to to replace someone's Miracle Shooter with a Betty Boop personafix , expecially in SR4.
Kagetenshi
Control Actions would clearly be rape. With Control Thoughts and, to a lesser degree, Influence, you'll never have a nonconsenting prospective partner again.

Unless you've got a thing for albino gnomes.

And hyzmarca, regardless of whether or not the above proposed definition covers female -> male rape, it fails to cover female -> female rape and is thus unusable.

~J
hyzmarca
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Control Actions would clearly be rape. With Control Thoughts and, to a lesser degree, Influence, you'll never have a nonconsenting prospective partner again.

Unless you've got a thing for albino gnomes.

And hyzmarca, regardless of whether or not the above proposed definition covers female -> male rape, it fails to cover female -> female rape and is thus unusable.

~J

That would probably be covered by Aggravated Sodomy. Lawmakers are kind of anal about defining different sex acts.
DeadNeon
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Unless you've got a thing for albino gnomes.


Don't judge me! grinbig.gif
Toptomcat
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
QUOTE (Kagetenshi @ May 22 2006, 08:48 AM)
Control Actions would clearly be rape. With Control Thoughts and, to a lesser degree, Influence, you'll never have a nonconsenting prospective partner again.

Unless you've got a thing for albino gnomes.

And hyzmarca, regardless of whether or not the above proposed definition covers female -> male rape, it fails to cover female -> female rape and is thus unusable.

~J

That would probably be covered by Aggravated Sodomy. Lawmakers are kind of anal about defining different sex acts.

sleepy.gif
That was pretty bad...
stevebugge
Slightly tangental but in these instances would the use of a mindprobe to determine intent be allowed by the court? Would the state be allowed to use court approved Magical Experts for these sort of examinations? Remind me to skip all Jury Duty after 2012.
Kagetenshi
Not in the UCAS—all Mindprobe-obtained evidence is inadmissible in court.

Good for reasons other than human rights, too—just because someone thinks they intended to do something (or didn't intend to) doesn't mean they did or didn't at the time.

~J
James McMurray
In canon it isn't allowed. I allow it in my game because practically the only thing stopping it is those mamby-pamby morals things. The more criminals that go to jail the more money the police force and prison owners make, so while specific officers will probably be moral individuals, the system itself is not.
mfb
the definitions likely vary wildly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and are probably hotly contested. for instance, i would bet that there's a campaign to get spells like Increase Charisma added to the list of spells that count as coercive acts when it comes to rape.

as far as mindprobe goes, it may not be admissible in court--but that doesn't mean you can't use it to find out whether the guy did it or not, and pursue evidence based on that knowledge. granted, it'd be illegal as hell, but a careful mage can wipe the spell sig. at that point, the criminal will just be another guy screaming about how the police violated his rights.
Kagetenshi
QUOTE (James McMurray)
In canon it isn't allowed. I allow it in my game because practically the only thing stopping it is those mamby-pamby morals things.

I disagree—the thing stopping it is that while important people in companies and government will rarely go to jail, they have much less ability to avoid trial altogether—and established use of Mindprobe risks it being used on them. The thing about Mindprobe is that when someone's in your brain, the only assurance you or anyone else has that they're not looking for anything more than evidence in the current case is their personal guarantee. Corps have enough nonextraterritorial holdings that there's no way they can keep anyone who knows anything important on corp territory at all times.

~J
James McMurray
True, which is why you make damn sure your people don't commit crimes. If they do, you make damn sure it doesn't make it to trial or they plead guilty so there's no need for a mind probe. In the absence of evidence no mind probe would be required as technically no crime took place. In the presence of lots of evidence no mind probe is required because guilt can be clearly established.

Stopping someone from making it to trial, removing all evidence, and planting false evidence are all good reasons to have a shadowrun. therefor mind probes in court are a good thing to a game of Shadowrun. YMMV. smile.gif

And since Lone Star, Knight Errant, etc. are corporations, havign the legal right to probe around in peoples' heads is something they'd lobby for until the cows came home.

