|
|
Post by Lady Frost on Feb 26, 2019 21:04:50 GMT -5
In an effort to not derail a lore thread, I wanted to bring this here. They've gotten sneaky and quiet about it. Villian now occurs carefully after the actions of some very loud trumpets. On this note, some of us have been talking recently about how to bring some of the 'villiany' back out of the shadows, so to speak. In these conversations, we've gone to using "Team Conflict" and "Team Resolution" over Team Evil and Team Good. As it is, Team Conflict is generally overseen by very high level, powerful LE-like characters. They're old characters, have a lot to lose, work very hard to minimize their risks and are highly political. On top of this, they've shown a willingness to be effectively dangerous when directly confronted. This all adds up to being something extremely difficult to play against, especially for anyone not uber epic or part of a guild. In the past, its been hard to find lower-level characters that are willing to be patient enough to be a part of year-long or more plotting. They join our guilds and then give up after a short time. At times we blame "Team Evil not being supported" but in reality, I think it may be partly that the support for "Team Conflict" is really not very confrontational and gets boring. We're starting to work on ways that Team Conflict can become a bit more confrontational through means that will provide Team Resolution characters to become rivals against and situations to actually be able to plot against. Some of it has been occurring already, but its an ongoing process. |
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95 
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 5:03:13 GMT -5
The thing is. Ive seen a lot of people such as myselft who has recently arrived at the server.
I would call myselft part of the team conflict and resolution because my character plays a role in both.
He is a real zealot against those who support chromatic and is going to play hard even solo against them.
But ive seen already that some people on team the LE side of things have already got an eye for the paladin.
As for me i think that people are afraid of the consecuences of having a risky Rp or even create conflict due the nature of the server.
Remember that we are in a server which for character lvl progression you need to heavily rely on cooperation whit other individuals.
So i think thats why people apply a lot of Deux ex Machina whit this and we frecuently see conflicts and resolutions be less "realistic"
Ive noticed as well that the population seems to lowering and even some complains that people do not feel progression in any way.
So to match you people up there we need to invest a lot of hours not only rping but lvling and many people they prefer to do not take and effort to invest on that and depart for greenier pastures where they can achieve the lvl of rp they want much easier
|
|
|
|
Post by lucid on Feb 27, 2019 7:50:25 GMT -5
The main problem is that people always leap to KILL THE WABBIT.
You need to attack their assets. As Evil, I feel like you should be setting up scenarios that will then perpetuate without you. Start the ball rolling, then let gravity take over. Then as Good, you don't even need to see the evil group to thwart their effects. Just get in there and smash that balefully glowing crystal.
In a nutshell:
Evil creates a problem: SUCCESS
Good solves a problem: SUCCESS
Everybody wins.
|
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 9:16:05 GMT -5
The thing is. Do they let them do their part? And when they are caught. Do they let the good guys to stop them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz on Feb 27, 2019 9:33:48 GMT -5
Wiht he move to EE, many new players joined, but not many openly evil new characters are being played. My hypothesis is that since it is a new server and environment, new players would want to test the waters first.
They do so with good, neutral or even evil PCs, but their characters stay away of most conflit and plotting, because they are at a disadvantage OOC as well. I compare it to playing a tabletop game for the first time with othrs who know the rules without haveing to read them anymore.
These people know the "metagame" and this gives them an advanatage. Maybe given time, as some some players grow familiar with the setting, more openly evil PCs will be created and played as that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Feb 27, 2019 9:49:18 GMT -5
The thing is. Do they let them do their part? And when they are caught. Do they let the good guys to stop them? What I take from Lucid's post above is that conflict doesn't always have to resolve in killing your opponent, if you manage to frame a conflict such that it isn't the goal. For instance, if I run a villainous character who has managed to tie up some people I don't like in a barn and set the barn on fire, the "good guys" don't have to kill my character to have a success. They can just save my innocent and hapless victims from the fire while I take off for the hills as the "good guys" arrive. Maybe it's even a distraction as I set up my real plan, which will form the basis of the problem to solve in next week's episode. I can create problem after problem to solve, but there doesn't have to necessarily be a direct conflict between our characters. I kind of get the idea that might be sort of where Lady Frost was going with the OP, too. |
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 10:13:43 GMT -5
Yeha i felt like that was the concept.
The problem is that when your character is going to be able to burn if they let him
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 10:18:46 GMT -5
For a long time openly evil characters saw issues oocly. "Stupid evil" and "team evil" were coined. Most that still play evil do so by playing through the DMs and effecting plots and such. Being caught doing good in a good setting is nothing. Being caught doing evil in a good setting could see the destruction of your characters social life and make nobody trust you for the rest of the life of your characters be that a year or multiple years. Which basically kills the character. Having played evil in the past and then trying to play a more goodly character I saw push back on both sides of the aisle that I would dare to play a goodie (the sides polarized) or goodly characters my new character had never known having a plain dislike for my pc and being resistant to rp (because of past dislike how stories had gone in regards to an evil PC). Even one of these headaches is enough to zap the will to play sometimes.
