|
Post by ID10Tango on Oct 29, 2019 13:09:43 GMT -5
To get back to the OP and elaborate on some things:
Start with a group and go on quests. Grow to the size of a player group or guild and then set an agenda of items/events you want to pursue.
Coordinate with a DM for the agenda and as participation grows and becomes more consistent, hit up another group/guild for an alliance. Continue to build and grow participation and modify the agenda as needed, but stick to the darker corners of FRC.
-This- is the evil comfort zone based on my experiences, and by far have been some of the most fun and memorable player and DM interactions I've had on FRC.
That's not to say that you can't participate in server events and put your finger on the scales here and there. But understand that the majority of the community operates within the good side of the spectrum, sworn to fight evil and undead, and don't want to interact with demons, devil's, or liches unless they are smiting them.
Lastly, it gives everyone room to "play their game". You can run around and do your things in secret, and the others can choose to participate or ignore. Kind of like when someone sees a few gruesomely crucified bodies on pikes around Cormyr, they might decide to investigate the issue in more detail...or they might just take the bodies down and then go home and forget about it.
-Tango-
|
|
|
Post by Masterbard Alyster Darkharp on Oct 29, 2019 19:36:45 GMT -5
As someone who belonged to the FRC DM Team for many years, I can assure you that there are never discussions about forcing Epics to retire or die or anything of the sort. Unless things have changed dramatically since I stepped down, this just isn't the case at all. New character creation month isn't forcing anyone to do anything, nowhere have I seen any rules passed that will change anything or force epic characters to do anything (although I would love to see Epic characters hang out far away from Greatgaunt even if that took rules to accomplish, thats a personal thing, not a reflection of what the DM Team thinks now, or ever did).
There is no grand plot against your character(s). If you think there is, you have thought way too much about it. Way too much.
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Oct 29, 2019 20:22:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Oct 29, 2019 21:30:10 GMT -5
As someone who belonged to the FRC DM Team for many years, I can assure you that there are never discussions about forcing Epics to retire or die or anything of the sort. Unless things have changed dramatically since I stepped down, this just isn't the case at all. New character creation month isn't forcing anyone to do anything, nowhere have I seen any rules passed that will change anything or force epic characters to do anything (although I would love to see Epic characters hang out far away from Greatgaunt even if that took rules to accomplish, thats a personal thing, not a reflection of what the DM Team thinks now, or ever did). There is no grand plot against your character(s). If you think there is, you have thought way too much about it. Way too much. Why all this dislike of epics in Greatgaunt? Unfair, Epics can act as guides and role models in game. That is how I view Marister and A'zu'ra. I take offense if this was in the rules.
|
|
|
Post by dwarvenkoff on Oct 29, 2019 21:37:53 GMT -5
I wish less was done in secret, because it's the fumbles and mistakes that make for a great scene. If you are "good" at playing that personality type and have mechanics etc to back up (not as necessary IMO) your plans will always succeed, which is boring. Slip up every now and then and throw other people a bone or red herring to chase. Keeping rp and DM attention locked within a guild isn't the way to go. I think we should encourage more cross guild stuff even if they work in oppositions to each other once the Staff has worked out a suitable way to facilitate it.
|
|
|
Post by Masterbard Alyster Darkharp on Oct 29, 2019 21:40:42 GMT -5
As someone who belonged to the FRC DM Team for many years, I can assure you that there are never discussions about forcing Epics to retire or die or anything of the sort. Unless things have changed dramatically since I stepped down, this just isn't the case at all. New character creation month isn't forcing anyone to do anything, nowhere have I seen any rules passed that will change anything or force epic characters to do anything (although I would love to see Epic characters hang out far away from Greatgaunt even if that took rules to accomplish, thats a personal thing, not a reflection of what the DM Team thinks now, or ever did). There is no grand plot against your character(s). If you think there is, you have thought way too much about it. Way too much. Why all this dislike of epics in Greatgaunt? Unfair, Epics can act as guides and role models in game. That is how I view Marister and A'zu'ra. I take offense if this was in the rules. Greatgaunt is the starting village, it just doesn't make sense that giant crowds of the most wealthy and prominant adventurers in all of the realm hang out in a 'one horse town' when there are much better places for them to be. Do you take offense that you aren't allowed in the really low level dungeons? I mean...you could easily guide them around down there and make sure they don't die. By all rights you should be allowed in them right? I understand it's a town, it just feels silly to me that if I want to find the archmage so and so, the best place to locate him is in the town square of one of the smallest villages in the nation, far from his home or fortress. I go there like everyone else, but I'm also not an epic level character. You can't really act as a guide for them and have them gain any experience, which is a driving need at low levels. I feel that it's important to let low level characters, especially those new to the server, develop -together- with other low level characters. As I said, it's a personal thing. There will not ever be rules to keep epics from lingering about the starting village, so it's a moot point. We are well over a decade into the life of FRC at this point and nothing has changed in regards to greatgaunt, nor will it ever.