Alternatively the Mind Probes could be done by the Witnesses (from my Witness and Juror thread). This puts it in the hands of an impartial third party. It doesn't make it impossible that they'd be digging around for more, but makes it less likely.

Also, Mind Probe is a noticable spell. It doesn't say to what extent you notice their digging around, so it is possible that you'll know that they're digging where they don't belong. If that's how the GM runs it then one setup to determine truthfulness coupled with the probe will let them know to stop when you truthfully say that the prober is overstepping his bounds.
stevebugge
I could really see the Star coercing people to allow mindprobes during an interrogation in order to make their job easier. "Just sign this waiver, and we can be done with this interview in about half an hour, if you didn't do it you'll be all clear" Of course if you did do it we will know the details, where to look for evidence, and who if any your accomplices were meaning we just have to go collect the evidence we know exists.
Nasrudith
My opinion the Raise charimsa is Charisma it probably should be legal. After all, make up essentially does the same thing, it makes them more attracted to the person.
hyzmarca
The thing about illegally obtained evidence is that it canot be used against the individual whose rights were violated. It can, however, be used against anyone else.

Of course, mindprobe evidence from third parties could be considered hearsay which is why it is a very good thing that they are illegal (from law enforcement's perspective). If a Lone Star officer admits to performing an illegal mindprobe on someone then that is a statement against his interest. Since statements against one's own interest are an exception to hearsay the evidence should be admitted. The officer could then get a gentle tap on the wrist and a promotion for taking one for the team.
stevebugge
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
The ting about illegally obtained evidence is that it canot be used against the individual whose rights were violated. It can, however, be used against anyone else.

Of course, mindprobe evidence from thrid parties could be considered hearsay which is why it is a very good thing that they are illegal (from law enforcement's perspective). If a Lone Star officier admits to performing an illegal mindprobe on someone then that is a statement against his interest. Since statements against one's own interest are an exception to hearsay the evidence should be admited. The officer could then get a gnetle tap on the wrist and a promotion for taking one for the team.

Of course all that applies in the UCAS, be very afraid in places like Tir Tairngire or Aztlan.

As far as UCAS goes for a big enough case (or in a market where getting something solved by any means necessary is better for business than doing it by the book) Lonestar could easily do something like this. "Sure Joe Mage Detective, just get on the stand, admit you broke procedure to obtain vital evidence, and we'll put you on paid administrative leave in Tahiti for a month and reassign you to a posting of your choice not in the UCAS" Pretty much if there is a law there is probably an attorney who can work out an end run around it. Of course where one runner's troubles start another runners job begins helping Lonestar make the judge a bit more amenable to a favorable ruling on the evidence "Judge, what are you doing with that Albino Gnome in this video?"
Member #5177
At sunset, a SR4 troll shaman with Charisma 2 conjures a Spirit of man and assigns it Increase Charisma as an optional spell power. Maybe he conjures another and assigns it mask.

The shaman finds a satisfactory partner and spends the night. At sunrise, the spirits on remote service depart and the spells drop. The partner wakes up next to the ugliest troll not ever fantasized about, looks between his legs and sees equipment that is no where near troll sized, and begins screaming.

When it is all sorted out and explained, she is told she consented?


BTW, the reverse leonization reminded me of the situation about porn stars using leonization, or an age spell/physical mask/etc., to appear underage. Is kiddie porn then legal or is the viewer guilty because of intent to view minors?

[edit] Also, does anyone know the current way misrepresentation of gender stands? (ie., Boys Don't Cry or The Kissing Game.)
James McMurray
That shaman could have a charisma of 5, since charisma isn't necessarily (or even usually) looks.

