Under what circumstances is it acceptable to introduce prostitute NPCs...

in b4 I don't know what I've been told...

I have a thing for Lawful Neutral characters being forced into "muh loyalty" situations where they are forced to choose between their word or what they know is right.

Disgusting fetishists both of you, keep your magic realm out of the game!

keeping out magic realm *is* my magic realm. Wat do Veeky Forums?

>Under what circumstances is it acceptable to introduce prostitute NPCs?
when you aren't playing with retards/idiots/autists/manchildren
So only in a very few cases

>trying to justify inserting your fetish

This is why people hate you.

Not only have you robbed Veeky Forums of a great source of humor, but it's not all that difficult to come up with contrived excuses to try and force your fetish shit into a game when it's absolutely unneccesary.

It takes no special skill, and you're actually dumber for putting in the effort.
Just fuck off already, and quit being such a cringy fuck.

Prostitution has existed in every major culture and society. If your group can't handle talking to one then yes don't give them the option and swap it with a member of a thieves guild they caught or something. But in any group not made up of teenagers you should be fine.

There are plenty perfectly good reason for a prostitute to refuse a customer. The most likely one being that she doesn't feel like it. A madame of a well to do brothel is going to charge out the ass for her own personal services and only offer them to regulars whose company she enjoys.

What the hell is awkward about a fade to black?

if you have to ask this question just dont.

What is this image even?

My guess is dwarf fortress. If you think paradox games are autistic, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Is this the game with the preposterous traps?

Hooker with a heart of gold has been a character archetype since the Greeks, user, it's been found in India and China and has been regarded as a universal archetype.

The point of the character is their contradiction, being an utter dick-sucking whore whose moral fiber is typically more ironclad than others.

Yes

Now I have an image of a fat, pimply guy, jerking it beneath the table. "Yeah, she's totally maternal and with rocking tits and shit, just like mother used to make - NNNNNGHHHHHHHH - yeah just like that man"

We're here for you, OP. We're here to help you feel some fucking shame again.

Roleplaying is a social event. If you have a wet erection beneath the table, people will be able to tell that this is giving you a boner. Have some sense of self-awareness, man.

Stay away from the shit that turns you on, especially if you're playing a game in real-life with other people. Otherwise, you'll be remembered as "That weird fat fuck who wants to fuck his mother." They'll be judging you with each word that leaves your mouth.

>just like mother used to make
>his mother made tits
>for food

That's fine and dandy if you can handle that, but it's clear that OP can't, so he shouldn't bother forcing himself to, or, even worse, allowing himself to.

>Under what circumstances is it acceptable to introduce prostitute NPCs?
If they look like Ma-ma it's okay.

>I kind of have a thing for kind, motherly prostitute
I was going to make a joke about your mother, but it would be too easy. Just like she is.

>prostitute NPCs
Including rape in your game is a quick trip to a game's failure, awkward discussions with your group, and possibly the loss of one or more friends. I heavily suggest you don't include rape in your games. It never ends well.

This.
If you need to ask, it probably not OK.

I feel ambiguous about fact, that we, as players have moved from using magical realms, to talking about magical realms and how to avoid it. On one hand, its certainly success. On the other hand it show us, there's still some work ahead of us.

. . .
Are you really arguing that Prostitution is the same thing as Rape?

You think any of those women would sleep with you if they didn't desperately need the money? Consent obtained by coercion is not consent. Ergo, prostitution is rape.

Yes. YES! This is The shit!

Isn't Star Trek a post-scarcity setting without currency? A prostitute wouldn't be a prostitute, she'd just be a slut.

...

It's a legitimate argument. Otherwise you may as well say that if I blackmail you into sex, it doesn't count as rape. What about the threat of violence?

The difference is that ones is

>I wish to engage your services for financial remuneration

and the other is

>You will give me your services or I will leave you in a much worse state than what you are now

Essentially one is trade and the other is theft at least

Incentive to do something is not always coercion. For example if I go into a shop and put money in the self swipe till and remove a sandwich, that is not theft or coercion, that is an exchange of services for currency or a sale.

If I go to my hairdressers and give them money to cut my hair I am not committing a crime upon them.