|
|
|
Post by kasama on Oct 29, 2019 22:20:43 GMT -5
Why all this dislike of epics in Greatgaunt? Unfair, Epics can act as guides and role models in game. That is how I view Marister and A'zu'ra. I take offense if this was in the rules. Greatgaunt is the starting village, it just doesn't make sense that giant crowds of the most wealthy and prominant adventurers in all of the realm hang out in a 'one horse town' when there are much better places for them to be. Do you take offense that you aren't allowed in the really low level dungeons? I mean...you could easily guide them around down there and make sure they don't die. By all rights you should be allowed in them right? I understand it's a town, it just feels silly to me that if I want to find the archmage so and so, the best place to locate him is in the town square of one of the smallest villages in the nation, far from his home or fortress. I go there like everyone else, but I'm also not an epic level character. You can't really act as a guide for them and have them gain any experience, which is a driving need at low levels. I feel that it's important to let low level characters, especially those new to the server, develop -together- with other low level characters. As I said, it's a personal thing. There will not ever be rules to keep epics from lingering about the starting village, so it's a moot point. We are well over a decade into the life of FRC at this point and nothing has changed in regards to greatgaunt, nor will it ever. To be fair, GG is the best place to hawk wares
|
|
|
Post by dwarvenkoff on Oct 29, 2019 22:36:38 GMT -5
Suggest we move the low level/high level stuff to a seperate topic so dumb folks like me don't keep jumping from topic to topic
|
|
|
Post by lucid on Oct 29, 2019 23:05:12 GMT -5
What better places? One attempt in ten, I find people in Suzail Market. 90% it is empty, and when people are there, mostly no RP happens unless they arrived with me. Same with Bron’s Wagon but even if you meet people there, nothing happens, mostly they receive loot and log. Everywhere else is 99% empty. Except Greatgaunt where there’s about 10-20% empty rate.
Wherever is this land of alternative RP you speak of? Guild halls don’t count, I’m not allowed in any of them.
|
|
|
Post by mysticalkas on Oct 30, 2019 9:03:23 GMT -5
On a side note of accomplishments. I understand we are all people and have things going on IRL. I do appreciate a good story and plot. It could just be my spastic brain, but why are there so many open plots and un-closed ones. It's difficult to continue on to a different aspect of the game when so much is left unfinished. Resolution is something to help develop characters and settings as well as plots and events. It's just something I think about that concerns all sides of players/guilds/groups.
|
|
|
Post by Animayhem on Oct 30, 2019 9:50:03 GMT -5
Why all this dislike of epics in Greatgaunt? Unfair, Epics can act as guides and role models in game. That is how I view Marister and A'zu'ra. I take offense if this was in the rules. Greatgaunt is the starting village, it just doesn't make sense that giant crowds of the most wealthy and prominant adventurers in all of the realm hang out in a 'one horse town' when there are much better places for them to be. Do you take offense that you aren't allowed in the really low level dungeons? I mean...you could easily guide them around down there and make sure they don't die. By all rights you should be allowed in them right? I understand it's a town, it just feels silly to me that if I want to find the archmage so and so, the best place to locate him is in the town square of one of the smallest villages in the nation, far from his home or fortress. I go there like everyone else, but I'm also not an epic level character. You can't really act as a guide for them and have them gain any experience, which is a driving need at low levels. I feel that it's important to let low level characters, especially those new to the server, develop -together- with other low level characters. As I said, it's a personal thing. There will not ever be rules to keep epics from lingering about the starting village, so it's a moot point. We are well over a decade into the life of FRC at this point and nothing has changed in regards to greatgaunt, nor will it ever. I respect the fact you personally do not go there and maybe your character will not act as a mentor but please do not lump others in your character's motives. Respect others reasons and do not lump everyone into one category.