In today's laws reverse leonizations for "kiddie" porn would not be illegal, as it's the age of the performer that matters, not the age the watcher wishes them to be.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (hyzmarca)


The two popular "date rape drugs" are rohypnol and gamma-hydroxybutyrate. The former is a tranquilizer that is somewhat more powerful than valium. The later is a rather powerful relaxant.

On its own rohypnal acts like any other tranquilizer and produces effects similar to large amounts of alcohol. Certain patients can become dangerously violent while under the influance and a large dose will cause short-term amnesia (a blackout).
GHB isn't quite as bad. If is were legal it would be one of the best sleeping pills known to man (and it is in some countries.) The illegal variety can be cut with dangerous chemicals and it is fairly eacy to overdose when self-medicating. The correct dose of GBH will cause you to fall asleep very quickly and nothing more or less. It is popular as a date rape drug because you wouldn't wake up if an elephant was plowing your ass in the middle of a three-ring circus with all the bells and whistles untill it wears off.
As with any depressants, combining either of these drugs with even the tinnest amounts of alcohol makes their effects immesurably worse.

Huh, interesting. Although I've heard of Rohpynol I haven't heard of the second one.

Sometime I should take one of those and see how it affects me just out of curiosity. Maybe I could set up a video camera, do a few rounds on a bag, take the drug, and then do a few rounds, and see exactly how the drug affects my performance.
James McMurray
If you take enough to make yourself a viable date rape victim there's likely to be no performance at all. Of course, exactly what that dosage measures out to is all a guessing game to the wouldbe rapists, so to really duplicate the experience with an experiment you have to leave yourself enough wiggle room in the dose that you could put yourself into a coma or die. smile.gif
Kanada Ten
QUOTE
In today's laws reverse leonizations for "kiddie" porn would not be illegal, as it's the age of the performer that matters, not the age the watcher wishes them to be.

The Supreme Court has more or less said that child pornography must include children, and the definition of age is rather static - or so it appears - being "The length of time that one has existed; duration of life." However, it could be defined as "one of the stages of life", and thus the legal definition of a child could extend to permachildren - which might even make sense if the process restricts or reverses mental facilities. That then brings us into grey areas of mental retardation and consent.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (James McMurray)
If you take enough to make yourself a viable date rape victim there's likely to be no performance at all. Of course, exactly what that dosage measures out to is all a guessing game to the wouldbe rapists, so to really duplicate the experience with an experiment you have to leave yourself enough wiggle room in the dose that you could put yourself into a coma or die. smile.gif

I'm a little bit confused, then. If the rapists usually use more than the maximum recommended adult dose (whatever that may be) *and* combine it with alcohol why don't we hear about more rohphynol-related fatalities?

In fact, if they're going to go and endanger the victim's physical health to that extent why even spend the money on the drugs and go through the bother of slipping it into a drink? Why not just put on a black ski mask and KO the victim in the parking lot for free?
Kanada Ten
Because one of those scenarios has the ability to not look like a crime.
hyzmarca
Whkipenia has some information on GHB and Rohypnol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghb

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohypnol

Aparently, GHB is popular amongst ravers because it can produce euphoria at low doses. I seriously doubt the claim that it is impossible to OD on GHB and wouldn't recomend combining it with alcohol or other depressents.
James McMurray
That and the human mind often has an aversion to violence. If you slip them a Mickey then they aren't even traumatized by the event. If you club them over the head they'll definitely know something happened.

I don't know that the rapists routinely use more, just that most of them aren't likely to be trained anesthesiologists or pharmacists. they may use too little, too much, or just enough.

I'm not sure about Rohypnol, but GHB is a fashionable drug outside of date rapists as well. If someone in a club dies of GHB and alcohol combined it's possible they did it themselves. It's highly unlikely that they clubbed themselves too hard over the head in the parking lot.

