Hah! What I think Kranium means, is that she wants relevant evil. Smart, in that it makes sense to the server atmosphere, and has greater/different ambitions than PvP.

All of which, I would welcome her to repost succinctly in the new thread I made. I largely agree, myself.

I don't know that I agree that a concept needs as long a time as Barak Runedar to be on a footing that it can provide legitimate conflict to it. I think with careful planning and DM cooperation in the planning stage, it can start slow still (Small murders for mysterious reasons, perhaps), it can be effective. I think we're disagreeing on something we agree about.

I wouldn't want to see a new Banite cell rise, get unfair boosts in the creation of a fortress. Even if they had a set deadline. But the reasons why we agree on this are different, I think. I believe that a concept can be created that makes sense for Amia as an island, and if it does, it can and should be assisted by DM's. Something as overt as a castle of evil doesn't fit in our (You and I) perception as quality conflict, thankfully. As long as this new conflict is made with respect to other player's accomplishments, it should be fine. Even if it gets extra help.

I completely agree, DMs should support innovation rather than another big bad overt group that gets support without putting in teh work. (Not saying that it's happened, just saying. If people put in the work and effort, ofcourse they should get love too.) And credit should be given to players on both sides of the good/evil axis for the hard work they put into it all. Without their work, the server would be a dull monotone place indeed.

As for "dumb" evil, I'm still a fan of evil groups using gurellia tactics to instill fear like the Banites did under Darthy's leadership in the first and second banite war. Their biggest mistake was making a base of operation to strike at, because until that point, everyone was pretty scared of when and where they'd strike, and the inability to counter attack. I like that sort of evil, as long as it doesn't just become about power builds and pvp but generates interresting RP in the process. Heck, when push comes to shove, I don't care abotu the build part either really.. a small group that's properly prepeared should always come out on top if they use tactics well enough. My Eilistraeean proved that way back when he was alone against a bunch of them and had traps set -everywhere-.

Let's all be honest.. RP thrives on conflict. As long as it's IC conflict and not OOC. Constructive conflict if you'd like.

_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer

I wasn't going to say anything, but I'll offer my opinion and try to help. I think you're going to find it difficult to motivate serious, dedicated players who put in a lot of work and in-depth background for each of their characters and make real plans, when you give them an expiration date on their efforts. If you put a deadline and tell them 'you're good for a month, then we want you gone' the long term lack of evil still isn't fixed, the effort seems unappreciated, and the players are going to ask 'why am I bothering' from the start and during. Questions I remember asking myself. So that's not the right way to go about things, in my opinion. The DM Team needs to dedicate one or recruit a new DM for the sole purpose of following a dedicated Evil faction providing support, even if they just get a trainee it'd be an easy job, and make a permanent interactive evil presence on the server, an actual foothold for once, that isn't temporary and subject to deletion on a whim.

I agree. That's why I considered the deadline request choice to be an optional approach. Something you could pursue if you wanted.

For example, a group that enjoys creating faster conflict can apply, work with DM's, and receive a deadline. In exchange for a decidedly finite concept, they receive additional and expedited (While still within reason) resources.

A group that prefers to make conflict and survive afterwards, or someone looking to make a settlement, or something long-lasting to an effect similar to Tarkuul, they shouldn't pursue this route, and should instead simply play normally. After a time, they'll be receiving DM attention just like every other developed faction. It will just take longer-- and the reward is that they can make a lasting impact. This option is what is already available to players.

The rewards of both options are inherently different. There are players who will find one option more appealing than the other.

The reason a smaller group is able to defeat a larger one is because of a massive difference in mechanical ability and mindset. This goes beyond just builds and into the domain of practiced PvP skill, awareness, counter-awareness and so on. These are things that certain evil groups have honed after being crushed time and time again. So with that said, a group of people with comparatively little combat experience is very likely to be defeated by a group that has put in a lot of hard work and dedication in order to gain every possible edge. This is all of course coming from my own experience, seeing as though I have been part of this type of evil for a good while now.