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Oct 30, 2019 11:01:58 GMT -5
On a side note of accomplishments. I understand we are all people and have things going on IRL. I do appreciate a good story and plot. It could just be my spastic brain, but why are there so many open plots and un-closed ones. It's difficult to continue on to a different aspect of the game when so much is left unfinished. Resolution is something to help develop characters and settings as well as plots and events. It's just something I think about that concerns all sides of players/guilds/groups. I had a conversation with Hawk not too long ago, and we touched on this. Short version, I think it was just a case of multiple DMs starting individual story arcs pretty much simultaneously. The DMs are aware of the frustration this can cause some players (better than many of us, probably) and are working to complete them.
|
|
|
Post by DM Maleficent's Kiss on Oct 30, 2019 11:17:32 GMT -5
Greatgaunt is the starting village, it just doesn't make sense that giant crowds of the most wealthy and prominant adventurers in all of the realm hang out in a 'one horse town' when there are much better places for them to be. Do you take offense that you aren't allowed in the really low level dungeons? I mean...you could easily guide them around down there and make sure they don't die. By all rights you should be allowed in them right? I understand it's a town, it just feels silly to me that if I want to find the archmage so and so, the best place to locate him is in the town square of one of the smallest villages in the nation, far from his home or fortress. I go there like everyone else, but I'm also not an epic level character. You can't really act as a guide for them and have them gain any experience, which is a driving need at low levels. I feel that it's important to let low level characters, especially those new to the server, develop -together- with other low level characters. As I said, it's a personal thing. There will not ever be rules to keep epics from lingering about the starting village, so it's a moot point. We are well over a decade into the life of FRC at this point and nothing has changed in regards to greatgaunt, nor will it ever. I respect the fact you personally do not go there and maybe your character will not act as a mentor but please do not lump others in your character's motives. Respect others reasons and do not lump everyone into one category.
People hanging around Greatgaunt makes more sense OOC than it does IC more likely than not. It's familiar to every single one of us, we all started there, we all likely found our first group there, we all made our first friend there, and many other historical factors that play into why we might hate it but always return. You also come back to it everytime you start a new character. It's likely you've been through the Greatgaunt crypt so many times you almost qualify for a level of Pale Master in real life. It's the one place you know you can return to at any time and almost always find RP since everyone else goes back for that exact same reason. In character does it make sense that high level adventurers stand around? Maybe, but maybe not. If we had multiple different starting areas this would probably be remedied but then we would essentially run into the problem that lower levels would have a harder time finding groups, so it doesn't do them any favors. I personally still wouldn't mind seeing more options for starting zones but the fact is that would take quite a bit of work and could do more harm than good in the grand scheme of things - If we had Arelith's population I would be a much bigger advocate. I think there is some benefit to having people around the starting zone when new players log in and walk through the gates the first time. I think if you are around the same level as those lowbie level characters it's helpful but I think a character being there to facilitate RP is better than an empty town. At the end of the day what matters is that RP is happening and whether it's in GG, Suzail, or the Kings Forest really doesn't matter so much as that people are interacting and having fun.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2019 11:44:56 GMT -5
People hanging around Greatgaunt makes more sense OOC than it does IC more likely than not. It's familiar to every single one of us, we all started there, we all likely found our first group there, we all made our first friend there, and many other historical factors that play into why we might hate it but always return. You also come back to it everytime you start a new character. It's likely you've been through the Greatgaunt crypt so many times you almost qualify for a level of Pale Master in real life. It's the one place you know you can return to at any time and almost always find RP since everyone else goes back for that exact same reason. In character does it make sense that high level adventurers stand around? Maybe, but maybe not. If we had multiple different starting areas this would probably be remedied but then we would essentially run into the problem that lower levels would have a harder time finding groups, so it doesn't do them any favors. I personally still wouldn't mind seeing more options for starting zones but the fact is that would take quite a bit of work and could do more harm than good in the grand scheme of things - If we had Arelith's population I would be a much bigger advocate. I think there is some benefit to having people around the starting zone when new players log in and walk through the gates the first time. I think if you are around the same level as those lowbie level characters it's helpful but I think a character being there to facilitate RP is better than an empty town. At the end of the day what matters is that RP is happening and whether it's in GG, Suzail, or the Kings Forest really doesn't matter so much as that people are interacting and having fun. Maybe Shallybrook could work for a secondary starting zone in the future. Either way, discussion for the build team at least.
