Life Hacks/Relationship scores guide

This guide is to help get an idea of how certain characters will react in various situations according to their relationship scores.

Friend

Friendliness is how much a person wants to be around you and how likely they are to accommodate you or do things to get on your good side. This accommodation can include anything from common courtesies such as sharing or offering you a space at the table to turning a blind eye or covering for you if they suspect you have done something wrong.

• Low range

On the low end of the spectrum, they enjoy having you around but they rarely think of you before they think of themselves. They will give you all the common courtesies, but will not go out of their way to make things extra nice for you.

• Medium range

In the medium range, they will consider you someone they want to be around. They might choose you over other people in their social groups and will dislike it if people talk negatively about you. They will do favors for you that inconvenience them, and they will also cover for you if you have been accused of some form of wrong-doing so long as what you are suspected of (even if they know you did it) does not violate their own basic principles. (I.E. They will cover for you smoking pot, but they won't cover for you murdering someone.) While they will try to make it so you do not get in trouble for minor infractions, if they are reasonably intelligent (not a child and not a druggie) then they will be likely to intervene if they judge that what you are doing is potentially self destructive.

• High range

At the high friendliness range, the lines between friendship and love begin to blur, and they will bend over backwards to accommodate you in some ways that others may consider to be rather extreme. They will define you as a core part of their life, and if your behavior and values disagree with theirs then they will try to conform themselves to match you. It is still possible for them to intervene in cases of destructive behaviors at the lower end of the high range, and in fact their intervention will be a lot more dedicated if they are in this range, but once they pass a certain threshold (that is different depending on the person) they will begin to loose their objectivity when it comes to your wrong doing and they will begin to justify it or deny it and pretend it isn't happening instead. In order to reach this level of friendliness, trust will have to have already been high, and hitting this level of friendliness will cause it to become even higher.

Depending on their personality and their values, they may even actively cover for or even facilitate you in doing things that would be considered outright morally reprehensible, including the most detested crimes in society such as murder and child rape. It is only when it gets into new levels of depravity such as cannibalism or other things that stretch the imagination that they may not support you. (They still will not obstruct it in any form. They will just choose not to be involved.)

(Note: What counts as low, medium, and high is left purposefully undefined. This is to be considered a sliding scale, and it is up to the writer at the time to judge which end of the spectrum a character is more likely to fall on in terms of their behavior.)

Enemy

How generally negative a person's reaction is to you. Enemy scores of around 10% are natural for anyone to reach at various times of their life for certain events. Anything higher, unless the target did something horrible, usually denotes some form of mental instability in the person feeling this level of hatred.

• 10% Irritated

Has some minor beef that causes them to behave unfavorably toward the target of their irritation, this irritation will usually fade with time.

• 30% Animosity

A long-term feeling of general distaste for a person. The person feeling the animosity toward the other usually cannot put a finger on the reason they feel this way, but when psycho analysis reveals what it is it usually turns out to not justify the treatment they were giving out 80% of the time.

• 50% Superficial Hatred

Has a real strong dislike for the person that justifies all manner of torment, torture, and general bad treatment. Will usually spend more energy thinking up ways to make the other person's life miserable than the target does dealing with the things they do. The person feeling this hatred usually has an instigating factor they can point to that most people would identify with as being understandable, but a critical and wise person with a grown-up way of looking at things will see it as a childish reason to go after someone like this.

• 70% Deep Hatred

Hates a person enough to become obsessed with making the other person's life miserable to the point they wind up harming themselves in trying to harm their target. May even attempt to kill the target of their hatred. Usually have an identifiable reason for their hatred. 50% of the time, anyone would agree this is a good reason to hate someone. The other 50% of the time, the person who has this much hate is that way because they are mentally unstable. It is possible for a mentally unstable person to also have a good reason.

• 90% Gevious Hatred

Hates someone enough to want them dead or tortured in gut-turningly grotesque ways. A person usually has to be mentally unstable to reach this level of hatred, although that level of mental instability 10-20% of the time may have been triggered by the manner in witch the target wronged them that may be every bit as egregious as the torture they want to put back on them.

Dominant

Feels it is their right to tell another person what to do. (Note: someone with a dominance score may take issue with the one they are dominant over initiating a sex act even if their romantic love meter is filled appropriately.)

• 10% Speaks their mind

Will feel confident in saying how they think things should be, does not necessarily mean they expect their will to be carried out but they do feel they have the right to be heard.