I really like the thieves' guild idea Hackums mentioned earlier. Thievery is currently limited to mugging people on the roads, as players carry all their valuables on their person. This means that you can't be a nonviolent criminal, because your target will more likely than not initiate PvP rather than hand over their money in fear. There's pickpocketing, but that has such massive skill requirements and extreme penalties for failing that there really isn't much point. Beyond that, your only options come from the job system, which has precisely zero impact on other players, so that's a dud. Which is bad, because theft should not be less common than murder.

With that in mind, DMs giving players the opportunity to rob a faction without having to overcome the (by now significantly powerful) guards directly would be a godsend, and would allow Evil to hurt Good without everything boiling down to a killing spree.

_________________
Currently playing:
Aven Brinyflask
Safaya Dalai
Riyit
Chsera Hile

(Credits to Raua for the sprite, sauce -here-.)

The whole thievery thing is something I've entertained with the evil character I mentioned. However it's difficult to do that sort of thing when the first mindset of goodie players is to kill. I've seen it, having played good/neutral/evil characters. You can't seem to have real PC/PC crime RP because everyone wants to kil/maim/destroy the offender. It's hard.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Please, please, please, read what I write. Read it once, read it twice, read it thrice before answering and make sure you didn't skip lines or focus excessively on examples.

Answer to Kranium's answer to my answer:

#1 My mistake. Replace "kickstarted" with supported. Playing on the evil team is noticeably tougher than playing on the good/neutral teams, considering that everyone and their mothers will constantly try to kill you. Thus, proper DM care. If you think people who worked hard about building a faction would be offended... well. Let's just say I did for a very very long time, yet here I am, asking boons for evil PCs and factions, thus disproving this point. It's obvious that this would be an edge to allow them to stand their ground, not being babysat or magically granted everything they want.

Let's proceed to

#2 Too much gold is an issue that has been addressed in the past. Aside from this, it doesn't have to be gold. It could be a ritual lasting days, or having to undergo a dangerous quest to get the reagents necessary to use the consequences-erasing tool (tm). It could be anything, but the point is making them less available as they make consequences absolutely weightless.

Perma: I've been in places where perma was enforceable. None of the deaths I've seen inflicted (which happened once in a blue moon by the way) stemmed from direct pvp. Explain the logical reasons why penalties (which, if you had read better, were in this case referred to ROLEPLAY situations. Not even death. Even less so PVP) would inevitably lead to pvp, because in my experience it does not. Of course this heavily relies on the players. If I can simply emote gutting you while you're sleeping and abide to the rule of "it seems realistic" then there is a certain sense of balance that is situational rather than build-specific. If it's based on mechanical killing, then we have a problem. And this problem actually relies on player attitude.

This said, I DO THINK THAT ENFORCED PERMA IS NOT A GOOD IDEA, BARRING EXTREMELY LONG AND STALE CONFLICT. Consequences are.

#3 "It's a terrible attitude to think harassment to the point people give up playing a char". So you're telling me that people are only here to play a character that wins all the time? That's the prime definition of a Mary Sue. If not of an Author Avatar. And that, my friend, is not (good?) roleplay.

Xaviera: I've suggested handicaps also stemming from other sources than mechanical ones, because I'm raking my brain to try and find a way for characters to make an impact in conflict without ending another player's character. I wholeheartedly agree that mechanics are horrible, but I still think that "fighting" is the bread and butter of the adventurer. Be it fighting evil bandits in the woods or being gnawed on by horrifying creatures.

As for making resurrection and raise less available (not unavailable, mind) I have two objections. First is: how much does it take for a level one character to reach level 30? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the vast majority of characters on Amia are either capped or hit the 30 mark so quickly that being non-epic is at best a temporary state. Second is: the biggest problem with those spells isn't their availability in PVE. I'd be perfectly alright with selling to lowbies salts to make someone who fainted (read, died) wake up. The true problem is that bringing someone back from the dead isn't considered a one-time miracle, but something as simple as reading a scroll and as cheap as purchasing a bagel.