|
|
|
Post by DM Maleficent's Kiss on Oct 30, 2019 11:55:37 GMT -5
People hanging around Greatgaunt makes more sense OOC than it does IC more likely than not. It's familiar to every single one of us, we all started there, we all likely found our first group there, we all made our first friend there, and many other historical factors that play into why we might hate it but always return. You also come back to it everytime you start a new character. It's likely you've been through the Greatgaunt crypt so many times you almost qualify for a level of Pale Master in real life. It's the one place you know you can return to at any time and almost always find RP since everyone else goes back for that exact same reason. In character does it make sense that high level adventurers stand around? Maybe, but maybe not. If we had multiple different starting areas this would probably be remedied but then we would essentially run into the problem that lower levels would have a harder time finding groups, so it doesn't do them any favors. I personally still wouldn't mind seeing more options for starting zones but the fact is that would take quite a bit of work and could do more harm than good in the grand scheme of things - If we had Arelith's population I would be a much bigger advocate. I think there is some benefit to having people around the starting zone when new players log in and walk through the gates the first time. I think if you are around the same level as those lowbie level characters it's helpful but I think a character being there to facilitate RP is better than an empty town. At the end of the day what matters is that RP is happening and whether it's in GG, Suzail, or the Kings Forest really doesn't matter so much as that people are interacting and having fun. Maybe Shallybrook could work for a secondary starting zone in the future. Either way, discussion for the build team at least. I'm not trying to advocate a new starting area or say that it's going to happen. I'm just saying personally I wouldn't mind seeing more starting areas at some point. I think you might be on to something though, maybe even one more starting area could be helpful if it had dungeons and RP opportunities around it to facilitate a "this is where I started" type of feel to it. Now this is just theory crafting at this point but if tomorrow we introduced a new starting area(Yes let's use Shally as the example) and it had slightly better everything than Greatgaunt, better dungeons(more xp), cheaper items, better merchants, that kind of thing. Better everything to the point that there was no point in actually starting in Greatgaunt, would you start hanging out there? I'm asking this because I think a huge reason we hang out in GG(DM's included) is because that's what we've always done and it's more OOC than IC most of the time. That's not really a bad thing, it's just the way it is and we as people tend to want to find places to call home, we also tend to go to where other people are so this isn't particularly surprising. Even if Shallybrook had better everything and made more logical sense to start in than Greatgaunt we might still all end up in Greatgaunt because it's historical influence is that established and that powerful, love the place or hate it.
|
|
|
Post by ShadowCatJen on Oct 30, 2019 14:31:33 GMT -5
The players will go where the RP is at.
This is what this discussion really rounds out to.
It takes time and effort to bring players to other areas or groups that they'd normally not be inclined to go to or work with. As it was mentioned already, a lot of people don't have the patience to wait around and have things "click" into place. In this era of instant gratification online gaming, longer wait times and patience are counter-intuitive.
In order to bring people into the place or group that you want to see the RP at all you need are one or two dedicated players willing to put that time in.
Ten years ago, I had my character Mynian be a barmaid at Talbot's Tavern in Valkur's Roar (Redmist). There were days where I would spend literally hours with no one coming in. I'd emote lines of her going about dusting tables and sweeping floors to a supposed "empty" room. Some players thought me silly and would send me tells perplexed as to why I would do something like that. DMs, however, were quietly dropping some RP XP on me and have Talbot and Gram respond every once in a while.
It took some time, but players started to get the notion that if you were to come to Talbot's, Mynian would be there to talk to. More and more, over time, people started showing up just because they knew at least one person was going to be there.
Politically, things ended up happening with Redmist splitting from the Crown and there was a threat that RP would come to a dead stop at Talbots as a lot of PCs wouldn't -- for very legitimate RP reasons -- not set foot in Redmist. I made the conscious decision to not have Mynian budge and inch and continue to work at Talbot's. While the types of characters that came in to the tavern were different, they also knew they could come to Talbots just for the simple reason that Mynian would be there and RP would be had.