What this has led to over the years is having to have trust in and know the person on the other side before ppl are willing to "openly" have a back and forth (opposed to a behind the scenes puppet master). But of course others could become involved through association. In the end ppl just don't do as much open evil anymore. I can remember a time when everyone was talking about how evil was to open and their alignment was stupid evil because they did things in the open where they could be opposed instead of being subtle. Back when great gaunt would burn etc. Now it's shifted. If you are exposed it can destroy your character. And that's not even taking into account the massive power of goodly epics that can combine with the lore power of cormyr to hammer you into the dust. Also there is a cartoon quality to people's expectations that good should always triumph at the end of the day. That's why your Uber powerful old characters that have worked for years attaining what they have wish to do these extended behind the scenes grand schemes. They need to trust you to be able to handle the maturity of dealing with a storyline. Evil has in effect from all the blow back over the years gone underground.
It's really the only way to play a long term evil character without complaints and ooc griping.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Feb 27, 2019 10:20:08 GMT -5
Yeha i felt like that was the concept. The problem is that when your character is going to be able to burn if they let him I was envisioning NPC's in the fire, and PC's doing the saving. Not sure if that was intended from the other comments, but it's what I was thinking. |
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 10:34:43 GMT -5
This is simple like in real life.
Evil goes low. Good goes high.
Get caught pay the price
|
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Feb 27, 2019 10:56:52 GMT -5
This is simple like in real life. Evil goes low. Good goes high. Get caught pay the price if you think evil always gos low I assure you think again. The Greatgaunt fire Aris started was for a good reason. Evil act started by a good action. |
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 10:57:46 GMT -5
Nah i dont think so but mostly its like that. Some people also make mistakes
|
|
|
|
Post by Razgriz on Feb 27, 2019 11:02:01 GMT -5
For a long time openly evil characters saw issues oocly. "Stupid evil" and "team evil" were coined. Most that still play evil do so by playing through the DMs and effecting plots and such. Being caught doing good in a good setting is nothing. Being caught doing evil in a good setting could see the destruction of your characters social life and make nobody trust you for the rest of the life of your characters be that a year or multiple years. Which basically kills the character. Having played evil in the past and then trying to play a more goodly character I saw push back on both sides of the aisle that I would dare to play a goodie (the sides polarized) or goodly characters my new character had never known having a plain dislike for my pc and being resistant to rp (because of past dislike how stories had gone in regards to an evil PC). Even one of these headaches is enough to zap the will to play sometimes. What this has led to over the years is having to have trust in and know the person on the other side before ppl are willing to "openly" have a back and forth (opposed to a behind the scenes puppet master). But of course others could become involved through association. In the end ppl just don't do as much open evil anymore. I can remember a time when everyone was talking about how evil was to open and their alignment was stupid evil because they did things in the open where they could be opposed instead of being subtle. Back when great gaunt would burn etc. Now it's shifted. If you are exposed it can destroy your character. And that's not even taking into account the massive power of goodly epics that can combine with the lore power of cormyr to hammer you into the dust. Also there is a cartoon quality to people's expectations that good should always triumph at the end of the day. That's why your Uber powerful old characters that have worked for years attaining what they have wish to do these extended behind the scenes grand schemes. They need to trust you to be able to handle the maturity of dealing with a storyline. Evil has in effect from all the blow back over the years gone underground. It's really the only way to play a long term evil character without complaints and ooc griping. I must admit that now that I'm playing a "not good" character as my main, certain perspective has been gained. It is not as simple as toggling hostile and causing mayhem. To me it seems that one needs more than one pvp check. 1) IC Reason 2) Potential of a Good Story or to Further a good Story 3) Right Moment to Strike & luck(no lag, the target where you want it, favorable odds...) 4) Risk vs Reward 5) OOC assurance that things will be ok with player(s) and DM(s) involved Maybe there are more |
|
|
|
Post by StabbingNirvana on Feb 27, 2019 12:41:54 GMT -5
This is simple like in real life. Evil goes low. Good goes high. Get caught pay the price if you think evil always gos low I assure you think again. The Greatgaunt fire Aris started was for a good reason. Evil act started by a good action. I'm pretty sure setting fire to a bunch of innocent peoples' property and potentially causing them financial distress, homelessness, and physical harm is a pretty low act. |
|
|
|
Post by Asgardian Grey Hawk on Feb 27, 2019 12:45:37 GMT -5
if you think evil always gos low I assure you think again. The Greatgaunt fire Aris started was for a good reason. Evil act started by a good action. I'm pretty sure setting fire to a bunch of innocent peoples' property and potentially causing them financial distress, homelessness, and physical harm is a pretty low act. never said the act wasn't evil said the reason why it happened was a good act. |
|
|
|
Post by Lady Frost on Feb 27, 2019 13:01:13 GMT -5
I think one of the reasons Team Conflict has ended up in the place it is (being generally politically LE) is because its the only place where they feel they can be both successful and avoid starting PvP wars. The evolution of the server has seen the disappearance of a lot of players who are willing to show weaknesses that can be taken advantage of. Characters from level 1 act like they're immune to fear, can't be intimidated, and nothing scares them. Those are the tools that evil uses against people. When those become invalid paths of RP it leads to the only one that can be forced upon people, death. That's why you see 'stupid evil' who kills people. Yes some of the RP is eye-rolling, but it's also a result of characters not offering any other ways leverage can be gained over them. If death is the only way someone can gain an advantage over your character then expect that to be the way RP goes if you get into a conflict. Us that play old-evil don't want that kind of PvP-death RP so we avoid it and play politically where we can have success and not have to kill people for it.