I believe that when these spells were originally devised, they were intended as a high-end sort of ritual. That is, very expensive and with rare components, making it a quest to find someone capable of reviving a fallen companion and so on. While I understand (and love) Amia being such a high-magic setting, the immediate availability of these (and perhaps other as well) spells makes it pointless to damage or be damaged in the first place. Please note that I lament this while being usually on the side that is being punched, as in my humble opinion a character that never risks death or failure is at the same time one whose achievements simply do not matter.

Also, agreed with what Yossarin said. It can also be brute evil with snot dripping down its nose. Heck, that's the standard definition of a D&D monster.

Also support the "mugging" idea, as long as it's not DC items.

+2
I have relatively little experience myself, but when you have people trying to use death magic on constructs and undead, you know experience plays a huge part of this. And yes, it's happened. More than once.

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?

Those roleplayers that get 'stomped all over' are the very same ones that assemble large groups and try to solve everything through sheer brute force, thus the need for evil to be strong enough to withstand such things. In my experience, most encounters leave no choice but PvP; good will simply state their demands in black and white, leaving combat as the most likely outcome. Believe me, I'm all for roleplaying and would take roleplayed conflict over mechanical combat in nearly every case. Still, given the way things are, I'm going to continue taking as many steps as possible to be mechanically strong in every aspect of the game.

If the problem connected to death lies in pvp, do not kill people via pvp. Kill them via roleplay circumstances and rolls. This is entirely possible, I've seen it before and worked wonders, as you could steal people's purses by telling others a sob story and kissing them... while your accomplice shoved their hands in their purses. Or you could trick your enemy into turning his or her back and stab them. Surprise people without armor while they were sleeping. Trick them into letting you hold their sword and then threatening them with it. Luring them into a house full of assassins, locking a door and throwing poison in and more. It was possible to fight via counter-rolls, but they exclusively relied on ability roll vs ability roll. Or AB vs AC, in a place where the gap ranged between 3 and 5 points. Or roll x versus a DC they both agreed upon, but again... this would be entirely up to the players.

I have always tried to avoid the deaths of others. It's far more preferable to play it as people being knocked out and the like, thus allowing all sorts of interesting avenues for storytelling after a fight. I don't get why some people have it stuck in their heads that you need to deal with a problem by obliterating it totally. As an example, the last time my character was defeated they were then immediately beheaded, reduced to ash and so on and so forth. And that isn't an outlier, that's the way it usually goes. Permadeath sucks. It doesn't (usually!) help create any kind of advancing story. Regardless of how PvP goes, I think it would be great if this was something people could keep in mind.

I'm personally all in favour of penalties. I think they might shift some of the emphasis away from combat (or at least the sort where a PC is raised and jumps right back into the fray) and toward strategy, tactics and working together. I've advocated for temporary post-death handicaps previously (on a time scale of RL days) and I may very well be the first person on the server to actually request penalties for aging.

I agree that fighting is generally what adventurers are all about. You've heard the expression 'if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail'? To adventurers, every situation tends to look like it can be resolved by combat. D&D and NWN are what they are because they're built on the heroic fantasy model of the lone fighter mowing down orcs by the hundreds with barely a scratch. The game is built on skills that are ultimately selected for their usefulness in combat and, all things being equal, a higher level character is stronger than a lower level and can get more goodies, so building a 'good' character is often about min-maxing, the race to epic status and acquiring ever bigger hammers. A consequence, with the compressed time scale of D&D/NWN, is that gaining a full complement of high-level spells is simply a matter of resting for 30 sec every 15 min or so. That's all there is to it.

In a high-magic setting built around wading back into the fray after being incinerated as if nothing had happened, there has to be a deliberate shift in both mindset and mechanics (because some people will just say screw the mindset) if we want to move things away from combat. This has to be facilitated by the DMs and how they RP the world the PCs are moving around in. PCs who speak with their swords while in town may find themselves squeezed out of ever more settlements as their reputations as troublemakers grow*. Repeated pitched battles between opposing forces will inflict long-term disabilities on the players, forcing them to rely less on combat and more on winning the hearts and minds of the people (or corrupting them) without alienating them. It might also slow down the race to epic levels. It might also lead people to emphasis RP defeats rather than mechanical PvP.