Now, before you say that this sort of thing can't happen now I'll just point a finger at what's going on at the Tipsy Imp. In the last month there's been more RP happening there then I've seen happen in almost the full year I've restarted playing. Why? Because, some players put the effort in having their characters stick around or just say "you can find me there" or "I'm heading to the Imp" while in character.
Again, players will go where the RP happens.
Granted, it's harder to pull off with the groups with darker and more evil bent to them, but there are lots of places not in the starting town and still within Cormyrian territory that such sorts can congregate. The time and effort just needs to be seen to.
I will also say that the DMs will also congregate where they see the RP happening. A lot of them will drop XP on folk who do RP outside of the Gaunt. I'm saying this based on my own experiences.
|
|
|
Post by kasama on Oct 30, 2019 14:37:05 GMT -5
Adding on to Maleficent's statements. I once played on a server called Brynsaar way back in the early 2000's, right about when HoTU released. They did something neat. The PW was a unique world, not FR or Krynn or Greyhawk. Because of this they had their own pantheon. Each character selected a god loosely inline with their alignment. Starting areas and respawn areas were then based on each god's temple. What this did was kinda force like minded characters to interact just because your route from temple to adventure was the different for each alignment. This also caused a couple of different gathering spots to happen, three to be exact. A place for good, for evil, and for Neutrality. Now, I'm not a fan of the alignment based part of what they did but I do like the background part.
|
|
|
Post by Masterbard Alyster Darkharp on Oct 30, 2019 18:35:02 GMT -5
Greatgaunt is the starting village, it just doesn't make sense that giant crowds of the most wealthy and prominant adventurers in all of the realm hang out in a 'one horse town' when there are much better places for them to be. Do you take offense that you aren't allowed in the really low level dungeons? I mean...you could easily guide them around down there and make sure they don't die. By all rights you should be allowed in them right? I understand it's a town, it just feels silly to me that if I want to find the archmage so and so, the best place to locate him is in the town square of one of the smallest villages in the nation, far from his home or fortress. I go there like everyone else, but I'm also not an epic level character. You can't really act as a guide for them and have them gain any experience, which is a driving need at low levels. I feel that it's important to let low level characters, especially those new to the server, develop -together- with other low level characters. As I said, it's a personal thing. There will not ever be rules to keep epics from lingering about the starting village, so it's a moot point. We are well over a decade into the life of FRC at this point and nothing has changed in regards to greatgaunt, nor will it ever. I respect the fact you personally do not go there and maybe your character will not act as a mentor but please do not lump others in your character's motives. Respect others reasons and do not lump everyone into one category.
I do go there, I don't have any epic level characters. I don't go there every day but I drop in from time to time. My characters motives have 0 to do with it, it's an out of character concern. I also do act as a mentor, I just don't typically do it in greatgaunt. When I post on the forums, unless it's in a designated IC thread, it's not about my characters motivations. I have a firm separation in my mind between out of character and IC. For my character it's awesome that I can hang out in a town square of a tiny village and eventually anyone I want to run into will show up.
|
|
|
Post by Sioladuil on Nov 3, 2019 18:15:26 GMT -5
Just my two cents here...
I think the job of an Evil Guild is to lose. No matter the event, no matter the circumstance the Evil Characters and guild must lose. When they don't lose, it causes all manner of sore feelings and complaints that it is not worth the win.
So interact with the community, interact with the characters and try to stir up intrigue and create fun for other players (Evil players put a lot of work in to intrigue and stories and hooks... to ultimately lose) and accept the fact that the guild will lose. Hopefully the players on the good side of the spectrum will remember that you are here to have fun as well and will alter their own roleplay to allow you to do that, but it rarely does (in my experience).