If I go to a prostitute and have sex with them in exchange for money I am not coercing them.

By your logic I could sue my boss for slavery.

>we
Take it back to Facebook, crowd-follower.

Where are the temple prosti-I mean, sluts, in the real world, that freely give it up to the downtrodden among us with no hope of aquiring poon on their own merits?

Where are the soup kitchens of the gash?

If you would not provide a service for free out of charitable intentions, then it is wrong to compare it to free trade.

>If I go to a prostitute and have sex with them in exchange for money I am not coercing them.

You aren't, but *they* are still being coerced by a system we call capitalism. They would never fuck you if they weren't desperate for your money.

Depends, is your boss a capitalist?

When the story calls for it and the party is cool with it.

That shit doesn't exist because prostitution is illegal in most of the US and Europe.

Oh, you're a commie.

Disregard everything, you are an irrelevant reactionary and your backwards and outdated ideology will stay that way forever now.

>By your logic I could sue my boss for slavery.
By that logic having sex with a robot is rape too.
Oh wait... feminists LITERALLY believe this.

youtube.com/watch?v=nxVBjfHzdI4

11:50 is the part where it gets interesting for us. But if you don't feel like watching Sex is rape if there isn't informed consent. Informed consent can only be made when you're free from duress. A sexrobot is always under duress because it literally cannot refuse a sex offer. Therefore, all sex with robots designed specifically for the purpose of sex is rape!

>mfw I want to call this backwards and medieval, but medieval man had a much healthier perception of prostitution than modern man
How disgustingly modern

I know /pol/ is a containment board for the alt-right, but there needs to be a place for your kind as well.

/v/ please leave

>Where are the temple prosti-I mean, sluts, in the real world, that freely give it up to the downtrodden among us with no hope of aquiring poon on their own merits?

>Where are the soup kitchens of the gash?

>If you would not provide a service for free out of charitable intentions, then it is wrong to compare it to free trade.

How about you get a job and pay for it. You are not entitled to a luxury no matter how much you try to claim it's a necessity.

In any major city of a fantasy/medieval setting, these people will exist. If they don't, you better have a damn good explanation as to why.

If we are ever in such a city, and we need information on a noble of some kind, prostitutes are the first stop for figuring out shit about him.

Taking that out is like saying the setting doesn't have horses. Sure, you might be reasonable, but you still need a very convincing reason to avoid having people call you an idiot.

>That shit doesn't exist because prostitution is illegal in most of the US and Europe.

Selling sex is illegal, having sex for free isn't.

I'm not a commie, I just understand we're they're coming from. The legal system prevents me from going out into the woods and owning that which I homestead.

>How about you get a job and pay for it.

Wew lad. Prostitution is not free trade because sex isn't comparable to any other human activity doesn't imply WOMEN SHOULD BE FUCKING ME FOR FREE REEEEEEEEEEE

>Prostitution is not free trade because it would horribly devaluate the price of pussy below what women consider acceptable
ftfy. Making prostitution illegal allows "normal" women to arbitrarily fix the price of their pussies because there's no easy competition.

Again, selling sex is illegal, having sex for free isn't. Where are the charity vaginas?

>The legal system prevents me from going out into the woods and owning that which I homestead.
Why the fuck do you feel entilted to settling in a wood that has belonged to my family for centuries ?

If you aren't doing anything with it, why should you be considered the owner?

But I am, it's where I get the wood for my fireplace, also some mushrooms and where we used to play hide and seek with my cousins and my brother when we were kids.

In every collage campus.

The only qualification you need is not being a neckbeard, fedoralord hamplanet. Qualifications that are not hard to achieve.

It isn't yours, why do you feel entitled to camp there?

Charity doesn't need qualifications. Soup kitchens don't screen for hygiene.

If it isn't yours, why shouldn't I make something of it?

That's basically nothing. If I build a shitty little hut, I've done more with the place in a week than you've done with it in centuries.

>If I build a shitty little hut, I've done more with the place in a week than you've done with it in centuries.
And take a "stray" hunting round.

>Charity doesn't need qualifications. Soup kitchens don't screen for hygiene.
But they do screen for very basic standards of behaviour. Someone coming in waving a knife around get thrown out if they don't stop it.

