As for Daisy being rapey - the whole point was to make the player uncomfortable, no?
I feel like we've had this conversation before... it's less about the rapey behaviour, and more about the way the game, at a meta-game level, dictated for you how your character felt about the things that happened, after the fact.
It's one thing to inflict something like that on a character, in story, but following it up with a meta-game statement of "And it was hot, and you think it was hot, and it was so tempting, and you think it was alluring and tempting!" - No, I didn't, and that's my right to decide, not the game's. To use the parallel example, yes, you might have (as one possibility) brain-controlled a goblin into letting you pass (but not to touch or lay hands on them, it might be added), but what you didn't do, and couldn't do, was turn around after the goblin recovered and insist, to the
Game, not to the goblin, that the goblin
liked that, that it found it a pretty nice experience, and insist to the game that that was the truth of it, in a way the game was forced to accept.
The game can absolutely give our characters consequences for their actions, and they can be dark and dire, but outside of moments of direct influence, it must not impose upon our character at a meta-level to tell us how we feel about what happened; that is being disrespectful to the
player, which is inexcusable. Even if the intent is that our characters are left with a lingering influence still trying to affect us, the game must make it clear that such a sensation is unnatural or alien - that it comes from something other than our character's own natural emotions and inclinations on the matter, which must,
Always be ours to decide in a game of this nature.