|
|
|
Post by Church of Bane on Nov 4, 2019 11:22:35 GMT -5
Just my two cents here... I think the job of an Evil Guild is to lose. No matter the event, no matter the circumstance the Evil Characters and guild must lose. When they don't lose, it causes all manner of sore feelings and complaints that it is not worth the win. So interact with the community, interact with the characters and try to stir up intrigue and create fun for other players (Evil players put a lot of work in to intrigue and stories and hooks... to ultimately lose) and accept the fact that the guild will lose. Hopefully the players on the good side of the spectrum will remember that you are here to have fun as well and will alter their own roleplay to allow you to do that, but it rarely does (in my experience). I disagree. If it was our job to “lose” then there would be no point in playing either side. Good should win sometimes, but Evil should also win sometimes. There should always be this push-pull between the two alignment groups. This makes for a fully rounded story where individual player actions matter. If “good” is the side that “always wins” then you take away the agency of the player choices regardless if their character is good or evil.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2019 11:36:58 GMT -5
Just my two cents here... I think the job of an Evil Guild is to lose. No matter the event, no matter the circumstance the Evil Characters and guild must lose. When they don't lose, it causes all manner of sore feelings and complaints that it is not worth the win. So interact with the community, interact with the characters and try to stir up intrigue and create fun for other players (Evil players put a lot of work in to intrigue and stories and hooks... to ultimately lose) and accept the fact that the guild will lose. Hopefully the players on the good side of the spectrum will remember that you are here to have fun as well and will alter their own roleplay to allow you to do that, but it rarely does (in my experience). I disagree. If it was our job to “lose” then there would be no point in playing either side. Good should win sometimes, but Evil should also win sometimes. There should always be this push-pull between the two alignment groups. This makes for a fully rounded story where individual player actions matter. If “good” is the side that “always wins” then you take away the agency of the player choices regardless if their character is good or evil.
I totally approve this message *thumbs up*. Plus playing cat and mice in turns is darn fun I honestly wish people would ditch the whole " I must always win" attitude away and just make cool stories. Atleast to me Evil chars and guilds job is to have fun and create roleplay stories to good guys to react to. That would ofcoarse mean that Good guys understand that if you hang every darn evil person you win, you lose the reasons for your chars to be heroes. So rather than doing ultimates, make minor victories here and there *sage nod*
|
|
|
Post by Sioladuil on Nov 4, 2019 12:00:43 GMT -5
I disagree. If it was our job to “lose” then there would be no point in playing either side. Good should win sometimes, but Evil should also win sometimes. There should always be this push-pull between the two alignment groups. This makes for a fully rounded story where individual player actions matter. If “good” is the side that “always wins” then you take away the agency of the player choices regardless if their character is good or evil.
I totally approve this message *thumbs up*. Plus playing cat and mice in turns is darn fun I honestly wish people would ditch the whole " I must always win" attitude away and just make cool stories. Atleast to me Evil chars and guilds job is to have fun and create roleplay stories to good guys to react to. That would ofcoarse mean that Good guys understand that if you hang every darn evil person you win, you lose the reasons for your chars to be heroes. So rather than doing ultimates, make minor victories here and there *sage nod* You are allowed to disagree, that is the joy of life. I still stand by what I said, however. If you take the overall victories for Good Aligned groups and Evil Aligned groups on FRC over the years... one groups victories far outweighs the other. Hence my opinion. That does not stop me from building an evil guild and creating as much fun and intrigue as I can I am just aware that the guild will usually come out on the loss in the majority of server wide events.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2019 12:19:10 GMT -5
These events you speak of do not have to be PvP events, with one side 'winning' at the expense of some other guild. Never in my history of PnP adventuring, as either player or DM, was D&D considered as a competitive game. There can be PvE events for evil players, just like there are for good ones.
If we stop trying to create some sort of 'D&D/Call of Duty' hybrid game, then these conflicts of interest can just fall away.
|
|
|
Post by Sioladuil on Nov 4, 2019 12:20:57 GMT -5
These events you speak of do not have to be PvP events, with one side 'winning' at the expense of some other guild. Never in my history of PnP adventuring, as either player or DM, was D&D considered as a competitive game. There can be PvE events for evil players, just like there are for good ones. If we stop trying to create some sort of 'D&D/Call of Duty' hybrid game, then these conflicts of interest can just fall away. I am quite aware of that... I actively avoid PVP as best I can. I refer to server wide events, that involve all, not just single faction events.
|
|
|
Post by Sioladuil on Nov 4, 2019 12:39:35 GMT -5
There is more than one type of victory. PVP is one kind. These events have all different outcomes and happenings outside of PVP, as any well run event does. There is always stuff going on behind the scenes you might not even see.