My point is that the world as it exists has a built-in bias toward epic combat and, until that changes, plots will tend to be 'resolved', in the end, by epic combat. This effectively puts long-term plots in the position of being brought to an end by a roll of the dice - and, since there's a decided bias on the server toward Good**, it means that Evil will generally lose out.


* Cordor tried this several RL years back, but it didn't really work because, aside from getting hassled occasionally by DM NPCs, there were no serious consequences to PCs. Just a thought - assigning a general reputation penalty based on level might give lower-levels some advantage and make the high-levels have to work harder at PR. Having those epics around your town can be dangerous, even if they're supposedly on your side.

** This isn't necessarily a bad thing - nobody wants a lawless environment where griefing under the guise of 'chaotic stupid' reigns supreme - but player actions need to be situated in the context of the whole world and the people in it, and there must be repercussions beyond simply losing a fight.

_________________

~Sharess on AmiaWiki~
Priestess, politician, prostitute
"[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt
AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)

Agreed and agreed. I still believe that bringing back in auge self-inflicting consequences and an open mentality for roleplay fights, loss and not killing your opponent right away (You're a drow, or a paladin fighting evil? You left them for dead. They miraculously managed to crawl away on their broken fingers after you "killed" them. You tied them and you're bringing them to your city of good goodliness, but you'll allow them a luck roll to see if they can cut the rope and run for the hills... there's always a way, doesn't need to be something character-breaking).

The biggest problem I see with excessive healing/raise dead/remove curse/wish/restoration/etc is that even if you WANT to have your character slip into a coma, if you WANT your character to gimp back to town with a mangled limb, if you WANT a scar, sure as hell someone will ICly ask you why you don't just gulp a potion down. And aside from "I like pain" or "there's OGM in healing potions", it's really hard to find an excuse.

Edit: there's a possible fix to having goody two shoes swarming you. That fix being guilt tripping your victimes or threatening to harm their loved one/puppy/bottled companion/friends or to come back and whack their ass if they'll tell anyone what just happened. It kind of works.

Edit 2: Also, grief, loss and consequences are absolutely possible in epic settings. Think about Dragonlance. Think about Sith and Jedi. What kind of story would it be if they had just gone "lol jk, we'll just cast a restoration on you and raise Padme, Anakin"?

Spot on. About the threatening thing, that's always great when it works out, though more and more lately it's become the case that you make said threats and are met with the same response regardless of how wickedly wicked said threats are. That response is usually something to the tune of good assembling the avengers and coming to deliver an ultimatum.

On a similar note, at one point my character made a mean off-hand comment to a passerby. That same passerby promptly went off, only to return with a cadre of others, all buffed to the hilt and clearly displaying a willingness to fight. Just for a snide comment! And that's the general level of aggression I've come to expect will happen in most circumstances, regardless of any roleplayed threats and dark plots one might happen to conceive.

It's a hilarious issue my friend's character Marquel has. She has two missing legs and on a few occasions has been asked "Why not ask someone to cast regeneration on you?"

_________________

This just in: Heal potions cause autism.

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

Same for conjuring elaborate and twisted answers to "healing" a gimp leg. I fully support spreading the IG misconception that excessive healing will somehow hurt you in the long run

To 2star. It's perfectly logical that adventurers who tackled dragons with their bare hands and shook hands with jergal wouldn't take random thugs too seriously. Not right away. RP shiv'em. Shiv'em good.

Edit again, my hands won't stop moving! - If you know that goody goody characters are going to come back to kill you, swarming is indeed a legit tactic in real life. Running away and doing the same with your evil buddies is just as acceptable even for an evil knight, as the enemy is clearly playing dirty. Run, note down their faces, and pick them one by one (and if they will laugh at you for being a coward, you get brownie point for saying they're the one bleeding on the floor, and poking them with a sharp object while asking them to "tell you more").

Kamina, I once tried to offer a possible explanation of that on the forums somewhere. It was very non-canon and thus made those arguing for the server to stay "closer to canon" fly into a nerd rage, but in the interests of preserving a player's ability to be wounded or maimed or deformed in some way, it seemed to offer them something.

