Hello there,
I have been thinking about this for a while, and I am writing this blog post to ask for your opinion (and opening comments for this so feel free to give me your opinion, but please make it constructive, thank you).
To me, a restrained sub should be vulnerable when out and about. I know SL is a virtual world and we are safe and all, but I am striving to make it feel as real as possible, so it strikes me as odd that a bound sub can walk everywhere without feeling helpless, and at the mercy of anyone who wants to overpower them, regardless whether they have a key to their restraints or not.
In fact, it may very well be something that some, if not most, serious players would agree with. Suppose you're outdoors with your hands cuffed behind your back, trying for example to slip out unnoticed (it could actually be a game, with the recent changes to the RLV...). But if you fail to go unnoticed and someone catches you, currently what can they do to you ? Nothing at all unless you permit it with an RLV relay or whatever attachment that has nothing to do with your restraints. That's not very realistic. If you're bound, you're vulnerable and people can do things to you whether you want it or not, that's the way I see it.
So here comes my idea. Suppose the person who caught you clicked on your cuffs, currently they would get a slightly condescending "you are not authorized" message and a suggestion to use a RealKey. Most people don't know what a RealKey is about, so they just assume they can't do anything to the sub and walk away. Opportunities of fun are missed. Even if the restraints are locked, there are many things that can be done to the sub, right ?
What I want to do is to provide the captor with a small menu, a little like the plugins browser, giving limited access to some plugins. These plugins would be Outfit, Sit and Leash. Because when you stumble on someone who cannot defend themselves, you can strip (or dress) them, you can snap a chain to their restraints (provided there isn't one already) and you can force them to sit somewhere.
This solution makes it safe for plugins such as "Public" (which immediately hands the key to the person touching the cuff), because only a handful of plugins would be available.
Currently what I'm trying to do is to add some code into the "Sit" plugin, which is present only in arms restraints, so that it triggers the menu I mentioned above. That preserves collars, legs and gags from this feature, and allows me to add this feature without adding a script for it. Notice that I didn't mention adding it as an option, if the sub is restrained, she is de facto vulnerable.
It makes sense to me, but does it make sense to you too ? Would you actually like such a feature ?
Thanks for your input,
Marine
PS : From the short but rich chat in the group immediately after I posted this article, it seems the general consensus is to have a plugin dedicated to it, that will be called "Vulnerable" (unless a better name is found), and that will give two switches : one for the sub only, to allow her keyholder(s) to make her vulnerable while bound, and one for the keyholder to actually make the sub vulnerable while bound or not. Only if both switches are turned on (they will be off by default, to let the restraints behave like they did until now), will someone get access to the Outfit, Sit and Leash plugins when clicking without having the key.
PS 2 : I'm sorry for taking so long to let the comments show... for once I will blame the tools because Blogger does not bother telling me when someone comments and that the comment is awaiting moderation. The consensus here is the same as on my group : such a feature needs a toggle, so there will be a toggle, as explained in the PS above. Thank you all for your comments !
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
This would be a good idea ONLY if folk in SL actually respected common-sense rules about role-play. The simple fact is that there is a small but irritating minority that don't and would make life really difficult for the restrained and their nominal captors or for a D/s pair. Nice idea Marine, but not practicable.
I like the idea, but feel it should be an option someplace. Not every one is the same. Some subs may not want to be that exposed, but many would. I don't think one size fits all, im my humble opinion. I am viewing this from the Dom/me side.
-Heather
I would speculate that many Doms don't like anyone else playing with their subs. If you don't make the new behavior optional via a config menu, Doms might prohibit further use of your toys.
Perhaps it could be configurable if a third party locks a restraint, but mandatory if the restraint is self-locked?
(From Chorazin Allen) See my Public Plugin https(insert characters)marketplace.secondlife.com/p/CoC-RR-Public-Plugin-Copy/2449894 .. this provides a Public mode with leash plugin access without handing over the key to the public user. It sounds pretty similar in concept to this.
Access to the main menu and other plugins is prevented to ensure that the wearer can't be unlocked by the public user and has to wait until they encounter their keyholder again or a timer fires.
Being a third party plugin, the wearer can choose whether to have it present or not (and active or not).
So, overall it's a good idea, and mostly already available other than the sit & outfit extensions which could probably be added easily into the plugin using the same techniques I use to present the leash plugin without permitting main menu access.
--Chorazin
(From Chorazin Allen, again) Another quick comment on the proposal itself - I don't think the new behaviour should be enabled when just locked (ie not in a pose). The reality check here is that mobility is normal if the arms are not linked by chains/straps/ropes.
--Chorazin
It sounds like a very fun feature, but it definitely needs to be a toggle as you'll find out if you start hanging in public places a little more, hehe. There's a world full of idiots out there. But if the toggle is under the control of the keyholder, then it's very close to the spirit of your idea!
If it's possible, then perhaps the Sub should also get to choose if he wants the keyholder to control that toggle, just like the "Allow IM Restrictions" on the gags. Never hurts to give the paying customer more options, I think!
