In the end, it does all come down to communication and consent. 
These sorts of situations are tricky in RP that isn't associated with a group with rules and social standards, as the only recourse you have a person not agreeing to an IC consequence is to non-consent and walk away. There's no way to enforce consequences.
That said, the way I handle it (and the way Mysterium handles reciprocal consent in our charter) is that a person consents to receive the same level of action from a person and their immediate peer group as they delivered to that person. We delineate four levels of action: social interaction (to which everyone automatically consents), use of powers/abilities whether or not they cause character changes, temporary character changes, and permanent character changes (including death). A person has to ask for consent before escalating a situation to a "higher" level.
So, in your example, if Otto were to consent to getting hit by Mr. Badass, Otto's experienced either a use of abilities or a temporary character change, depending on the level of injury. Then, Otto and his peer group (or minions, I suppose) get to do the same level of thing to Mr. Badass, as he automatically consents to the same level of action. That could mean pushing him around (use of abilities) or roughing him up (temporary character change) for one scene, if Mr. Badass only interacted with Otto for one scene. If it's a pattern of behavior, then Otto and his buddies/minions get to exhibit the same pattern of behavior. If it might escalate into a permanent character change (say, by breaking his will or his back), Mr. Badass has to ask consent -- and if Otto gives it, then Otto and his minions can retaliate with lethal force.
The levels of action, the reciprocal consent (aka "auto-consent"), and the time limitations are all there to ensure fairness in conflict RP, and to provide justification for the enforcement of ICA = ICC. Everyone knows that if they escalate a conflict as an IC action, auto-consent ensures that they have to accept the equivalent action as an IC consequence -- and if not, there's OOC consequences for violating the consent rules in the charter. Of course, this only works well in a group where you have some control. Outside of that... all you can do is negotiate and avoid people who won't be reasonable. I have found, though, that following these principles tends to get people to agree to IC consequences of their actions as they feel it's "fair;" you can't hit them with a consequence that's worse than what they did to you.
These sorts of situations are tricky in RP that isn't associated with a group with rules and social standards, as the only recourse you have a person not agreeing to an IC consequence is to non-consent and walk away. There's no way to enforce consequences.That said, the way I handle it (and the way Mysterium handles reciprocal consent in our charter) is that a person consents to receive the same level of action from a person and their immediate peer group as they delivered to that person. We delineate four levels of action: social interaction (to which everyone automatically consents), use of powers/abilities whether or not they cause character changes, temporary character changes, and permanent character changes (including death). A person has to ask for consent before escalating a situation to a "higher" level.
So, in your example, if Otto were to consent to getting hit by Mr. Badass, Otto's experienced either a use of abilities or a temporary character change, depending on the level of injury. Then, Otto and his peer group (or minions, I suppose) get to do the same level of thing to Mr. Badass, as he automatically consents to the same level of action. That could mean pushing him around (use of abilities) or roughing him up (temporary character change) for one scene, if Mr. Badass only interacted with Otto for one scene. If it's a pattern of behavior, then Otto and his buddies/minions get to exhibit the same pattern of behavior. If it might escalate into a permanent character change (say, by breaking his will or his back), Mr. Badass has to ask consent -- and if Otto gives it, then Otto and his minions can retaliate with lethal force.
The levels of action, the reciprocal consent (aka "auto-consent"), and the time limitations are all there to ensure fairness in conflict RP, and to provide justification for the enforcement of ICA = ICC. Everyone knows that if they escalate a conflict as an IC action, auto-consent ensures that they have to accept the equivalent action as an IC consequence -- and if not, there's OOC consequences for violating the consent rules in the charter. Of course, this only works well in a group where you have some control. Outside of that... all you can do is negotiate and avoid people who won't be reasonable. I have found, though, that following these principles tends to get people to agree to IC consequences of their actions as they feel it's "fair;" you can't hit them with a consequence that's worse than what they did to you.
The Freelance Wizard
Quality RP at low, low prices!
((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages))
Quality RP at low, low prices!
((about me | about L'yhta Mahre | L'yhta's desk | about Mysterium, the Ivory Tower: a heavy RP society of mages))