• 30% Up on the pecking order

Expects to be given first say on how coveted resources are divided (above the people they are dominant over anyway.)

• 50% Lead

Will take the lead in terms of determining what activities are done and attempt to take final say on the subject.

• 70% Boss/Authority figure

Will feel it is their place to give the person they are dominant over commands or punishments where appropriate.

• 90% Master

Will see the person they are dominant over as being out of order for even attempting to dispute an order they are given.

Submissive

Feels compelled to bend to the will of another.

General

• 10%: Non-dominant

You must actively assert your dominance. They will try to take control if you do not take control first. Will cede the floor to you if you attempt to have the first word and will accept your place to determine what is being done if you happen to speak first.

• 30%: Defers to you

Will habitually back down if you contradict them effectively. Will still stick up for themselves if you don't give them good reason to do what you say. You may have to persuade them, but you only have to shoot down their off-the-cuff objections. They will not dig deep to come up with something to win the argument unless it is over a subject they are absolutely sure they are in the right on due to research and familiarity with the subject, or the ridiculousness of your stance.

• 50%: Submissive

Regards you as being their superior in the pecking order. Simply accepts that you get priority for things like speaking order, getting food, or having the front seat in the car.

• 70%: Subservient

Allows you to give them orders witch they will unquestioningly carry out unless it is something that conflicts strongly with their moral compunctions.

• 90%: Unquestioning Submission

Will go along with your will without protest even if it is something they dislike. They will still be opposed to certain things, but they can be persuaded to do literally anything so long as the correct steps are taken.

Subordinate status

Submissiveness due to position or other superficial feature. It is submissiveness that has been appointed rather than developed. Level of submissiveness is a result of the level of respect the submissive party has for the person artificially instated over them.

• 10%: Defiant submission.

Regards the person appointed over them to be in some way inappropriate for their position. Will follow non-objectionable orders, but will need to have some form of social, formal, or physical force used to make them submit to their superior when (not if) they decide they don't want to do what they are told.

• 30%: Hesitant submission.

Is forced despite themselves to hold the person with authority over them with respect. This is usually due to mentally registering that the person with authority over them knows better than they do, and are usually right when they say something. Doesn't want to follow the orders, but knows (or at least believes, justly or unjustly) deep down that the orders are correct and to not obey them would invite natural negative consequences in addition to whatever artificial consequences the person they are supposed to obey can add on.

• 50%: Fair-weather submission.

Will gladly and happily do what they are told so long as they think what they are being told is a good course of action to the best of their knowledge. Disagreements will be settled with rational discussion rather than acts of defiance.

• 70%: Willing submission.

Has a good deal of respect for the person with authority over them and considers it a genuinely pleasant thing to follow their orders. Will even follow a bad order without complaint so long as it does not have particularly bad foreseeable consequences.

• 90%: Absolute submission.

"Yes men" and "ass kissers." Will hardly even disagree with the person they are submissive to if they give a bad order. All sorts of things can lead to this mental state, but for whatever reason they will not even make much effort to resist something they know is wrong just because the person in authority said so.

Sexual

Will submit to the sex acts that another they are submissive to wants to do with them. Their own will is irrelevant. They will always allow sex acts of the appropriate level to be done to them by the person they are submissive to whether they want to do it or not, but other factors such as context and scores in other areas will determine how they react internally in their own minds to being made to submit to these sex acts.

Note: dismissable sex acts and higher require grooming to break down their defenses. If any grooming level is skipped, score requirements are raised by 20 points cumulatively for each grooming level that has been skipped in the requirements for that sex act. (for instance, a submission score of exactly 100 will allow mild sex acts without any grooming, or moderate sex acts skipping one of the three required levels of grooming.)

(Sex act thresholds are measured in groups of 20 without a top-end buffer zone. This is because there is a break-down of inbetween values for each act, but these increments of 20 are the top ends of each category.)

Note: This only measures scores for convincing them to perform a sex act they were not ready to do before hand. If they initiate the sex act, they can initiate it with a score of 0.

• 20

Will accept any benign sex acts without complaint, even if it is non-consensual.

• 40

If appropriately groomed (early grooming has been achieved with this partner,) they will accept any dismissable sex acts without complaint even if they catch on it is being done intentionally for sexual or naughty reasons and do not consent to this.