Laurk and his character Abby have been a huge relief from this for me. Abby has visible 'weaknesses' that Zoe can 'take advantage of'. Zoe can leave impressions and have an effect on her without having to result in combat and death. As a player, I'm far more willing to let Laurk and Abby become aware of Zodika's weaknesses for that sportsmanship. If more players would allow their characters to have these weaknesses that could be taken advantage of, I think we'd see far less PvP conflicts and murder, and a healthier relationship between Team Conflict and Team Resolution.
At the end of the day we aren't here to win and lose - our characters might be - but as players, we're here to tell stories. Good stories have characters that are relatable with faults and weaknesses. They get taken advantage of and they climb out of it. Most players that play Team Conflict don't expect to win, but they do hope to be able to take advantage of someone and gain leverage over someone before the status-quo returns and they move on to the next thing. Team Confict's success then becomes the lasting effect their gained leverage creates. What we need to do is not force Team Conflict to have to make the leverage murder and death.
|
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Feb 27, 2019 13:18:09 GMT -5
I think one of the reasons Team Conflict has ended up in the place it is (being generally politically LE) is because its the only place where they feel they can be both successful and avoid starting PvP wars. The evolution of the server has seen the disappearance of a lot of players who are willing to show weaknesses that can be taken advantage of. Characters from level 1 act like they're immune to fear, can't be intimidated, and nothing scares them. Those are the tools that evil uses against people. When those become invalid paths of RP it leads to the only one that can be forced upon people, death. That's why you see 'stupid evil' who kills people. Yes some of the RP is eye-rolling, but it's also a result of characters not offering any other ways leverage can be gained over them. If death is the only way someone can gain an advantage over your character then expect that to be the way RP goes if you get into a conflict. Us that play old-evil don't want that kind of PvP-death RP so we avoid it and play politically where we can have success and not have to kill people for it. Laurk and his character Abby have been a huge relief from this for me. Abby has visible 'weaknesses' that Zoe can 'take advantage of'. Zoe can leave impressions and have an effect on her without having to result in combat and death. As a player, I'm far more willing to let Laurk and Abby become aware of Zodika's weaknesses for that sportsmanship. If more players would allow their characters to have these weaknesses that could be taken advantage of, I think we'd see far less PvP conflicts and murder, and a healthier relationship between Team Conflict and Team Resolution. At the end of the day we aren't here to win and lose - our characters might be - but as players, we're here to tell stories. Good stories have characters that are relatable with faults and weaknesses. They get taken advantage of and they climb out of it. Most players that play Team Conflict don't expect to win, but they do hope to be able to take advantage of someone and gain leverage over someone before the status-quo returns and they move on to the next thing. Team Confict's success then becomes the lasting effect their gained leverage creates. What we need to do is not force Team Conflict to have to make the leverage murder and death. I would like to point out that the fact a character can't be intimidated into backing down doesn't mean they are immune to fear or have no weaknesses. I've spent years playing characters who absolutely can be scared, it's just that their response is often enough to strike preemptively to take out the threat if they can, or otherwise do something about it. One of my characters has actually killed another PC out of being scared that terrible things were going to happen to her even if she *did* cooperate, so she killed him out of fear. So sometimes "fear" means "fight back." The full phrase is "fight OR flight," not just "flight." So there are times the weakness of a given character is that they can be tempted and drawn into striking first and getting in trouble with the law for it, and not the easily recognized "backing down." I don't want to do too much of my character's rivals' homework for them, but I've seen the point of intimidation response get bandied about enough, I thought I'd share. |
|
trauson
New Member
Idk.... Alive?
Posts: 95
|
Post by trauson on Feb 27, 2019 13:32:57 GMT -5
Sorry i dont know what fear is....  Nah to be clear for example if i had to choose a weakness for my character i could choose a bunch of them... a lot of them. And im sure that they are trying to exploit them as we speak. But its fun how things are developing on my side. But yeah we are too afraid not only here but in every server to do massive pvp wars for obvious reasons Many people dont take the difference between occ and ic but it could be cool to live a kind of marvel civil war between adventurers |
|
They've gotten sneaky and quiet about it. Villian now occurs carefully after the actions of some very loud trumpets.
Nah to be clear for example if i had to choose a weakness for my character i could choose a bunch of them... a lot of them. And im sure that they are trying to exploit them as we speak.