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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

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.

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.

Because one of those scenarios has the ability to not look like a crime.

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.

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?"

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.

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.

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.

Damn you for posting as I'm typing!!!

That could work too.

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

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.

You've never woken up with a hangover? Most people can't tell the difference.

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.

We were really poor when I was growing up too, but I reacted the exact opposite.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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."

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.

yeah, it ruins the effect.