...I'm the anon you replied to directly above, for reference; this got wordy, my typing style is recognizable, and I personally see no reason to remain anon at this point, so. Here I am.
Nah, don't worry, I'm not taking it as an argument - I personally don't have a problem with Caster being in the game, and I wouldn't have a problem with Guildias, either. I've played plenty of questionable characters myself - Guildias being one of them - and I definitely understand that my scroll wheel is my best friend when it comes to those sorts of things. And if the players can make characters like that compelling for others to play with, that's really great, actually - horrendous characters like that can be really interesting to work out and bounce off the setting.
But while I realize that Route has never been G-rated/kid-friendly/safe for...brain, it's one of those things where it does have a reputation based on premise. It's going to be seen as a Pokémon game before anything else. It's also a really slice-of-life Pokémon game most of the time. Characters like Caster or Guildias would not be seen as out-of-place in, say, Dirty Vegas, where the entire premise is based around sex and sin, but they would get some side-eye here based on the setting alone, hence the "Why is Caster even in this game" - some characters are just more compatible with the setting, and Caster might be pinging some as really inappropriate. People's expectations are also different in games like DV - I've never actually played there myself, but based on premise alone I would understand that sort of post being made there; I wouldn't join a game based Pokémon and expect to be greeted with an hour-long video of a child being tortured. I can't speak for the anon above me, but I don't think that most people are triggered by Caster's presence; they're just kind of wondering how this is appropriate.
Like the OP below, I don't have a problem with sensitive material being played out; the problem I had with it is that, as it was presented, it felt like I had the options of either responding to something that upset me, or bending my characterization to avoid it. I avoided commenting here last night because that was upsetting me, and I knew that I would have a kneejerk response I would regret after I was no longer upset. (I also need to apologize to Ara, as I know I flipped the hell out on her last night; I'll do that whenever I see her tonight.) I can see where you're coming from now a bit better, but at the time it felt really odd and unfair that this plot would be justified because it's within the IC scope for the character, but people who were uncomfortable with the plot had to bend their characterization to avoid it.
Honestly, the reason it was so upsetting to me is the knowledge that it was going on in an open post; the best way I can think of to describe it is along the lines of listening to two people you care about having a very loud, scary argument in the next room over, while you're in your room with the door closed. You don't have to get involved in the argument, as it doesn't concern you; you can put headphones on, turn up the volume and ignore it. At the same time, the knowledge that it's happening literally a wall away and you are in a position to step in, you're just too scared to intervene, is upsetting. I think this is a large aspect of what's bothering people, and why they feel pressured by things like this being openly broadcast to the network - it's not that it's a disturbing thing, it's that it's a disturbing thing that you should be doing something about. That's why posts like that to public networks like the 'Gear don't tend to go over well at all and tend to lead to a lot of upset in-game; it's not intentional pressure, but it's there.
I personally think the alternative of making it more obviously opt-in is a fair compromise that doesn't sacrifice anyone's ability to be IC, but obviously it's up to you guys, ultimately, to decide where this goes. I definitely appreciate that you're willing to be civil with us about it, and that you're taking the time to listen to our concerns and try to find a solution. It's one of those things where I don't think everyone will be 100% happy no matter what's done, but I think better communication overall would be good - I don't expect you to read minds and if others are bothered/upset they do need to tell you (and I have talked to Mei about Caster, and she's been very good about avoiding pressuring me since then), but to be fair to them I was also under the impression in the plotting post that this would be much more private/opt-in than it ended up being. I don't think you guys are horrible people or being incompetent or anything, I just think that everyone needs to communicate a bit more when it comes to really sensitive material.
...that was pretty much a really tl;dr "I agree with this", but hopefully it got my thoughts on this across a bit more clearly than I have been.
no subject
Nah, don't worry, I'm not taking it as an argument - I personally don't have a problem with Caster being in the game, and I wouldn't have a problem with Guildias, either. I've played plenty of questionable characters myself - Guildias being one of them - and I definitely understand that my scroll wheel is my best friend when it comes to those sorts of things. And if the players can make characters like that compelling for others to play with, that's really great, actually - horrendous characters like that can be really interesting to work out and bounce off the setting.
But while I realize that Route has never been G-rated/kid-friendly/safe for...brain, it's one of those things where it does have a reputation based on premise. It's going to be seen as a Pokémon game before anything else. It's also a really slice-of-life Pokémon game most of the time. Characters like Caster or Guildias would not be seen as out-of-place in, say, Dirty Vegas, where the entire premise is based around sex and sin, but they would get some side-eye here based on the setting alone, hence the "Why is Caster even in this game" - some characters are just more compatible with the setting, and Caster might be pinging some as really inappropriate. People's expectations are also different in games like DV - I've never actually played there myself, but based on premise alone I would understand that sort of post being made there; I wouldn't join a game based Pokémon and expect to be greeted with an hour-long video of a child being tortured. I can't speak for the anon above me, but I don't think that most people are triggered by Caster's presence; they're just kind of wondering how this is appropriate.
Like the OP below, I don't have a problem with sensitive material being played out; the problem I had with it is that, as it was presented, it felt like I had the options of either responding to something that upset me, or bending my characterization to avoid it. I avoided commenting here last night because that was upsetting me, and I knew that I would have a kneejerk response I would regret after I was no longer upset. (I also need to apologize to Ara, as I know I flipped the hell out on her last night; I'll do that whenever I see her tonight.) I can see where you're coming from now a bit better, but at the time it felt really odd and unfair that this plot would be justified because it's within the IC scope for the character, but people who were uncomfortable with the plot had to bend their characterization to avoid it.
Honestly, the reason it was so upsetting to me is the knowledge that it was going on in an open post; the best way I can think of to describe it is along the lines of listening to two people you care about having a very loud, scary argument in the next room over, while you're in your room with the door closed. You don't have to get involved in the argument, as it doesn't concern you; you can put headphones on, turn up the volume and ignore it. At the same time, the knowledge that it's happening literally a wall away and you are in a position to step in, you're just too scared to intervene, is upsetting. I think this is a large aspect of what's bothering people, and why they feel pressured by things like this being openly broadcast to the network - it's not that it's a disturbing thing, it's that it's a disturbing thing that you should be doing something about. That's why posts like that to public networks like the 'Gear don't tend to go over well at all and tend to lead to a lot of upset in-game; it's not intentional pressure, but it's there.
I personally think the alternative of making it more obviously opt-in is a fair compromise that doesn't sacrifice anyone's ability to be IC, but obviously it's up to you guys, ultimately, to decide where this goes. I definitely appreciate that you're willing to be civil with us about it, and that you're taking the time to listen to our concerns and try to find a solution. It's one of those things where I don't think everyone will be 100% happy no matter what's done, but I think better communication overall would be good - I don't expect you to read minds and if others are bothered/upset they do need to tell you (and I have talked to Mei about Caster, and she's been very good about avoiding pressuring me since then), but to be fair to them I was also under the impression in the plotting post that this would be much more private/opt-in than it ended up being. I don't think you guys are horrible people or being incompetent or anything, I just think that everyone needs to communicate a bit more when it comes to really sensitive material.
...that was pretty much a really tl;dr "I agree with this", but hopefully it got my thoughts on this across a bit more clearly than I have been.