Intimidating townspeople is fine

Psychological warfare

There are better ways of psychological warfare than committing your troops to raping an entire hamlet.
Rape is inherently a personal thing.

One example is carrying and defacing the banner of the enemy.
There, it's already more effective and efficient.

You can murder someone for self-gratification, too. Most murders these days are "heat of the moment" killings with no motive other than "fuck this guy." Rape is hardly always an intentionally harmful and evil act as well, there's plenty of cases where "rape" just means "he wanted it and she stopped saying no after a while so he kept going." Acting like murder isn't as bad because you can do it in self defense is ludicrous. Anyone who says they would rather be murdered than get raped simply either doesn't understand the concept of death or has some completely overblown idea of what a rape is.

From a purely biological perspective, rape is ingraned as deeply traumatizing into the brains of humans, but women especially.

Think of it, the central goal all life strives towards is either conservation of the gene or reproduction of the gene. This is achieved through sex in humans. Men fear rape because they fear injury to their penises, since a broken dick would most likely prohibit them from ever spreading their seed again. As such, being concerned about the well-being of your junk is advantageous.

For women, it goes even deeper. There is fear of injury as well, but more importantly, fear of involuntary impregnation, most likely with a sub-standard rapist's genetic info. Since we humans did not have any reliable way to abort our own pregnancies up until very recently, the rape-child would be a leech on the woman's resources and health until it is born, and even once born, it would not be ideally suitable for carrying the woman's genes due to the rapist's inferior genes diluting the quality of the offspring.

There are no tactical advantages to rape as supposed to just killing them after.
You cannot rape in self-defense.

It's utterly just gratification.
Murder is bad but damn is it more useful than rape.

So what, I can kill someone in self defense, therefore drowning someone isn't nearly as bad as Chad giving Stacey the deep dick shile she's drunk? Intent isn't the only measurement of how bad something is, to say otherwise would be to say that there's nothing wrong with drunk drivers killing pedestrians because they didn't purposefully intend to kill anybody.

Wait, what setting are we putting this in context with?

Literally any setting, context doesn't matter outside of fringe cases like "Well in MY setting everyone goes to Super-Heaven when they die unless they get raped."

I know this sound shallow as hell (perhaps because it is) but I've always felt that it's because rape is something that can actually happen to us. I'll never be eaten by a dragon. A necromancer will never annihilate my soul. An alien won't ever dissect me and stick my brain in a jar. I'll never be shot and killed while making a run against a megacorp. I will never, ever, be stabbed with a sword or brained with a mace, or killed with a poisoned knife. These are all horrible things, but I'm safe from them. They happened to my character because they exist in a heroic fantasy where terrible but fantastical things happen to them.

In contrast, I could be raped. Will I ever be? Probably not, that kind of rape is actually relatively rare outside of prisons and shithole countries. But the kind of circumstances that occurs when a character is forcibly held down and fucked exists within the realms of possibility in life. This is not to say that we should absolutely stay away from rape as a subject in our games and settings (I leave that to the tables preference). I'm just trying to perhaps maybe explain why some people are uncomfortable with it.

I actually played in a game about a year ago where rape factored into one of the PC's plans, and this eventually culminate with two of the characters retiring together at the end of the campaign. It all worked out fine because everyone at the table was completely cool with it, and we had been playing together for over a year at that point - but if someone hadn't been, I would have tried to make an effort to understand why, and definitely not insisted that we keep going despite their protests.

because you arent jacking off to murder

the issue with rape is that its inherently magical realmish- its hard to tell how much is "character" and how much is your stiffy

Because sex is believed to be somehow special, magical, and good. Rape is dirty, mean, and evil. Stop trying to apply logic to cultural norms and just go with it. Nobody wants to hear about how your character likes to rape and how you'll defend your awkward behavior with "but murder is still worse!"

What if my stiffy IS my character?

stop playing bards

>literally any setting
>context doesn't matter

For the most part it does, user.

It's sexual

Considering we're talking about the difference in scale of atrocity between murder and rape in the framework of including them as concepts in the game itself, the setting really does not matter here outside of obvious fringe cases where the inclusion of these topics in the greater work of the setting is done primarily for subversive or contradictory purposes, which can be disregarded.
If you want to ingnore that and be autistic about it, use fucking Forgotten Realms or whatever.