GHB and Rohypnol get around the "snow Fox carries a gun" problem. If you try to hit her in the parking lot you might miss, not hit hard enough, or step on something and alert her. Then you get shot and/or asked "how do you feel aboutt he word no?" and "can I cut off your balls?"
James McMurray
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
I seriously doubt the claim that it is impossible to OD on GHB and wouldn't recomend cmbining it with alcohol or other depressents.

I would doubt any claim about the impossibility of ODing on any drug. Even enough THC in your body could kill you. I have no idea how many bowls you'd have to smoke, but it's probably possible.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Kanada Ten)
Because one of those scenarios has the ability to not look like a crime.

Are you sure about that? The use date rape drugs is so widely known now that it's a cliche. If I were in a bar and I saw some woman suddenly act totally out of it whereas she was fine a few moments ago the use of a drug in her drink might spring immediately to mind.

Hell, the admonition made to women not to leave a drink on the bar counter when going to the restroom is a cliche. Few things would be more suspicious than a sudden change in behavior on the part of a woman at the bar in a way that looked drug induced.

Furthermore, you'd still need the chance to put the drug in the drink unobserved. At bars there's often a lot of people, a lot of heads pointing into a lot of different directions at once. While obviously it wouldn't be impossible to surreptitiously drug a drink I'd think there'd also be decent odds of getting caught. And if you were putting something into a woman's drink I think that everyone's first thought would be that you were planning rape.

In other words, I don't even think that the drug route would look less like a crime than the assault route. Hell, there are probably less witnesses on the street.
Kanada Ten
I'm thinking more of the blunt trauma to the head being more than a little bit of collaborative evidence. It's pretty much impossible to feign ignorance while wearing a ski mask and carrying a club.

But I think your limiting the scenario with the drugs. Who says you give it to her at the bar? And if she gets wasted, why would anyone say something about her leaving with the guy she came in with? And so on. One is possible to look non criminal, not that it will always appear so.
nick012000
Which is why I remember seeing on TV that the usual MO od date rapists down here in Aussie is to scope out the girl they're after, buy the same drink as her, drug their own drink, sit down with her, put their drinks next to each other, talk for a while, walk off with her drink, and wait.
James McMurray
It all comes down to timing. You wouldn't try it right at the bar where everyone is sitting unless you were really ballsy. But you could buy two drinks and walk over to a table with them. One is for you and the other is a duplicate of the one that's sitting in front of ther almost empty. On the way over you drug hers.

You also don't have to do it at a bar. If you do it at a rave you've got he cover of strobe lighting and whacked out youngsters (to borrow a phrase from my upcoming old age). You've also then got the cover that GHB is probably in every 8th person's pocket.
James McMurray
Damn you for posting as I'm typing!!! wink.gif

That could work too.
mfb
QUOTE (Wounded Ronin)
In other words, I don't even think that the drug route would look less like a crime than the assault route.

to a point. i don't tend to keep track of the behavior of every person in any bar i go to, monitoring them for sudden changes in behavior. if the girl is there alone, or has seperated herself from the friends she came in with, sudden changes in her behavior aren't likely to set off any alarms. on the other hand, someone swinging a club at someone's head is going to draw attention no matter how little-known the attacker and victim are.

but, yeah, the chance that someone might notice that you're acting weird is part of why not going anywhere alone is important.
Wounded Ronin
Good points. I guess that using those strategies you outlined above your endeavor could be less risky than outright assault.

That being said, those strategies would only work if someone dosen't carry their drink around with them and watch it carefully. If someone were to get the same drink as me but then walk off with my drink I think I'd notice because drinks are so damn expensive. At the same time, it would be sort of gross to continue on someone else's drink. I'd probably just get disgusted. I'm guessing that other people would react in a similar way but perhaps I'm wrong.

Anyway, I found some interesting info about rohphynol here: http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t990311b.html

QUOTE

Even without alcohol, doses as small as 1 milligram can incapacitate a victim for 8-12 hours.


Wow.