• 60

If appropriately groomed (grooming and early grooming have both been achieved with this partner,) they will accept any mild sex acts without complaint even if the act is non-consensual.

• 80

If appropriately groomed ("Involved with each other" and all lower grooming achievements have been reached with this partner) they will accept any moderate sex act without complaint even if it is non-consensual.

• 100

If appropriately groomed (Raunchy couple and all lower grooming achievements have been reached with this partner) they will submit to vaginal or anal sex even if it is non-consensual. Once they have had consensual or non-consensual sex 10 times with the individual they are submissive to, they will not complain about fetish style sex acts either.

Trust

A comfort that you will not do something to hurt them or feeling that you have their best interest in mind.

General

• 10 Familiar

Is over the general distrust afforded to strangers

• 30 Comfortable

Does not feel you will intentionally do something negative toward them, except for some light teasing.

• 50 Trusted

Feels they can trust you with a secret.

• 70 Reliable

Feels they can count on you to stick up for them when the chips are down.

• 90 Absolute

Their first automatic reaction will always be disbelief if they hear you have done something bad, and will need a lot of convincing to be persuaded you did what they say.

Sexual

Trust substitutes for the "romantic love" stat when having sex with a child or young teen 14 or under, and also is required for fetish sex in addition to the primary (romantic love) stat meeting the requirement for the actual sex act that goes along with the fetish activity. Trust will also allow you to avoid suspicion when having sex behind someone's back provided enough plausible deniability, and is the stat used in cases of surrogate sex where a parent or guardian willingly and knowingly allows you to engage in sexual actions with their child (must obtain permission, witch may or may not be granted according to personality.) See romantic love for the child's reaction to sex or for permission for sex from a guardian. The numbers covered here will refer to fetish sex and covert sex only.

Note: In the case of fetish sex, this is the required level to talk them into the fetish sex when they do not hold the fetish themselves. Lower levels of trust are possible if they are the one with the fetish.

For a child engaging in sex, scores can be lower, but not less than 30 below the requirement, for them to initiate the sex act themselves if they have some form of interest in that particular act, such as wanting to touch the opposite gender's genitals.

For parents or guardians allowing you to have sex with their children or charges, this only counts situations where you are a normally acceptable sex partner for them under normal circumstances (such as you both being teenagers and dating.) Abnormal situations incur modifiers unless the parent or guardian has an unusual view on sex with children, and levels can be lowered in situations like the parents pimping out their children or the parents having a stupidly liberal view on child sex and having decided a particular sex act is no big deal.

• 0% Suspicious/untrusting

Fetish: Will not engage in any fetish sex.

Covert sex: Will be alert and suspect even the slightest inconsistency, may even suspect without evidence if their mind has reason to go that direction in the first place.

• 10% Hesitant

Fetish: Will permit someone with a non-threatening fetish such as a foot fetish to, in that case, touch and/or manipulate their feet or paint their nails(or whatever the equivalent would be for a different non-threatening fetish,) but may or may not draw a line at licking.

Covert sex: Will be alert and suspect even the slightest inconsistency that leads them to believe you are having secretive sex.

• 30% At ease

Fetish: Minimum for swinger or cuck sex or any sex based on having sex with someone generally perceived as dangerous.

Covert sex: Will feel they don't have to watch you that closely, but not that this behavior is beyond you. Will become suspicious if they get strong evidence such as one of the usual signs one might use to express their suspicions to another.

• 50% non-suspicious

Fetish: Minimum for the majority of fetish sex, does not include any form of sex that would require a "safe word."

Covert sex: Default position in their mind is that you will not have illict sex behind their back, but can be persuaded easily if they find evidence. Will only suspect you if they see multiple suspicious signs (those used to typically describe suspicious activity of this nature) adding up. (minimum 5 to maximum 10 signs)

• 70% Trusting

Fetish: Minimum for any form of safe-word requiring sex, including BDSM, choking, and rape role-play.

Covert sex: Sees you having illict sex behind their back as being something you simply would not do. Will dismiss any evidence, including some rather obvious evidence such as creaking bed-springs and semen stains on the sheets, by providing alternative explanations. Minor evidence such as disheveled appearances will not even register as suspicious. However, if enough obvious evidence stacks up, direct testimony is given, or someone who is suspicious of what you are doing convinces them, they will believe it.

• 90% Blind Trust

Fetish: Required for the most extreme and potentially life-threatening activities during sex.