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?

If this can somehow comfort evil players, this is the most accurate depiction of what sometimes happens on the other side:

I just wouldn't count on the drow or Tarkuul for Conflict RP, which is probably the "evil" that people are looking for.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

I often RP my character moving slowly and awkwardly and wincing in pain as a result of decades of being stomped on, blown up, thrown down, battered, bitten and beaten. Still, as much as I want to RP that, in the heat of a fight I'm not going to be concentrating on emoting it, or even pulling my punches in any way (and I rather doubt anyone else is either). This is all part of the reason that I've requested aging penalties - even if I want to click the other side of the map and run there at full speed, the body won't be able to respond at peak effectiveness. And the need to remain at peak effectiveness is where a combat culture gets you. That's why characters have 6 Int and 6 Cha and 'stunningly beautiful' in their bio. That's why someone will pay millions in an auction for that piece of epic gear that gives them +1 AC or +1 AB or +5 on a skill check. Some people will try and fight the system for better RP, but it's difficult to not use what the system gives you. Give people disabilities and they may actually RP them, but even if they don't RP them they still have them.

_________________

~Sharess on AmiaWiki~
Priestess, politician, prostitute
"[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt
AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)

I also do my best to RP the extended and persistant injuries physical, mental and psychological which can be a challenge.

This is something I've been doing secretly for a long time, lore be damned! I don't give two tweets about Lore (yes, with a capital L) if it doesn't behove my style of RP. Naturally though, instead of threatening to break a rule (of which I don't know because I'm too lazy to read law), I make up stories and explanations to skirt it! You can do this quite laissez-faire, it's never gotten me in any trouble at least. When someone insists on reading out of the textbook, just give him his candy and move on. They'll be pleased for a while.

_________________
Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill
All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person
I know you heard this and probably in fear
-Kendrick Lamar, good kid

I dislike this train of thought because soon we're going to abandon all canon and just say, oh, I'm a palemaster because somebody burned my arm. So now I have a skeleton arm. And... Undead powers. Yeah.

I also don't think hyper-canon or hyper-lore is the best way to go either. There can be multiple ways of achieving a goal and multiple results of achieving that goal, but I don't think absolutely forsaking D&D and Forgotten Realms to make your story is a good idea in a FR campaign setting D&D roleplaying server. Try to find a happy medium between creativity and consistency is all I'm asking. Not pointing fingers, just responding to the notion that "canon is bad".

_________________
Osiris Masud

luckily we can call bs on things people say icly and grind thier bone arms to dust anyway

_________________
-Ja'acira Arrows'R'Us
-Balorin Wolfhammer- A dwarf so old he remember when the Beer stein was invented
Saisha Jai'diem Knight of bahamut, and abit of a looker

I am nowhere near certain of whether I am trudging all over Yossarin's aforementioned past suggestion, but the way Faerun operates allows for a relatively easy method of preventing 'instant recovery' via magical means, at least in the case of divine magic. As I don't recall seeing regenerate and resurrection on the wizard's spellbook, I believe an assumption can be made that clerical (and druidic) powers are the worst violators of common sense if we view the world in terms that game mechanics provide. Namely, if even the lowliest acolyte (1st level cleric) can do things like heal even the most grievous injury -- at the least, on a commoner who has at most 8 hit points -- and make even sewer water and rotting offal perfectly safe to consume, why are there hospitals or world hunger? It should be a simple matter of lining up outside a temple of Ilmater or what have you a few times per day and receiving your meal of partially-gnawed sewer rat and purified ogre urine. It isn't pretty, but if you can't afford to buy food, it will keep you alive.

This is to say nothing of the things high-level priests can do that I can say with absolutely no hyperbole would tip the entirety of the world on its head if they were available on planet Earth. Things such as:

• Cure Diseases
• Cure Blindness and Deafness
• Restore lost ability scores (if you don't think this is impressive, consider what muscle atrophy and brain damage would be mechanically represented as)
• Instantaneous and untraceable communication, which as a fan of science makes me tingly, and would probably make a military general as giddy as a nine-year-old with a lifetime's supply of candy
• Telling the law of conservation of mass to go jump off the nearest cliff
• Instantaneous treatment of severe mental conditions/deterioration (everyone seems to forget about this function of the spell...)
• Again, raising people from the dead

And those are the cleric spells that aren't flashy. But this then raises the question of how the entire planet hasn't become a utopia yet (aside from the developers of the magic system not entirely thinking some of this through, a possibility I will be ignoring for the moment).