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Nov 4, 2019 16:24:07 GMT -5
I think “winning vs. losing” is a very complex matter. The original DND books defined “winning” as “having fun,” and said on that basis in so many words that you can therefore “win” even if your character dies. I think the most badass *players* of evil PC’s have been those who did their evil deeds, and when their character had their comeuppance, hammed it up even harder, reveled in the moment, did something bad@$$ in the moment, and went out in a blaze of glory to be remembered. I’ve heard of characters who got in a last lick for hp damage against the onlookers from the chopping block, and were never anything but a great sport about it. I think that’s both classy, and also supremely bad@$$, exactly the kind of person I want to play with as an ally or enemy in game.
“Winning” in game can be short term or long term, momentary or lasting. The episode is over when you draw a line in your own mind and say, “This is the end of the episode,” and start another. I’ve had a character of mine persist on an episode for many years, long after her IC enemy probably thought they won. The difference between a setback and a defeat is whether or not you call it an episode, roll the credits, and quit.
I do think, though, that it’s the nature of the genre to expect villainous victories to be setbacks along the way to the hero(es)’ victory at the end. In gothic horror like Ravenloft, you expect tragedies and a final downfall for everyone. In comedy, maybe nobody really dies, and the results of falling of a cliff are cartoonish. In high fantasy, it’s not 100%, and no one is obligated to play to follow a trope, but it’s kind of the expectation of the genre that the bad guys do some evil things, and then the audience feels satisfied when they take a tumble in the end. The basic formula is, “How and why the hero kicked the villain’s butt in the end.” Good and evil are in no way on equal footing from a story writing standpoint, and I’d question my own moral judgment IRL if I didn’t get that. That doesn’t mean evil should have a game mechanical disadvantage, or that the good guys should have the DM’s favor, or anything else it doesn’t mean. But so far as why people would want the good guys to win in the end, “The bullies beat everybody up forever, and everyone lived miserably ever after” doesn’t quite have the same box office appeal as a story ending.
|
|
|
Post by Masterbard Alyster Darkharp on Nov 4, 2019 19:29:02 GMT -5
I think “winning vs. losing” is a very complex matter. The original DND books defined “winning” as “having fun,” and said on that basis in so many words that you can therefore “win” even if your character dies. I think the most badass *players* of evil PC’s have been those who did their evil deeds, and when their character had their comeuppance, hammed it up even harder, reveled in the moment, did something bad@$$ in the moment, and went out in a blaze of glory to be remembered. I’ve heard of characters who got in a last lick for hp damage against the onlookers from the chopping block, and were never anything but a great sport about it. I think that’s both classy, and also supremely bad@$$, exactly the kind of person I want to play with as an ally or enemy in game. “Winning” in game can be short term or long term, momentary or lasting. The episode is over when you draw a line in your own mind and say, “This is the end of the episode,” and start another. I’ve had a character of mine persist on an episode for many years, long after her IC enemy probably thought they won. The difference between a setback and a defeat is whether or not you call it an episode, roll the credits, and quit. I do think, though, that it’s the nature of the genre to expect villainous victories to be setbacks along the way to the hero(es)’ victory at the end. In gothic horror like Ravenloft, you expect tragedies and a final downfall for everyone. In comedy, maybe nobody really dies, and the results of falling of a cliff are cartoonish. In high fantasy, it’s not 100%, and no one is obligated to play to follow a trope, but it’s kind of the expectation of the genre that the bad guys do some evil things, and then the audience feels satisfied when they take a tumble in the end. The basic formula is, “How and why the hero kicked the villain’s butt in the end.” Good and evil are in no way on equal footing from a story writing standpoint, and I’d question my own moral judgment IRL if I didn’t get that. That doesn’t mean evil should have a game mechanical disadvantage, or that the good guys should have the DM’s favor, or anything else it doesn’t mean. But so far as why people would want the good guys to win in the end, “The bullies beat everybody up forever, and everyone lived miserably ever after” doesn’t quite have the same box office appeal as a story ending. Well said. Winning and losing is sometimes in the eye of the beholder. I have played a character for a long time now that began as true neutral, and later through DM alignment adjustments for actions taken 'for the greater good' shifted him to neutral evil, where he today remains. I think the day I shift back to true neutral will be a serious win for him. I feel that it should have probably happened years ago truthfully, but when it happens it happens. I try to play my character as he is, without conforming to what is on the alignment entry on the sheet.
