[MUD-Dev] Introductions and

[Richard Woolcock]

Mike Sellers wrote:

[snip]
> Overall, I think it's probably just buying trouble to try to assign an
> advantage/disadvantage rating to varying forms of sexuality.  First, you're

Possibly, but thats a risk I'm willing to take - as long as I make it clear
WHY it is a disadvantage.

> going to offend someone, no doubt about it.  Second, such ads/disads would
> have to be made relative to a single culture.  Third, even if you said

True, but I can chose the culture.

> homosexuality was a disad, someone could easily turn this into an
> advantage, e.g., by becoming the secret (and powerful) consort to the king
> (okay, that's a stretch in a MUD-like situation).  Finally, if you're going

Ah yes, but they could never give birth to the King's children...

> to include hetero- and homosexuality, what about other forms?  Are you
> going to include necrophilia and fetishists?  Talk about your disads...

Hmmm isn't zombiphilia sex with the undead?  I think I will probably 
avoid necrophilia and beastiality though, as well as a number of other
'less socially acceptable' inclinations.  Whilst it might be briefly
funny when someone takes a fancy to your pet hampster, the end result
would not really add to the mud.  Additionally, going digging in the
local graveyard might sate your sexual appetites, but it doesn't really
add anything to social interaction between players.

Fetishes could be quite entertaining, although I think those would be
perhaps better left to roleplaying.  hetro/homo/bi will add to the game
though, I believe - allowing for such things as 'hopeless love' and
the like.

KaVir.