>Rape is something that can actually happen to us.
Murder is something that can actually happen to you, too. I fail to see the difference.

>because you arent jacking off to murder
Speak for yourself.

Dude, I wasn't being pedantic about it or anything.
Rape really is just a gratuitous crime especially set in fantasy settings hence why it is treated the way it is.

In the context of heirs, then it becomes more used in line as the kind of evil implemented in the quarrels of status (barring any other more effective political subterfuge).

It isn't even about "culture" as OP mentions it.
It's just a fucked up thing to do to someone without the recourse of a finality with little to no gain whatsoever.

>Murder is something that can actually happen to you, too. I fail to see the difference.
That's because you didn't read the rest of the post.

Rape in the context of war demoralizes the enemy, increases your own troops morale, and conditions your troops to be cruel and sadistic. Making your troops more ruthless in battle.

Is it fucked up? Extremely but that’s the nature of war.

Sex.

>and conditions your troops to be cruel and sadistic
thats not a good thing, you want discipline, not self gratification

the best soldier is an emotionless robot, not some slobbering hentai-villain

Can you actually point to historical examples of soldiers that committed rape being more effective, for that reason alone, than soldiers that did not?

>You cannot rape in self-defense.
But it would be an interesting picture to see somebody try.

/thread
While some rape apologists say that rape is a tool for conquerors, they aren't directly wrong.
It's just a REALLY shit tool when it comes to subjugating communities.

Stop playing with Americans.

You’re really being delusional here. Just look at ww2, look at what the Japanese and Russians did

Because it's torture at a level that is personal and deeply intimate. Torture in games and media is usually abstracted or softened somehow so that's it's more of a beating than an elaborate ritual of mutilating and breaking someone down. Whips, or electricity, or the like. Yes it clearly involves pain, but it's not nearly as invasive and traumatizing as it has been in practice. Combat is the exact same way, in that we rarely go on about the real fear and agony of being gassed or maimed or slowly bleeding out.

There's a line that gets crossed where you are acting out something obscene, and most people have a fairly clear understanding of where that line is and shy from it. Rape lacks that softening factor pretty no matter how you play it, and therefore it is usually cut entirely. Some can distance themselves for sake of the narrative, or push it into off-screen and heavily implied content, but it will never not be a touchy subject.

>armies did something
>therefore that thing is something that armies SHOULD do
thats not how this works

I mean if you're going to go for it this makes sense.

rape is the only thing that is never justified or justifiable. you can kill for self defense, you can steal to feed yourself, but rape? you can never truthfully say "I had to force myself on that person". Shut up Mookie, no you can't.

To be fair, WW2 was a really weird time.
You don't want emotionless robots because that usually fucks with ther jugement of situations too much.

You don't want mustache twirling hentai villians for the very same reason.
Also Porn is a basic commodity in any modern dupply line. Usually in terrabytes.

>Murder is something that can actually happen to you, too. I fail to see the difference.
Not that user, but thinking about it I suspect it may be the level of realism present in how things play out.
People only really associate rape with current and historical real-world occurrences, whereas murder is saturated in fiction enough that people have a level of automatic disconnect between 'fictional death' and 'actual death'.
If you played it hyperrealistic, in a manner that's likely to actually happen in real life I suspect you'd unnerve the rest of the table no different from how rape does.

>ou don't want emotionless robots because that usually fucks with ther jugement of situations too much.
isnt the whole point of an emotionless robot that the dont have emotions to fuck with their judgement?

Russians did not endorse raping and pillaging as a military doctrine, and they roflstomped the Nips once they decided to turn east.

I never said armies should rape wtf

I simply said it’s untrue to the statement there is no tactical advantages when there are. It’s naive and stupid to think raping an enemy a practice that’s been around for thousands of years has literally no advantages

>Rape in the context of war demoralizes the enemy, increases your own troops morale, and conditions your troops to be cruel and sadistic. Making your troops more ruthless in battle.

You're providing precedent for propaganda, general.
Are you trying to make EVERYONE against us?

>increase troop morale
This is true for some (or even most) but you will have deserters that may or may not lead to betrayals.

>conditions your troops to be cruel and sadistic.
Better training and discipline does leagues for your troops better than mass rape.
Most soldiers that would do this were already criminals beforehand.