>If it isn't yours, why shouldn't I make something of it?
It isn't yours either.

>That's basically nothing. If I build a shitty little hut, I've done more with the place in a week than you've done with it in centuries.
Irrelevant. Trespass is trespass.

You just want something for nothing because you're too lazy to go out and work for it.

>implying I don't have as many guns

If we're going down that path, why shouldn't I just shoot you and your family in a home invasion and take your shit?

>But they do screen for very basic standards of behaviour. Someone coming in waving a knife around get thrown out if they don't stop it.

Yes, and? They'll still feed you regardless of how you look or smell or how rude you are. Initiating violence against other people is a far cry from there.

>It isn't yours either.
>Irrelevant. Trespass is trespass.

You can't trespass on land that nobody owns by definition, comrade.

You tell me of a charity hairdresser that will cut anyone's hair for free. Alternately, you suddenly come to the understanding that paying for a haircut is literally rape as they wouldn't cut your hair for free.

>why shouldn't I just shoot you and your family in a home invasion and take your shit?
Because you'd spend the rest of your life in prison, as opposed as only a few months for squatting.

I don't see why some nu-gypsy faggot like you should get anything free from anyone. It's not like woodland is expensive, either.

Where in the world is there land that isn't owned? If the land isn't held by private interests, it's almost certainly held by a government. And you can trespass on even PUBLIC lands, owned by the government.

>You can't trespass on land that nobody owns by definition, comrade.
So no such place then?

>Yes, and? They'll still feed you regardless of how you look or smell or how rude you are. Initiating violence against other people is a far cry from there.

And yet very minimal qualifications have to be met. Charity is never entirely unconditional, even if that condition is as basic as "don't attack the dude handing out the charity".

>Especially because if one of the players tries to sollicit her, she literally has no reason to refuse. In fact, where normally a woman refusing the PC's requests for casual sex is the norm, under these circumstances refusal would be the exception, and no matter what option I pick it's bound to get awkward really fast.

Madames are rarely still among the working girls, or if they are, very client-selective. So that isn't the problem you think it is.

>because sex isn't comparable to any other human activity
Why is this specific service different and special?

I assume that you believe that it should be illegal to pay someone to be in a porn movie?

He believes that women have sex for free. Not true in many cases.

This is absolutely the reason why prostitution is illegal. It devalues other pussy which, until recently, devalued marriage and the church is very much in favour of temporal power.

>Prostitution is not free trade because sex isn't comparable to any other human activity
How puritan of you.

Pretty much any church will hook you up with a haircut so that you can go to a job interview not looking like a bum. Most will loan you a suit.

>Where in the world is there land that isn't owned?
>So no such place then?

Doesn't matter if the government owns it; you don't.

>And yet very minimal qualifications have to be met.

"Not initiating violence" is a universal qualification for all peaceful human interaction, not something specific to free trade or charity. It's irrelevant for our purposes.

Clearly the hairdresser desperately needs the money or they wouldn't be cutting your hair.

>You can't trespass on land that nobody owns by definition, comrade.
But you want to own it. Nice hypocrisy. Either it belongs to someone or it belongs to the people. What makes you think you can just steal it based on your own arbitrary definition of acceptable usage?

>Doesn't matter if the government owns it; you don't.
I'm so confused as to why you even brought it up in the first place. What are you saying? That, because I'm not a government, I can't stop you from trespassing on my land?

Also, what the fuck was all that about "using" the land? I own a guitar, and never play it, haven't practiced in years, and yet I still own it because it's mine. Do you think that anybody should be able to come and take my guitar because I haven't done anything with it in however long?

What's the statute of limitations on how long I can legally own property? How long a family can pass on property? At what point, be it seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years, decades, or centuries, do I no longer own what is mine?

There was a girl at my uni that was cutting hair for free in her free time. It was like a passion for her.

I went there once, it was pretty weird.

If you're coming to Veeky Forums to ask if something is magical realm, you're either a weak-willed shit with no business making your own decisions, or you already know it's magical realm, and are hoping someone will convince you it isn't.

They should be prostitutes but also ninja

Also ninja prostitutes.