Still, though, even if someone's memory were harmed, wouldn't a mysterious 8-12 hour period of incapacitation ring some alarm bells. If I were female, and I went out with some guy, and all of a sudden after only 3-5 drinks I were incapacitated for 8-12 hours, I'd be extremely concerned.
James McMurray
You'd notice it even if the drink left on the bar was at about the same level as yours was, you'd already had three or four, and person struck you as "just another guy trying to use cheesy lines to get laid"?

It's possible you'd get concerned, but if you just dozed off while watching a movie with them and woke up on the couch the next morning you might not think twice. You might even feel good aboutt he person because they brought you a blanket before they slipped out.

Or maybe you did have a big chunk of memory gone. You won't necessarily remember who you left the bar with, or even that you left the bar at all. You might get worried or you might just chalk it up to having drank too much too fast.

Date rape does get prosecuted, and convictions do occur, but the nature of it makes it sometimes hard to secure a conviction, especially when you have no reason to think you even had sex and so don't go to a doctor to get checked out.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (James McMurray @ May 22 2006, 07:36 PM)
You'd notice it even if the drink left on the bar was at about the same level as yours was, you'd already had three or four, and person struck you as "just another guy trying to use cheesy lines to get laid"?

Um, yeah. Drinks at a bar are expensive. Whenever I go to a bar I keep a mental tally of the cost I've incurred so far and I never ever spend more than $20. When I go to the bar I'm in effect counting drinks. If someone were to try and make off with drink #4 and my expense level at $12 I'm going to be very annoyed. I want to be reasonably hardcore sloshed by if not before the $20 mark and if someone makes off with one of my drinks it will be harder and harder for me to attain that goal.

I mean, considering how bars are expensive, I'd assume that people usually do the same thing that I do. Set a maximum expenditure level and mentally keep track of the bill and the drinks. When you go in with that kind of mentality you really do eyeball your own drink like a hawk.

Maybe I'm just out of touch with how most people go to the bar but for my part I basically cling jealously to my drink because of the cost.


EDIT:

Regarding the other point about how a victim might not realize they've been drugged.

I have never taken these drugs myself, but I understand that when someone goes and gets general anathesia for surgery they often wake up feeling very thirsty and very bad in a variety of ways. Do you think it's possible that a rohpynol victim would wake up after a large dose (say several miligrams as opposed to the one cited in the above link) and not feel very strange?
Arethusa
You've never woken up with a hangover? Most people can't tell the difference.
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (Arethusa)
You've never woken up with a hangover? Most people can't tell the difference.

Well, once my mom went and had surgery. She told me that when she woke up, it was like something out of the Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner (her words). She told me that she was so thirsty that her tongue felt like it had swollen up and was taking up her whole mouth, and she could barely speak. She begged the nurse for water and the nurse shoved a piece of ice in her mouth instead. The ice seemed wonderfully refreshing but soon it was melted and my mom still felt like her tongue was enormous.

Now, I have *never* had a hangover experience like that. In my experience hangover involves a combination of headache and GI tract inflammation. It does *not* include freaking Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner swollen tongue syndrome. Furthermore, if I only had 3-5 drinks and someone slipped me some rohpynol, I'm guessing that I wouldn't necessarily have an inflamed GI tract, which is the big thing that tends to be common with a large excess of alcohol.

So, in summary, the main things I've noticed in my own hangovers (which are rare because I always use a lot of water when drinking) are 1.) headache and 2.) GI tract inflammation. I am pretty sure that you wouldn't get those symptoms from a few miligrams of a depressant.
Arethusa
I've woken up from surgery as well, and the effect wasn't so pronounced. It's unpleasant, and your mouth is dry, but dying-on-a-boat swollen tongue is likely something related to more serious anaesthesia and surgery.