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Nov 4, 2019 21:09:23 GMT -5
I still stand by what I said, however. If you take the overall victories for Good Aligned groups and Evil Aligned groups on FRC over the years... one groups victories far outweighs the other. Hence my opinion. That does not stop me from building an evil guild and creating as much fun and intrigue as I can I am just aware that the guild will usually come out on the loss in the majority of server wide events. I understand your opinion, but may I ask: "Why are you counting?" Honestly, from my point of view, the one big PVP event I have been in was a loss for me. The player. I have remained silent for too long on this, and won't any further. I will try to use my example to further conversation on this subject. That was the Zorastryl event, and I will try to keep this focused on the "good vs evil" pov mentioned so far. If you were to simply watch the event unfold, and disregard what is on someone's character sheet, from an outsider's point of view those with Team Marister were not acting "good" at all. They rode in, pillaged, and slaughtered any who got in their way with no quarter given. Whereas those on the side of Team Mathias were on the defensive. Did anyone on the Marister side of things wish to reach out and offer a peaceful resolution to the overall problem at hand? No. Did they even try to determine why some adventurers sided against Marister? Again, no. So who was evil here? It definitely doesn't seem like Team Mathias was evil. They weren't the ones trying to raid, and conquer. Also good vs evil isn't you vs monsters. If you want that there are plenty of places where "good wins". World of Warcraft is a perfect example where $15/month provide you access to where a company gives you things (loot, gear) to "keep winning". Even after the battle ended the trial was filled with characters who were on Marister's side thirsty for blood, slaughter, and vengeance. How is that GOOD? That's mob mentality, and you never see "Lawful Good" or "Chaotic Good" mobs. Even in the realm of evil there are differences: An Ogre tribe, or a group of Ettins are more along the lines of "evil" in the Evil as monsters sense, but when characters who side with "good" treat the evil Malarite Druid the same way as they would treat an Ogre then I, as a player, have to ask why that would happen? You see we're here to create a story. When I joined this server near it's beginnings, and when I came back last year, developing a story is -exactly- what I wanted to do. Statements such as "evil should lose / good should always win" comes off as entitled, and honestly (to me) is not in the spirit of FRC's place among all the places to game out there on the internet. This should be a place for everyone to play, and this goes both ways, but please keep in mind that evil should not be painted with a broad brush. You might color people who aren't good or evil at all, and that takes away from their story. ROLE play more. ROLL play less. -fin
|
|
|
Post by Warlord on Nov 4, 2019 21:31:46 GMT -5
When do I get to read discussions about Law vs Chaos?
|
|
|
Post by hellscream123 on Nov 4, 2019 22:16:28 GMT -5
Sure, team matthias looked "good" but that raises an importamt note upon the face of evil. Appearence lasts longer than fact. Since the battle there as been swathes more happen than what began the conflict which has explained a great deal. But the appearence of good and evil remains a hard flux state for many characters.
To such an end i proport thw following advice: try not to appear to be evil. For to do so such paint a side far longer than any internal truth that may be held. The IC rumour mill is the best example of this fact.
The "most sucsessful" evils. C. Evil that has had a hand in the shaping of events and the realm at large. Was not evil whos appearence could be cited aa a reason to stop them. Dark hooded broody spooks is litteraly the appearence of multiplw dungeon mobs. Naturally looking thusly will cause the same kick so to speak.
Hide in plain sight, act in private, tip the scales only so slightly. Because indeed cormyr is a land of good, where good os favoured. Evil must ergo be corrupting, subtle, twisting and manipulative of appearence. For the momwnt you are known evil. You wont be unknown as it. I can reference a dozem characters whom this applies whom flatly can no longer hide their moral plans.
On the note of law V Chaos, chaos plus evil tends to function best in the hands of DMs and their monsters. Law is a realm infinately vexing upon morality ans working it to gain should be ones preffered. Lest you just become a no good darn outlaw. Forced forever outside societies good will for your crimes, justified acts or otherwise what you appear to be will weigh far more.
Side note: the zorastryl battle was an ooc mess for all involved due to lag, drop outs and a cascade of hiccups and does not serve as a very good example of the ideal events of Good V Evil on the server. The task force dance after it has been a far better example: when good and evil are forced be besides each other and decide what and how to do. Conflict of interests, morllity fights and discussions of just followed rife in some very fun character drama.
Fun is winning. D&d sucks at pvp. Appearences matter more than explanations. TLDR and 2 cents away!
|
|