Is it fucked up?
Extremely but the objective of war is to defeat the enemy and not to give rise for more.
Rape is fucking useless and a symptom of an undisciplined band that thinks they can get away with anything in the field.

yeah but turns out the human mind doesn't really work like that, we still need some years for fuctional neuro-augmentation to get Human-Killbots.

Also politicans don't like it if hospitals are bombed down, inside where 100 terrorists and 10 not so-much terrorists, of course the media will tear that apart.

I did read the rest of the post.

>I'll never be eaten by a dragon.
Alligators and bears (and even fire ants) are pretty close to home for many people.

>A necromancer will never annihilate my soul. An alien won't ever dissect me and stick my brain in a jar.
There are lots of brain-affecting diseases that have a similar effect.

>I will never, ever, be stabbed with a sword or brained with a mace, or killed with a poisoned knife.
I don't think that being stabbed or bashed over the head by a mugger, or getting tetanus from a rusty nail, is too outlandish an occurrence.

Because rape isn't fun. I play D&D to have fun with a group of people. If one person is uncomfortable with ANYTHING including rape, it's not allowed. I'm playing to have fun. Sitting while a player describes how he violates an NPC or worse a PC is not fun and is fucking creepy.

You’re seriously not understanding anything . Encouraging your troops to commit heinous acts is what fuckong turns them into emotionless robots

Fucking retards thinking actual warfare in history was all followed by the Geneva conventions

You can rape someone politically.

>X is bad
>youre delusional, A and B did X
>therefore X is not bad
you literally implied that it WAS a good thing for an army to do since the russians and japs did it

>when there are
no, there is no tactical advantage- the reason its done is because because people do bad things for self gratification sometimes

Also rape to subjugate people is a REALLY shit tool.
Usually way better is to give them jobs, nice things or just take care that their goats don't get raped again.

Sorry user, i belive you, nobody can just pretend to be this autistic.

also
>t. rape apologist

>Encouraging your troops to commit heinous acts is what fuckong turns them into emotionless robots
thats not what being a robot is used to mean

a robot is someone who follows orders exactly, a machine- its not about whether they feel bad or whatever, no one cares about that

if you encourage your soldiers to do whatever they want you will negatively impact discipline

>I never said armies should rape wtf
That's literally what you're claiming. You're claiming that rape creates 'tactical advantage', whatever that is, and that this is the reason why armies rape. And not because the scenario involves scores of extremely stressed men who have womenfolk of the dehumanized enemy in their power.

>If you played it hyperrealistic, in a manner that's likely to actually happen in real life I suspect you'd unnerve the rest of the table no different from how rape does.

This, there's a difference between
>You stab the goblin. It shrieks and drops dead!
and
>You stab the goblin. It screams in agony and wrenches itself off your blade. Its innards spill out of the gaping hole in its stomach and it moans and sobs pathetically as it attempts to stuff its organs back inside itself. Do you speak Goblin? Excellent. It begins begging and pleading, ask you not to kill it, offering you anything, asking you to help it. It then begins crying and saying "I don't want to die" over and over.
>You have defeated the goblins! Give yourselves 10 xp.

You're reaching, user. I'm not gonna bite.

see >if you encourage your soldiers to do whatever they want you will negatively impact discipline

Because you effectively teach them to DO WHAT THEY WANT.
Which is pretty much the opposite you want a soldier to do.

If-I-put-a-sciencey-word-at-the-front-people-will-think-I'm-not-full-of-shit: The Post.

Pretty much this

Aversion.

I don't really mind rape, so long as it's done in a useful manner - i.e. not someone's fetish ERP, because that's just not my thing. But done as, say, a character advancement or a consequence for failure, something like that, I'd be fine with.

But the only people who do want to portray that kind of thing are, frankly, 99% creeps, and I don't want to play with creeps.

Do guardsmen rape?

HERESY

It's been done for thousands of years because people fuck for thousands of years. You are a fucking idiot if you think busting a nut is a tactical move. Soldiers raped because they had down time and their lives are unstable enough that they simple couldn't be bothered to give a shit

Jesus fucking christ.

Why the fuck are you standing there for a minute for the goblin to go into shock and start begging for his life all why you still hol you knife, which is still stuck into him.
That's why you finish them off.
Never heard of double tap ?

Reduces psychological traumer in the attacker and potential risk from the attacked.

