Stories of Tie Up Games

Redman wrote: 2 months ago Four, but only if there's three characters in the story.

All jokes aside, there's not really a hard number. It just has to make sense. Let the characters tell you what they want, and flow with it. It probably won't seem excessive at all.

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago I feel like it depends on the context, but the more people you involve the harder it will be to give them all enough attention in the story. Personally, I'd prefer a story with two well-established characters than ten characters you only get a brief look at. But you can definitely make it work with plenty of people involved - just take your time when adding more characters and it should turn out nicely.

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago I feel like it depends on the context, but the more people you involve the harder it will be to give them all enough attention in the story.

RopeBunny wrote: 2 months ago

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago I feel like it depends on the context, but the more people you involve the harder it will be to give them all enough attention in the story.

Agreeing, mostly, with this.

I've done multiple TUG's, multiple times (sorry not sorry ) and it largely depends on context. Can't add nearly as much detail or interaction without it becoming confusing.

However, as a set piece, someone walking in and finding the entire football (insert sports or other team/group here) team bound and gagged, I'd say it totally works under those circumstances. You get to describe the scene, the carnage of it all, after which you bring the focus back down to the two or three main players in the unfolding story.

Just my thoughts, take.

RopeBunny wrote: 2 months ago

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago I feel like it depends on the context, but the more people you involve the harder it will be to give them all enough attention in the story.

Agreeing, mostly, with this.

I've done multiple TUG's, multiple times (sorry not sorry ) and it largely depends on context. Can't add nearly as much detail or interaction without it becoming confusing.

However, as a set piece, someone walking in and finding the entire football (insert sports or other team/group here) team bound and gagged, I'd say it totally works under those circumstances. You get to describe the scene, the carnage of it all, after which you bring the focus back down to the two or three main players in the unfolding story.

Just my thoughts, take.

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago That's a really good point, situations like that where you want to convey the chaos could work better if you're flashing from captive to captive.

RopeBunny wrote: 2 months ago

Rtj65 wrote: 2 months ago That's a really good point, situations like that where you want to convey the chaos could work better if you're flashing from captive to captive.

Flashing from captive to captive, love the way you put that

Brilliant imagery there.

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago I happen to know from experience that when you have 2 people tied together, their natural instinct is to become a pair. Their individuality and ego takes a back seat and their sense of connectedness with their fellow captive takes the wheel.

You can expand upon this significantly. If you have a room full of, say, captured tied up guards, they almost become a single entity to be managed.

The same principles of holding them captive still apply but the psychology shifts. In a bank heist scenario irl, the hostages feel a sense of groupthink, and tend to make decisions based on the wellbeing of the group.

All that to say, you can have dozens of captives in a single scene because there is basically only 1 dynamic; that of the captor and the captive(s)

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago Christmas fiasco? I'll check it out

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago I happen to know from experience that when you have 2 people tied together, their natural instinct is to become a pair. Their individuality and ego takes a back seat and their sense of connectedness with their fellow captive takes the wheel.

You can expand upon this significantly. If you have a room full of, say, captured tied up guards, they almost become a single entity to be managed.

The same principles of holding them captive still apply but the psychology shifts. In a bank heist scenario irl, the hostages feel a sense of groupthink, and tend to make decisions based on the wellbeing of the group.

All that to say, you can have dozens of captives in a single scene because there is basically only 1 dynamic; that of the captor and the captive(s)

Rtj65 wrote: 1 week ago

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago I happen to know from experience that when you have 2 people tied together, their natural instinct is to become a pair. Their individuality and ego takes a back seat and their sense of connectedness with their fellow captive takes the wheel.

You can expand upon this significantly. If you have a room full of, say, captured tied up guards, they almost become a single entity to be managed.

The same principles of holding them captive still apply but the psychology shifts. In a bank heist scenario irl, the hostages feel a sense of groupthink, and tend to make decisions based on the wellbeing of the group.

All that to say, you can have dozens of captives in a single scene because there is basically only 1 dynamic; that of the captor and the captive(s)

Interesting, I do like the idea of there being a sort of shared camaraderie between multiple captives like that. I don't think that necessarily has to be the case, even though I'm sure it's the most likely one.

You could have a situation where a captor pits multiple captives against one another, or if they show signs of favouritism to one captive over another. But that definitely depends on the scenario and the people involved, of course!

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago

Rtj65 wrote: 1 week ago

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago I happen to know from experience that when you have 2 people tied together, their natural instinct is to become a pair. Their individuality and ego takes a back seat and their sense of connectedness with their fellow captive takes the wheel.

You can expand upon this significantly. If you have a room full of, say, captured tied up guards, they almost become a single entity to be managed.

The same principles of holding them captive still apply but the psychology shifts. In a bank heist scenario irl, the hostages feel a sense of groupthink, and tend to make decisions based on the wellbeing of the group.

All that to say, you can have dozens of captives in a single scene because there is basically only 1 dynamic; that of the captor and the captive(s)

Interesting, I do like the idea of there being a sort of shared camaraderie between multiple captives like that. I don't think that necessarily has to be the case, even though I'm sure it's the most likely one.

You could have a situation where a captor pits multiple captives against one another, or if they show signs of favouritism to one captive over another. But that definitely depends on the scenario and the people involved, of course!

I will never argue against this, but it's something of an 'exception makes the rule' scenario.

The only example I can even remotely think of would be the show prison break, and that, unfortunately, had very limited bondage, mostly just cells. Damn good show, but it showed that interplay you mentioned

YourCaptor75 wrote: 1 week ago I'll take that as a challenge @Rtj65 haha