The simplest answer is in the lore. Every instance of divine magic, no matter how small, is drawing power from the priest's patron god. Ironically, if we accept spells as a modification of expended energy, the law of conservation of energy is upheld perfectly by divine casters; they aren't drawing from their own stores to do all of this, they are quite literally begging (or 'praying', if you prefer) to use the abilities of ultrapowerful beings to accomplish what they like.

To demonstrate what this might look like, picture yourself as a despot. It doesn't apply to every god, not even close, but it will do for now. You rule a country with technology so advanced, you could obliterate every planet in our solar system, including yours, thrice over. However, as absolute ruler, nobody can so much as pull a switch without your say-so. Then one of your most trusted scientists (as any scientist with access to your tech needs to have explicit approval from you to breathe on the aforementioned switches) walks up to you and says, "M'lord, I want to use a regenerative matrix to regrow the arm of some random schmuck who lost it in a battle he chose to fight because...erm...because...reasons?"

Oh, and did I mention that every time you allow the use of your tech, you lose a day of your lifespan?

I don't know about you, but I would tell him to get the hells out of my throne room so I could go back to playing solitaire with literal asteroids.

What it comes down to is permission and need. Gods have vast reserves, yes, but granting spells is still costly, especially very powerful ones. Mind you, in this case I would classify literally anything more powerful than an orison to be 'very powerful', but for Amia you at least have to earn spells of 3rd level or higher, for example. As a cleric, you are a conduit, not a generator, and any spells you cast need to have the unambiguous approval of your god, which is why falling is not a slap on the wrist. Clerics have full reign to cast spells on themselves (because, as I mentioned in my metaphor, just being a cleric is enough to say that the god in question trusts that every spell for personal use has merit) and hunting companions (because they improve your immediate chances of survival). Anything else? Needs to be an exceptional circumstance, to say the least.

Healing the wounds of someone you met off the street? You don't know who they are or how they got them. They could have just finished slaughtering a room full of greengrocers for all you, and probably your god, know. The god expects you to take this into account and use the powers given to you wisely, which incidentally tends to be a strangely high ability score for divine casters.

As an extension of this, if you are asking for a spell from a cleric and their deity is drastically opposed to who you are, you should be fresh out of luck unless the spell is a blade barrier. We somewhat represent this with the unspoken mechanic that you have to notify someone you're raising of your alignment and deity (even though I am fairly certain few use this 'rule' and not everyone even knows it exists), but it should work both ways. Unless the cleric can wholly justify the act, a priest of Torm should not be raising a rogue of Cyric. Tyr's boon of a bless spell should fail to affect the Banite in the room.

Now, these are imperfect examples, and I don't expect them to be adhered to, not the least because it would require giving any cleric a free pass to OOCly know the deity and alignment of everyone they cast a spell on. Thus, I would institute a clause stating that the cleric has to actually know of the recipient's disposition in order for the god to deny them, and a second clause stating that unless proven otherwise, total strangers are treated as non-crucial, True Neutral faithless beings. A paladin of Salandra can easily get away with healing everyone like this that they see (to a point), but a Lolthite priestess, not so much.

I haven't touched on as much as I'd like to, but this part of the post is long enough already, so I'll post a TL;DR and move on.

TRANSLATE YOUR RAMBLINGS CONCISELY, OVERNEATH:

• A cleric needs a damned good reason to expend divine power on anybody
• The god needs to approve of the act
• Divine opposition should be treated with great care
• Strangers should be treated as non-hostile, but also non-essential, to most priests
• For particularly powerful spells, a recipient needs to prove themselves worthy, or they're out of luck (this is the crux of my post, essentially)

And yet, surprisingly, I'm not finished! Let's talk about Band-Aids.