Covert sex: May very well dismiss it even if shown the semen dripping from the girl's vagina, the read-out from a DNA test saying it's the guy's, and verbal testimony from both partners saying it happened. Would be dismissed as the semen actually being lotion or having come from another guy and the test having been faked. (key word, may. People who are more intelligent and rational will be hurt but still give the trusted person room to provide an alternate explanation, and trust will fall by 70 whether they are convinced or not.)

A person who trusts blindly may even allow for a quick somewhat improbable explanation (such as wrestling) if you are caught in the act but penis is not inserted at the time they lay eyes on you. (again, this extreme situation leads to trust instantly falling by 70 if the individual has a degree of intelligence and rationality whether they believe the excuse or not.)

Fear

Fear is divided into three categories. Perceived threat to self, perceived threat to others, and threat of self harm. In this case "threat to self" refers to harming the person who has the fear stat, and "threat of self harm" refers to the person the fear stat is in regards to harming themselves. There are occasions where someone may fear more than one outcome, but the behaviors that result will reflect the one that is the strongest.

Note that fear does not always refer to a physical threat, especially in the threat to self and threat of self harm categories. The former presents commonly in the form of a child fearing punishment from a disciplinarian parent, and the latter in the form of fear they may ruin their future livelihood prospects rather than injure or kill themselves. It could also refer to their behaviors being dangerous and inviting harm from an outside source, such as them being raped and/or kidnapped by a stranger.

Fears threat to self

Fear of personal harm is the fear that the subject of the fear might cause some negative result to the person who feels the fear. This is not necesarily physical harm. A child might fear punishment from a parent, a friend or sibling might fear the subject will hate them and abandon them, and someone might also fear their possessions could be damaged by the subject of their fear.

Note: This form of fear can be used to achieve absolutely any effect that could be achieved with the same levels of submissiveness. The big difference between achieving this through fear Vs. submission is that they may or may not be Ok with doing said thing if they submit to it normally, but if they submit due to fear they will always hate being made to do it. Even if it is something they would normally enjoy under other circumstances, they will not like having been forced to do it by you.

• 10% Uncomfortable

They feel uneasy while you are around, but do not have a particular reason they can point to to justify this unease.

• 30% Avoidance

They feel it is best not to be around you if you can be avoided, just in case. May or may not have a reason to justify this fear.

• 50% Afraid

Self acknowledges they are afraid, and can probably find a justifiable reason as to why they are afraid. Will have difficulty confronting you or standing up to you. (Any encounter that would decrease dominance will reduce it by larger amounts until it reaches 0%. Only effective if dominance was originally lower than 50%)

• 70% Debilitating fear

Are afraid of you enough that they loose the ability to oppose you for fear of what you might do in response. (Any encounter that would increase submissiveness will increase it more until it reaches 50%, can now increase negative hits to dominance up to 100% as well.)

• 90% Absolute terror

Will do every single thing you say for fear of what you will do to them if they don't. Is no different in outcome from having 100% submission.

Fears threat to others

Fear of threat to others is the fear that the subject of the fear may harm the firends or loved ones of the person feeling the fear. This fear can present in all the same forms as that of threat to self (except that fearing they might hate their loved ones tends to not produce as strong a reaction as they would fearing the same thing for themselves,) the biggest difference between the two is the type of reaction they will have. Rather than submitting due to the fear, someone who fears the threat to others is more likely to become dominant with the subject of the fear in order to prevent the harm from coming.

• 10% Uneasy

They feel uneasy while you and their loved one are interacting, but do not have a particular reason they can point to to justify this unease.

• 30% Cautious

They feel it is best to keep you away from their loved one, just in case. May or may not have a reason to justify this fear.

• 50% Afraid

Self acknowledges they are afraid, and can probably find a justifiable reason as to why they are afraid. Will likely become belligerent in order to ward you off if you are around. (Any encounter that would increase dominance will increase it by larger amounts until it reaches 70%. Only effective if dominance was originally higher than 20%)

• 70% Sees as true threat.

Feels that reasonable tactics to keep you away from their loved ones will not work, and that you actually intend them direct harm if you come around. Is likely to get the police involved at this level, go to the extreme of physically fighting you to ward you off, or may even try to kill you for the protection of their loved ones.