Anything to do with sex usually hits the stupid switch in people's brains. It's doubly true for socially awkward nerds - you know, like people on Veeky Forums. Add in the element of coercion and non-consent and it's just a recipe for shit getting weird, and not in a good way.

Pretty sure this is just a bait thread and we all falled for it.

Or OP is just and edgy faggot/autists who doesn't understand how most humans function on a meotional level.

well
>most guard engagements are defensive
>most of the things in the 40k universe are so lethal/tainted that even exposure is dangerous
>most of their enemies are ugly as shit or not even capable of sex

so no, 99.9999999999999999999999999999999% of them dont- not their enemies anyways, im sure local populaces might get some imperial mandate

Like if they're called to put down some minor rebellion on an agri-world or whatever. No Chaos, no mutants, just bog standard humans who decided to give themselves democracy or whatever.

Would some of the regiments go around raping?

>>intimidating townspeople is fine
Intimidating townspeople can be a problem if the player is clearly doing it for lolrandumb reasons.

>>stealing gold from them is fine
Stealing is a natural part of most games. There's often skills and abilities dedicated to it specifically.

>>slaughtering people are fine
Combat requires foes to fight. In a game that has combat, killing enemies is just a natural extension of that. It can definitely become a problem if the person is doing it just for kicks, but a lot of games use the logic of "you must reduce the enemy HP to zero (at which point they die)". This is compounded by the fact that a lot of GMs just treat them as glorified target practice as a result, leading into you fighting basically the equivalent of zombies.

>>sending a fireball to scorch out dozens of guards is fine
See previous answer.

>>Nazi empire is fine
Nazis make for good villains everyone can hate. It too can be a problem if it's played way too straight and seriously. Usually the tone is more "VII VILL ASK THE QUESTIONS" and less "rounding up people en masse and burying them in a shallow grave"

>>torturing some guy for information is fine
The players who go way too far with this are also probably fine with rape in a game. In and on itself it depends largely on the tone and how it's played up. Another problem is how often GMs reward torture and thus encourage it more. Realistically someone being tortured will, as far as I know, just say whatever the torturer wants to hear to make it stop.

>>BUT ABSOLUTELY IN NO FUCKING WAY RAPE IS FINE, IT IS NOT OKAY, IT WILL NOT BE IN MY GAME
Rape is a massive warning flag because of how seriously it's played. Play it off as a minor thing and some people get offended that you're making light of something serious. Play it off as a huge deal and it bogs the tone of the campaign and tends to shift it into the deep end of grit.

First of all, why send the military?
Aren't the arbites specialised for this sort of thing?

And even if they send the Imperial Guard, the standard of them varies so strong that the answer is a "maybe?"

No. Commissars would put a stop to that

Ye can rape to prove a point

>First of all, why send the military?
>Aren't the arbites specialised for this sort of thing?

They got killed. The Guard get called in to suppress rebellions all the time, because the few that actually get going probably tend to target the local Arbiters first and foremost. And consider that the PDF could be part of it.

>Not raping the daughters of your political opponents so they're ruined and no one will wed into the family.
>Not raping famous female heroes from the enemy kingdom to show them that even their best aren't safe and to drive their men folk into making mistakes out of rage
>Not telling your men they're free to pillage, rape and shit in hats as they see fit for 48 hours after you take a city in order to improve moral during long sieges
>Not enforcing a night of harem-servitude upon the brides of god of an enemy religion in order to prove that their god is weak, flaccid and impotent, effectively NTRing their God.
>Not personally raping the wives and daughters of rebels before forcing their husbands to wear red hot crowns of iron, siring an entire generation of bastards by their lines that shall never sit upon the throne to make it clear what happens when you play stupid games
You're just not being inventive enough. Rape can be a very useful tool under the right conditions if you're enough of a right cunt.

What would the violation be listed as? "Non-standard recreational activities"?

>proceed to administry 10kmL of fluid over next 30 minutes
>10 kmL of fluid
>kmL
>kilomilliliters

Inappropriate conduct

You can literally replace the word "raping" into "murdering" and your post will be a thousand times more effective.
(except for the harem thing since that's not what they were anyways).

You're doing this because YOU want to have sex NOT because you want to win.

You know, rape isn't a necessary or effective step in any of those situations.

but i assume that you are joking.

That and the attached priests and political officers. Raping an Eldar would probably get you executed 3-5 times in a row.

>You cannot rape in self-defense.
You're wrong. I can think of at least one scenario.