This is for those concerned about how common healing potions are. Raise Dead scrolls are in the same vein. These items can be used by anybody and seem to make all injury and death trivial. And, on the surface, they do.

Except that, if we accept my above arguments, you need to ask a crucial question. Where is this absolutely divine (again, these spells aren't on a wizard spell list, folks*) power coming from? The short and easy answer is...it isn't. Or, at least, that would be short and easy if we choose to implement it that way. Describing what happens if this isn't the case is quick, so I'll do that first.

* - Yes, I know bards can cast healing spells, but that's a whole other bag of fish.

If every healing potion and raise dead scroll you use is bound to a deity because it's divine magic, you are ten kinds of screwed and so is anyone you're trying to raised unless you have an obscene Use Magic Device skill or are very judicious with your methods of shopping. The reasons are twofold: A) the power is ostensibly coming from the god of the priest who made the item, meaning you answer to them just as much as the cleric in question would, or at the very least if it was the cleric using the spell on you, and B) that deity is going to be an (ironically ungodly) level of pissed off that some nobody is trying to channel divine magic as though they're part of the priesthood. For every potion of heal you drink, Waukeen or somebody should be throwing lightning bolts at you for wasting their power (with a 6th level spell!!!) without being a clergyman.

All right, so that explanation makes little sense given how we all roleplay these items. Which means that healing objects and raise dead scrolls are, surprise, exactly what it says on the tin: magic items. Just like a wand of missiles or boots of speed, the power comes from the item, not an external source. This means that anyone can use them, hooray!

But it also means that the spells are necessarily less powerful than if they were coming from the real thing. Don't mistake me: potions should do exactly what their mechanical representations do. They heal injuries. However...that is all they do. Specialized divine magic knits flesh, repairs muscle, resets bone, restores organ functionality and a host of other things with one casting. If you have a limited amount of magical energy to expend (because, again, a god is not involved), you simply can't do all of that. The item needs to have a specific function, and in this case, that is to get you ambulatory, not in perfect condition.

If seeing a real cleric is like getting advanced surgery from someone with an M.D., then drinking a healing potion is like applying a Band-Aid and walking it off. You can live to fight another day and, presumably, perform at your maximum efficacy for a time. But it's just a patch. Crippled in combat? Potions dull the effects, but until you treat it properly, you will retain that limp. Brain damage from a concussion? Those cells are being held together for now, but when you get back to town you'll either need a restoration or a coloring book. Disembowelment? Why, what a neat segue into my next point!

I think a crucial issue with the apparent power of healing and raising items is how we treat them in-game. This may sound absurd, and it is, to a degree, but literal miracles should not be something you can buy at the corner store. And yet, if we didn't have them, hunting becomes a nightmare unless everyone takes at least 9 cleric levels.

Our solution here shouldn't be looking at changing the IC use of potions and scrolls. At least, not entirely. It's fighting monsters that raises the problem. In CvC, you and your attacker can agree on whether a final blow kills you, knocks you unconscious, or what have you. In CvE, you don't have that luxury, and the assumption is always that 'dying' is actual, literal death.

Well, says who?

We're dealing with Player Characters, here. The very definition of extraordinary. If my PC can bend space and time into a Möbius strip (kudos to anyone who gets that reference), call down fire from the sky, kill a creature ten times his size with a single hit, or disappear into a shadow like dust in the wind, I say that I get to choose whether or not that Blood Moon Orc decapitated me, or got in a lucky strike with the blunt side of his axe, knocked me down, and ran off to engage my companions. Or, in the case of soloing/TPK, simply assumes I am dead and leaves me there to awaken and find my own way off.

This being the case of standard procedure, the biggest point of contention in a Raise Dead scroll becomes less an implement of miraculous resurrection and actually becomes something much more reasonable: a resuscitation device. A magic spell, simple enough for anyone to use, that forces an unconscious compatriot to get up and continue the fight.