An entirely different option, would be something like the puzzle on the restrains that don't have a key. It gives the Sub time to get away, and requires the person trying to gain control to not be a complete idiot. It's a decent compromise, though it probably doesn't feel very realistic for this purpose of just grabbing the sub to make them sit, strip, etc.
It's an interesting idea - and one that some would welcome, but I have the following thoughts:
1. although you say you don't want it to be an option - I actually believe it should be. Why? Because there are too many players who aren't adult in the true sense of that word - and who don't understand consensual play. In RL, a sub who goes out vulnerable does have some choices - and one is to choose when and where to be vulnerable.
2. Leashing is an interesting option, but does not (unless I've missed something) allow struggling to get unleashed without struggling out of the restraint. This raises extra dangers that would only in RL attach if a kidnap is in progress.
3. I like the ideas in general, but would prefer an option to make it optional.
Dear Marine,
first let me tell you that I LOVE your design and your way of making me helpless in your items.
But I too admit that there are times when I am not that playful and wear it just as a lovely accessory.
I would welcome the fact to become more vunerable, sometimes, but not always. I think I'd like to have the final decision how playful I am that day. for me it is a question of SSC. I experienced several morons out there, people I don't want to grant any access to my restraints.
In my opinion a switch to turn the 'playful mode' off would be nice, a feature that maybe should be granted only to the one who locked the restraints; so the owner decides what might happen to the bound one.
I am certain that some of my friends would simply love to be that helpless. Maybe I am more of a fun and not a serious player, I don't know, maybe I worry too much and most people just don't touch the restraints of others anyway.
One of your many fans
Margaux
Dear Marine,
first let me tell you that I LOVE your design and your way of making me helpless in your items.
But I too admit that there are times when I am not that playful and wear it just as a lovely accessory.
I would welcome the fact to become more vunerable, sometimes, but not always. I think I'd like to have the final decision how playful I am that day. for me it is a question of SSC. I experienced several morons out there, people I don't want to grant any access to my restraints.
In my opinion a switch to turn the 'playful mode' off would be nice, a feature that maybe should be granted only to the one who locked the restraints; so the owner decides what might happen to the bound one.
I am certain that some of my friends would simply love to be that helpless. Maybe I am more of a fun and not a serious player, I don't know, maybe I worry too much and most people just don't touch the restraints of others anyway.
One of your many fans
Margaux
This is an interesting thought. Firstly, I agree with your logic. Someone who is restrained and in public is inherently vulnerable, and someone who stumbles upon them can without a doubt do things to them. So I think it merits some thought as to what could be done.
Certainly I agree that clothing could be removed (cut away, torn off, etc.), but I'm not sure that it would be as easy, realistically, to add it.
Certainly other restraints could be added, so maybe the menu could give access to shared folders. Here too I think there should be a little realism; not many people wandering around in public have a ball gag and armbinder afterall (but if you know of anyone who does, please introduce me ;). So maybe there needs to be some limit on what can be selected from the RLV folders, perhaps restricting to easily carried items like handcuffs, tape, scarf, rope, maybe the ball and ring gags as well.
Certainly they could force the restrained person into positions, so having the ability to force sit on objects I think is ok, but additionally, maybe having a small AO with some selected force fantasy poses would make sense? I think the ability to add a leash is also ok.
All of this I think is good in the context that a restrained person encounters someone with less than pure intentions. However, I think we should probably also consider the case of the good Samaritan encounter. Perhaps the person you run into would prefer to help you get free? For tape and rope restraints, you already have his capability built in, but for locked restraints it may not be so easy. Leather straps and cuffs can be cut with heavy shears. Maybe the person has a set with them, or can find a pair nearby, or purchase a pair from a store? Padlocks can be defeated with bolt cutters. The likelihood of someone having a set is small, but they could easily acquire one. So I guess what I'm saying is there may be room in this idea for some additional accessory products to aid with more serious restraints. The only set I think would be rather impervious to manipulation is the Elegance set, since the hasps of the locks are internal in the design of the restraints.
Along the same idea as the good Samaritan, even if a restrained person encounters someone with less than pure intentions in public, it is unlikely that person will do anything while they can be seen by other people. So maybe there needs to be some logic that senses others who are nearby witnesses, and if there are any, then the options that are presented are restricted to things likes forcing the sub to follow you while you lead them someplace more private.
My own opinion on this idea is that it would enhance the realism of being restrained. One of the things I like most about physical restraint is the removal of free choice (yes, even though we all choose to be restrained in the first place and establish limits), and I think providing tools that enhance the aspect of vulnerability, helplessness and inability to stop something from happening are all good things in your product line.
-Kel
I personally like the idea. It makes the whole situation more realistic. But I do expect a lot of RLV users to disagree. There are a lot of jealous masters who would be annoyed that their slave girl is being used by some other man. To that, all I can say is that if you're bound and worried about being misused you shouldn't leave your house.
Post a Comment