Storytime

I wouldn’t accept any of these things either, and I’m amazed at Veeky Forums‘s willingness to defend them.

Are the people who are okay with genocide also okay with ERP, in the same game? Why or why not?

>You can murder someone for self-gratification, too.
Well, murdering someone for self-gratification is also viewed as Not Okay. I don’t think this argument really helps.

Just because it's a bait thread doesn't mean it can't be a good thread, though. It's a perfectly fair subject for Veeky Forums to examine what taboos exist in tabletop gaming and why - it's better than yet another fucking amazon or concubine thread.

What is one liter in a face of ass rape?

>a lot of games use the logic of "you must reduce the enemy HP to zero (at which point they die)
My narratives got a lot better on the realization that this is flawed, that very few people OR beasts will actually fight to the death if they have a choice about it. Those bandits just want loot, it's not something they're prepared to die for. That wild beast is just hungry, on realizing that a prey isn't worth the danger they're likely to abandon the attack. That sort of thing.

Well, that's true fine gentleman.

But i'm still waiting for the "rape in self defense"

...

I got nothin' for that. Seems like it'll rely on a scenario being so specifically crafted for it as to become ridiculous.

>An ancient prophecy, which has been verified as definitely true, states that if you don't have sex with this woman on the night of the next solar eclipse, a demon will claim your soul and use you as a vessel to go on a thousand-year rampage against humanity
>She refuses.

How else would you discourage an invulnerable being from attacking you?

Why does it need to be a necessary or effective step? Sometimes, it is an effective way to portray a character's fucked up motivations. Or do you insist upon everything that characters do in your campaigns being founded in logical reasoning for some reason?

People do illogical shit all the time. It's realistic for such elements to be present in almost any game being played by adults.

>I wouldn’t accept any of these things either
Really? Stealing isn't that bad. Even the torture doesn't have to be graphic and intense.

I ran a game a while back where the players captured an orc and tried to beat some information out of him. It's not like they tied him up in their serial killer basement and described how they sliced off his flesh.
>I punch the orc and ask him where his warband is
>Ok, roll intimidate
It never got to the point where the players were uncomfortable. And why would it have? It's literally just beating on an orc that tried to kill them a minute ago.

Some of that shit in OP's list is pretty tame.

Are you That Guy?

All you're doing is encouraging OP to make more shitty threads.

Why not hold a discussion in an actually good thread, instead of bumping this one? Even if it's you wind up derailing it a little, we live in the age of the catalog, where the OP is far more visible than the discussion within the thread.

There is literally no justification for bumping a shit thread, and you spamming that image doesn't make it the truth.

Right, in order what you'd do by replacing rape with murder is
>Justify a man hunt rather than force the family to hide it
>Create a Martyr
>Leave your men with more killing to do, that's like 'rewarding' an office worker with more paperwork rather than a Christmas party
>Create Martyrs, again
>Create a short term horror rather than a long term example, you kill the men folk to make the short term horror, you want the long term reminder because the scent of blood doesn't stick around for more than a few weeks, bastards do.

Look, I'm not saying 'Oh yes, rape is obviously the moral path and no worse than murder, honhonhonhonhon, now back to /r9k/ with me'
I'm saying that it is effective, as a weapon, because it is unpleasant and that you'd have to be a real son of a bitch to do it. But, some characters are real sons of bitches and rape is horrific in a way that murder isn't, as proven by the fact you're desperately squirming to deny that raping someone who supposedly has their virginity protected by god himself is far more effective than martyring them.

Also, its effectiveness as a moral enhancer will vary depending on culture.
Interesting fact of the evening, did you know that during the occupation of Germany there were 11,000 rapes by American soldiers, most of whom left food to assuage their guilt, approx 1385 rapes by French
And 240,000 deaths linked to rape from the Russians (Estimated number of individuals raped 2,000,000 but we'll never know the exact number of rapes because it was usually a 'pass them around like a pack of mints' situation)

Guess how many pre-planned reported rapes from the British?
8.

Culture. It's a hell of a drug.

>spamming
...posting an image is spamming, now?

You know, maybe by wrestling it and tying it down?

Just don't stick your dick in it.

No. I shy away from edgy characters generally, but I would also not whine about a grim backdrop existing for heroic characters to strike a stark contrast upon and thrive. There are more than two sides to almost any argument, user.