Opinions sought: Much younger players?

[smootrk]

I do not think that the environment in Canada is quite as prone to lawsuits as in the US. Like Asmor said, the mere mention of impropriety (even if completely false) can truly ruin lives. I have seen the consequences of false accusation, and even though the charges were proved false and dismissed, the individual (not myself, in case anyone was thinking it) had to relocate to get away from the stigma that he endured.

Canada's lower age of consent, and by my view, more liberal values, contribute to this lack of understanding the US's overly P.C. and cautious view on this kind of issue. The legal prosecutions and social outcast situations that occur around these issues are very very real here.

Be cautious.

 

[shilsen]

It's sad enough, that you actually have to worry about this.

Bye
Thanee

Agreed. Personally, I think life's too short to worry about this kind of stuff. As a DM and a teacher, I've run games for students, including for people I was teaching (I failed a guy and killed his PC in the same week!). And I've met and continue to meet students, both male and female, without anyone else present. Maybe in theory I should be more careful, but I really can't be bothered to spend the time and emotional energy worrying about this.

And when I'm locked up on false charges of sexual harassment, all of you can say "I told you so"

 

[Mark]

A position of authority does not include "he was my DM".

Which is not the point, though I would not doubt someone might be able to make a case for the DM being perceived by a minor as in a position of authority. The point is that an unescorted minor would be in the home and the person who is the DM just happens to be in a position of authority within that home (they are in charge within those walls).

And this is not like basketball or chess or some other straightforward game. It is a complex game where people assume the roles of characters and even adults sometimes have mix ups and misunderstandings in regard to how things play out and what gets said and meant by whom at various times in the game. Heck, it does not even need to be the twins that have some sort of misunderstanding. Perhaps the mother overhears the two kids discussing what they will do in character the next game, maybe something they have cooked up on their own of which the DM and other players know nothing about. Maybe the father who has not been keeping up with what the mother has allowed or not allowed is asked by the daughter to buy her a new dress because it reminds her of what the nice 30-something neighbor man said her character should wear the next time she is over to his house to play in their game. I do not think the first call in such a case is going to be to the nice neighbor man to get this cleared up.

I am not sure what sort of lawyer would not advise caution but perhaps you could keep a spare room available in Canada in case your advice does not go strictly to plan?


Run a separate game for them at the gamestore until they turn eighteen in less than two years. It is not that long and is the smart thing to do, Jeff.

 

[Mark]

Agreed. Personally, I think life's too short to worry about this kind of stuff. As a DM and a teacher, I've run games for students, including for people I was teaching (I failed a guy and killed his PC in the same week!). And I've met and continue to meet students, both male and female, without anyone else present. Maybe in theory I should be more careful, but I really can't be bothered to spend the time and emotional energy worrying about this.

Are you saying that as a DM you kept a kid in your game during the school year even though as his teacher you knew he was failing in your class? I am sure I must be misunderstanding what you posted.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Run a separate game for them at the gamestore until they turn eighteen in less than two years. It is not that long and is the smart thing to do, Jeff.

And what would be the difference Mark if she was eighteen instead of sixteen?

Please explain the legal difference in relation to a civil action. I'm dying to know.

(Hint: the only legal difference is that consent is no longer a defence to a criminal charge if sexual intercourse is alleged to have occurred in California. That's it; that's all. With respect to a civil action, volenti defence may not be available. That's it; that's all. For the most part, everything else is the same.

If she is going to allege that she was sexually assaulted - you are going to face some unpleasantness whether she is 16 or 18. There is no magic to an 18th birthday.

If she is going to sue you - then she will. Litigation guardians aside - no real difference.

I repeat: this is nutty legal advice. It is not at ALL the same as if she was one of your students. That thread spoke to a very different issue.

 

[Mark]

civil action

Who is talking about a civil action?

 

[Steel_Wind]

Who is talking about a civil action?

Then this is about a criminal charge. A charge of an unfounded sexual assault?

That's just as likely at 18 as it is at 16. The only difference is that if she is 16, you can't say in your defence "she consented" as a complete defence (in the state of California, that is).

Otherwise, it's the same essential risk.

 

[Mark]

Then this is about a criminal charge. A charge of an unfounded sexual assault?

That's just as likely at 18 as it is at 16. The only difference is that if she is 16, you can't say in your defence "she consented" as a complete defence.

Otherwise, it's the same.

You do not see any difference between how the parents might react in one situation over the other, or how authorities are likely to react in one situation over the other? I do not think that you and I are going to agree on this, no matter that you are a lawyer.

 

[Steel_Wind]

You do not see any difference between how the parents might react in one situation over the other, or how authorities are likely to react in one situation over the other? I do not think that you and I are going to agree on this, no matter that you are a lawyer.

Not really. If my eldest daughter (who is seventeen) calls me tonight and tell me "Daddy, I was just sexually assaulted", I assure you, the impact of that call is going to be just as strong tonight as it will be on January 30, 2008 (when she turns 18). I'll be one pissed off avenging mo'fo either way.

If the girl - 16, 17 or 18 - goes to the Police and alleges sexual assault - the machinery of the State is going to investigate with some pointed questions - and absorbent swabs - just as pointedly, and just as quickly.

The only real question comes in to the reaction of some investigating police officer: "And just what, exactly, were you getting out of a 16 year old girl playing fantasy games with you and your friends Mr. "X"?

(assumption - you are a horny bastard who likes young women)

Alternative scenario: "And just what, exactly, were you getting out of an 18 year old girl playing fantasy games with you and your friends Mr. "X".?

assumption: Let's be fair: it's exactly the same, either way.

The assumptions don't change.

If you are going to live your life on a defensive basis, caught like a deer in the headlights when something new comes along - then you are. I can't deny that's saying "no" is not a safer course of action. Clearly, it would be.

But that is not to say that's it's a reasonable course of action.

 

[Mark]

Not really.

Fortunately, if my advice proves horribly wrong the worse case scenario has less of an impact on Jeff's life.

If the girl - 16, 17 or 18 - goes to the Police and (. . .)

The concern if she is not eighteen is that the parents believe that *they* have reason to go to the police for whatever reason. Not impossible but far less likely once she becomes a legal adult. Once that ball starts rolling it's all down hill.

If you are going to live your life on a defensive basis, caught like a deer in the headlights (. . .)

You really don't want to go there.

I can't deny that's saying "no" is not a safer course of action. Clearly, it would be.

First off, I recommend a compromise of gaming with them at a game store, not 'saying "no"' so this one piece of advice from you with which I tend to agree is a bit off in its premise.

But that is not to say that's it's a reasonable course of action.

That can only be truly known after it is too late to impact things. If it turns out it was perfectly reasonable to let them play, huzzah. If it turns out it was not, Canadian Robert has a house guest. On the plus side, you've got that really cool gaming set up with the projection unit and all for Jeff to share.


Leaving all of the legal possibilities aside, I am curious about the ramifications with Jeff's girlfrend who seemed none too happy with his D&D playing, let alone his latest possible addition to his gaming group. Now, maybe Jeff feels risking the relationship is no big deal, and perhaps Jeff is a cool guy (I met him and think so) who has potential girlfriends lined up around the block (I never asked about this part), but there are a few things on this score that need addressing before a decision is made, too.