• 90% Hopeless fear

Sees you as a threat that can't be stopped, akin to a force of nature that they cannot do anything about such as a tornado or a disease. They will not try to prevent you from harming their loved ones because they don't see a way they can stop it. (Note: This level of fear of this veriety is most common in children fearing the subject of the fear will harm their parents or older siblings. It also appears in people with 70% greater fear of personal harm from the same source.)

Fears threat of self harm

The fear that the subject may harm themselves is the one form of fear that can be fostered even with an otherwise healthy relationship going (although it tends to harm trust.) This is the fear that the subject may damage their life, livelihood, or body in some way. This is usually through carelessness having an accident or engaging in behaviors that make them vulnerable to attacks from others, but a threat of intentional self harm is something that is known to happen and produces some of the higher levels of fear in this category if the subject is identified to have leanings in that direction.

• 10% Uneasy

Has no proof that the subject will harm themselves or engage in dangerous practices. This level is more a cluster of thinking about various "what if?" scenarios that could happen to you but they don't think are entirely likely to happen.

• 30% Concerned

Still does not have a solid basis for their perceived fear, but will ensure you have supervision from someone they have a trust score with in order to prevent one of those "what if?" scenarios from occurring.

• 50% Fear

Can name a specific likely outcome that could result from your activities. Will begin limiting your freedoms for the sake of your own protection to prevent the event that they fear. However, they still trust you enough to act according to the limitations they place on you.

• 70% Self threat

View normal prevention tactics as not being enough to protect you from your own dangerous activities. Will either act on their own to limit your freedoms, or try to ensure you have someone watching you at all times who they have at least a 50% trust score with.

• 90% Extreme fear

Knows (in their own mind) for certain that, if left to your own devices, you are going to do irreparable harm to yourself and will defy every effort they make to prevent it. May go to either one of two extreme reactions. Either give you up for lost and act as though mourning you while you are still alive, or have you institutionalized or arrested for your own good figuring that having you locked up with supervision and help available is better than the alternative.

Familial/platonic love

How accepting of non-sexual gestures of closeness this person is, and how forgiving they are of a person's faults.

Lust/romantic love

How willing this person would be to do something sexual in nature with the person they have this score with. Note that in children below age 14 willingness to do something sexual has more to do with their curiosity and their trust and friendship with the proposed sexual partner. As such, lust and romantic love are not connected and a child below that age will substitute trust and friendship scores for romance so long as romance is still 1/10 the required level.

General

Note: This only measures scores for convincing them to perform a sex act they were not ready to do before hand. If they initiate the sex act, they can initiate it with a score of 0.

(Sex act thresholds are measured in groups of 20 without a top-end buffer zone. This is because there is a break-down of inbetween values for each act, but these increments of 20 are the top ends of each category.)

• 20+

Will see any action categorized as a "benign sex act" as a natural and appropriate gesture of closeness for this stage of their relationship.

• 40+

Will see any action categorized as a "dismissable sex act" as a natural and appropriate gesture of closeness for this stage in their relationship, and will be perfectly Ok with it even if they are aware it is being done in a sensual manner.

• 60+

Will see any action categorized as a "mild sex act" (except french kissing for children) as a natural and appropriate gesture of closeness for this stage in their relationship.

• 80+ Will see most actions categorized as a "moderate sex act" (provided they do not take issue with a particular act on principal) as a natural and appropriate thing to do at this stage in their relationship.

• 100 Will see sexual intercourse as a natural and appropriate thing to do at this stage in their relationship. (Might demand a condom if worried about pregnancy.)

NOTE: No level of romantic love unlocks violent or fetish sex as something they will be accepting of. They must either have a high submissive score or be naturally into that kind of sex to start with.

Consent minimums

The links below list the numbers a person's relationship scores have to be at for them to consent to a sex act. The 1st link shows the minimums for each foreseeable sex act that might be performed, the second shows how you determine witch value is used. (6 of the 8 factors are candidates for being the primary score determining whether or not they will consent to a sex act depending on other factors that may be present.) And the 3rd lists factors that might modify the scores listed in the 1st link.

WARNING: The math in there gets a little complicated. It was comprised by one of the nerd-brains that took a mutual shared lead on this project. Any other writer who wants to contribute really does not need to know the contents of this page. Following the simplified numbers above will keep you very safely on the right page. The numbers thrown about in there have mostly to do with how to get consent with numbers lower than those given in this basic guide in a way that sort of more or less reflects real life in a game mechanics sort of way.

• Consent minimums
• Determining value used for sex
• Modifiers for consent scores
• Special cases