I'm not saying the two are the same. They are distinct. But generally, people can't tell the difference, and waking up after date rape is generally already confusing as hell.
James McMurray
QUOTE
Um, yeah.  Drinks at a bar are expensive.  Whenever I go to a bar I keep a mental tally of the cost I've incurred so far and I never ever spend more than $20.  When I go to the bar I'm in effect counting drinks.  If someone were to try and make off with drink #4 and my expense level at $12 I'm going to be very annoyed.  I want to be reasonably hardcore sloshed by if not before the $20 mark and if someone makes off with one of my drinks it will be harder and harder for me to attain that goal.


I'm not sure if I'm explaining it well. You aren't missing a drink. There's a drink still on the table right where yours was, with it's liquid level at the same level. The difference is that when the person that came to talk to you pointed out some weirdo at the other side of the room he used the distraction to switch glasses and leave you the spiked one. Unless you've somehow physically marked your drink there aren't a lot of clues to tell you anything happened.

QUOTE
I mean, considering how bars are expensive, I'd assume that people usually do the same thing that I do.  Set a maximum expenditure level and mentally keep track of the bill and the drinks.  When you go in with that kind of mentality you really do eyeball your own drink like a hawk.


It might be differences culturally, age based, or just in who we are and who we hang out with, but most of the people I know that go to bars start a tab and then start drinking. At the end of the night you know you've had 4 or 5, but aren't really surprised when the tabe says 6. Of course, I'm a lush and like to buy drinks for the people I came with (they return the favor).

Re: hangover vs. anesthesia: I've had both and they're remarkably similar. If I wasn't looking for it I doubt I'd know the difference other then "man, I haven't had a hangover this bad in years."

I think that you (Wounded Ronin) are the type of person who is constantly in touch with his surroundings. You keep an eye on your drink and your budget. I think most people aren't that way. I used to be that way back when I was broke and had to keep a tighter rein on my spending or be broke at midnight, but have really relzxed a lot since I graduated and started making money. Most of my friends are the same.

Note: I'm not trying to say you're broke, or that you exhibit broke people / stingy behavior. I'm just pointing out my situation. I have no idea why you act differently, it might just be that you're a responsible adult (unlike me). smile.gif
Wounded Ronin
QUOTE (James McMurray)


I'm not sure if I'm explaining it well. You aren't missing a drink. There's a drink still on the table right where yours was, with it's liquid level at the same level. The difference is that when the person that came to talk to you pointed out some weirdo at the other side of the room he used the distraction to switch glasses and leave you the spiked one. Unless you've somehow physically marked your drink there aren't a lot of clues to tell you anything happened.

Well, I suppose that if someone essentially was able to set me up for a sucker punch ("look over there for some reason" BAM) they could in theory do a drink switcharoo. I mean, the way you describe it, I can't deny that it's possible.

Of course, if the man in question switched my 1/6th vermouth gin martini with an identical-looking dry vodka martini that was a bit warmer, then there'd be hell to pay. rotfl.gif


QUOTE


It might be differences culturally, age based, or just in who we are and who we hang out with, but most of the people I know that go to bars start a tab and then start drinking. At the end of the night you know you've had 4 or 5, but aren't really surprised when the tabe says 6. Of course, I'm a lush and like to buy drinks for the people I came with (they return the favor).

Re: hangover vs. anesthesia: I've had both and they're remarkably similar. If I wasn't looking for it I doubt I'd know the difference other then "man, I haven't had a hangover this bad in years."


I guess it would come down to a question of how much the person drank, then. If the person drank a huge amount perhaps anything would go regarding afteraffects. (Even death, if you think about it.)

But if a person only had only a few drinks, I'd guess that they probably shouldn't get hung over from that. I'd guess that any hangover-like feeling would be quite suspicious. I mean, *especially* if my genitalia were sore on top of that.

QUOTE

I think that you (Wounded Ronin) are the type of person who is constantly in touch with his surroundings. You keep an eye on your drink and your budget. I think most people aren't that way. I used to be that way back when I was broke and had to keep a tighter rein on my spending or be broke at midnight, but have really relzxed a lot since I graduated and started making money. Most of my friends are the same.