Still a transaction. You got a haircut, she got someone to practice on.

>That, because I'm not a government, I can't stop you from trespassing on my land?

No, my point was that it's not your land because you haven't cultivated it.

>But you want to own it.

No, I want to cultivate it, which will in turn give me ownership of it. Your mere usage does not rise to the level of cultivation any more than some guy taking a stroll through the woods to clear his thoughts.

>Still a transaction.

Then nothing is charity because my giving you food results in good feelings for me.

So you want ownership of it.

Why does your usage grant you exclusive ownership but someone else's usage does not?

Or are you cool with someone else kicking you off because they want to build on it and they consider that usage to be more valid than your usage?

OP admits straight away it is a fetish thing. In those circumstances, don't do it.

>No, I want to cultivate it,
So if I come there after, buldoze your shithut and build a high rise it will be mine ?

Yes. Charity is a lie.

>Why does your usage grant you exclusive ownership but someone else's usage does not?

I'm building something on the land and maximising the utility of it. You're not.

This would be analogous if you'd ever done anything with the land. Once I start farming on it, it's mine. You never owned it, you just occasionally gathered wood on it.

It's not coercion.

Prostitution is one of the oldest professions in the world, many women barter their bodies when they don't have anything else to trade. Pretty common among widowed women with children to keep food on the table.

I assume it's some neo-feminist bullshit, but yeah that should be in /pol/ as well.

and breath fire

It's all fun and games until they try to kill you, and you keep coming back and they keep getting better.

>many women barter their bodies when they don't have anything else to trade.

HMMMMMM.

If I blackmail you, you're fucking me because you don't have another choice in the matter. Why is that coercion but poverty isn't?

>Once I start farming on it, it's mine
No it's not by your own logic, if I can raise the cultivation level by evicting you (assuming this means anything).

Plus, not every kind of land needs to be cultivated or is even proper to be cultivated, you'd know it if you weren't some kind of city dweller. You still need woodlands to provide wood for building and heating.

If the person doing the fucking put them into poverty so that the fucking could take place then the person doing the fucking coerced them.

If the person doing the fucking is unconnected to the poverty then he hasn't coerced her. He has simply provided something that she badly needs and she has provided him something in return.

>No it's not by your own logic

Before I started cultivating it, nobody owned it. I have the only claim to ownership. Once I own it, you bulldozing my hut/farm is theft.

That's why you go to a brothel. Everyone knows that teams of ninja are shit. Only lone ninja are dangerous.

How is cutting down the trees on order to cultivate it maximizing the use of woodland? It's destroying it.

You do have a choice in the matter, facing the consequence of whatever you're blackmailing me with. If you're comparing that to prostitution I guess facing the consequence would be "not getting paid".

Rape on the other hand would mean you do not have a choice in the first place. I wish the subject wasn't trivialized by such ignorant correlations, then again we're on Veeky Forums.

Not at all, he's increasing the level of usage to further approach maximum utilization.

That beats your shitty cultivation.

According to your ridiculous justifications for trespass and theft.

>He has simply provided something that she badly needs

ie: She's had sex because the alternative was starving. She's had sex in circumstances that do not allow for her to give consent.

If I come across you hanging from a cliff, and I pull you up on the condition that you agree to be my slave for life, assuming that slavery is legal should a court enforce the contract? You were clearly not in a position to disagree.

Before I built a factory farm on it, nobody owned it. I have the only claim for ownership.

See ?

>Rape on the other hand would mean you do not have a choice in the first place

What choice does starvation give this hypothetical woman?

>Not at all, he's increasing the level of usage to further approach maximum utilization.

He's not increasing it from nothing. When I started, there was no usage of the land, nobody owned it. When he started, I owned it. One is homesteading, the other is theft.

>Once I start farming on it, it's mine. You never owned it, you just occasionally gathered wood on it.
So every time you allow a field to lie fallow anyone who feels like cultivating on it can come along and claim ownership?

>Before I built a factory farm on it, nobody owned it.

Untrue, because I owned it by virtue of having cultivated the land.

You don't feel that allowing woodland to exist undisturbed as a habitat for wildlife is an acceptable usage?

It's either cultivate crops, live on it or nothing?