Note: I'm not trying to say you're broke, or that you exhibit broke people / stingy behavior. I'm just pointing out my situation. I have no idea why you act differently, it might just be that you're a responsible adult (unlike me). smile.gif


Well, I am poor, but I'm also kind of compulsive and get feelings of guilt whenever I spend too much money. Thing is, even when I literally have a thousand bucks in my bank account just sitting there doing nothing in reserve for random emergencies, I still don't ever spend more than $20 at the bar. If I did, I'd stop enjoying myself, I think. I think it's because both my parents were really poor when they were young and they did all kinds of things that instilled a built-in sense of thrift; for example, whenever we used to go out to restaurants or things like that they'd always make a point of ordering only an entree and no beverages besides for just water. Obsessive compulsive mental configuration wins again!
James McMurray
We were really poor when I was growing up too, but I reacted the exact opposite. smile.gif

It sounds like you wouldn't be a very good choice for a GHB rapist (if you were a woman of course, GHB rape doesn't work well on men I asume), but it also sounds like that would be fairly easy for the person to tell if they were at all watchful. Eyes that scan the room and a hand always onthe drink glass is too much effort when there are so many easily schmoozed gullible women out there.
Member #5177
QUOTE (James McMurray)
That shaman could have a charisma of 5, since charisma isn't necessarily (or even usually) looks.

Which shaman, the one with the stated Charisma 2? Way to undermine getting the thread back on topic. ohplease.gif
James McMurray
Huh? The shaman using spells to enhance his ability to get laid is very on topic. That comment was thus more on topic then a lot of other stuff in this thread. Including other posts by me, which would probably have been better targets for your ire. wink.gif

How's this:

Anything that does not directly influence them is probably fair game. Tailored Pheremones, Mask spells, and high levels of Kinesics are perhaps immoral, but not illegal. If I found out a 2 Charisma troll shaman used magic to trick my daughter into getting it on I'd be really pissed, but wouldn't expect there to be any legal recourse we could take, at least not as far as geting him convicted on rape charges.

Perhaps that would closer constitute fraud?
mfb
it really depends on the jurisdiction. in conservative areas, possibly including the CAS, use of such spells to gain sexual favors could well constitute rape. in more progressive areas, such as the NAN, they probably wouldn't. in batshit insane areas, such as the UCAS, who knows?

as far as morality is concerned, i don't think i'd have a problem with someone using Cha-boosting magic to get laid, any more than i'd have a problem with someone plying a prospective partner with alcohol to loosen them up. it's kinda scummy, but meh.
James McMurray
So then what differentiates "scummy" from "you'd have a problem with it?" It seems to me like you have a problem with it on some level, or it would be "ok" instead of "scummy."
mfb
it doesn't hurt anybody who doesn't basically deserve it, so i don't find any moral fault with it. my personal choice is to not take advantage of people like that, because i wouldn't like dealing with how they'd feel about me the next morning.
Moon-Hawk
QUOTE (James McMurray)
I would doubt any claim about the impossibility of ODing on any drug. Even enough THC in your body could kill you. I have no idea how many bowls you'd have to smoke, but it's probably possible.

You can't OD on THC by smoking pot. You'd die of smoke inhalation and/or just pass out well before ODing. Based on rodent studies a human would need to smoke something like 20 pounds in a go, IIRC. Flat out not possible. Now if you were injecting pure THC (as they did in the rodent studies) then it would be possible, but human limitations prevent ODing on pot through smoking or eating. So while it may be possible to OD on THC, you can't get there by smoking bowls.
Please note that I am only talking about a single episode, and am not making any statements one way or the other about the long-term effects and/or repeated use.
Drugs are bad, m'kay? Also, don't smoke pot if you've been drinking.
mfb
yeah, it ruins the effect.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012