TRANSLATE YOUR RAMBLINGS CONCISELY, OVERNEATH...AGAIN:

• Stop treating healing items like actual gifts from the gods and more like immediate patches that are temporarily effective, but don't keep you on your feet consequence-free like the real thing
• CvE shouldn't be absolute life-or-death, but instead a definite challenge that doesn't mean you need a miracle to bounce back from it
• In relation to the above, Raise Dead scrolls (scrolls, mind you, not the spell) awaken characters from unconsciousness, instead of bringing them back from the dead

But wait! There is more! Don't worry, this parting word is shorter than the novel above, I promise.

Here's the beauty of playing on a server where roleplay, ideally, dictates our experience, and perception can dictate our roleplay: you don't have to do any of this. By all means, ignore this post and continue as you were! I can't fault you for it, and it's your right as a player to do so. And if you want the mechanics to make more sense, you still don't have to use my verbatim suggestions to direct how you play these things off. The most important part is that you reach a consensus on how you and your character treat these matters, and in cases where assumptions might clash, make sure the individual players reach an agreement.

And if a player feels slighted that you choose to play off their attempt to use divine magic you relieve you of a condition that could potentially massively impact your roleplay (again, if you so choose to maintain that facet) with a one-second fix and you say quite rightfully that, in your case, it just doesn't work? Well allow me to shed a solitary and very sarcastic tear for them.

For most people, who I'm sure have been blinded by the sheer amount of text here long before now, the post ends. Below are some minor stream-of-consciousness points that I felt I wanted to bring up. Read them if you wish, and if not, adieu and thank you for taking the time to read my post.


It occurs to me that someone using the 'CvE lite' individual ruleset might see the Fugue Plane as disingenuous to the whole concept. To which I say...yes, actually, that's a valid point. You're 'knocked unconscious' but somehow get to go to Kelemvor's waiting room and are instantly teleported across the island less several thousand gold anyway? How does that make sense?

Well, the whole point of this post is to consolidate and alter points of reference that don't make total sense. Again, it's up to you to do what feels right in a situation that involves your character, but I've been in this situation before and I can give an example of how to play it off.

For one, you have a portal wand. In fact, the Fugue Plane has to drop you at a location to which you are bound. And I don't know about you, but I don't see very clearly after I've had most of my life and dignity beaten out of me. The transitional period between entering a portal and arriving at a destination may very well look like a misty room full of standing stones to an addled mind!

As for the losses, what kind of bandit or semi-intelligent monster doesn't loot the corpses of their foes? For the non-intelligent, and old favorite of mine is that I was beaten so hard that my more plentiful items (such as tens of thousands of individual gold coins) scattered to the nine winds when I went down, and I was thinking more about escape than collecting my cash.


Another consideration. What if you are using a 'CvE lite' system, but another player is using a 'hardcore CvE' system, and you can't find a way to meet a middle ground? Don't panic! There may be a perfectly good reason for the discontinuity. Perhaps you're made of sturdier stuff, or are more practiced at turning that final hit into a nonlethal one. Maybe the Raise Dead scrolls they keep on their person ARE the real deal, but are attuned specifically to their god so that it'll always work if they die. Using different roleplay facets isn't wrong, and they can work together more often than not. As always, cooperation will see you through. Don't get frustrated, go with the flow, and remember that what matters is whether the experience is fun, not necessarily whether it makes sense.

_________________
Contents subject to change without warning, reason, necessity, or logical imperative.

FYI if you are killed during hunting (or even worse PvP and the victor does, indeed, say you are dead) and you RP it as 'waking up' you are breaking lore and the mandate of the DMs. The statute is that dead = dead. You can try and farce it off as being unconscious, but any DM (and most players) will call you on it. Unless the stance changes, that's that.

I mean, you are buying Raise Dead scrolls after all. Not to mention the fact that a timer was put on the dead so you can't immediately revive them in PvE and PvP. Seriously, don't RP it this way. It's not your right as a player to, essentially, tell the DM team that you are not going to RP death as death.

And what happens when you die and respawn is entirely up to you within the realm of lore-reason. Perhaps a wandering NPC found you and brought you back to the city? BUt you are certainly not supposed to RP it as anything less than death. Because you died. And your portal wand has nothing to do with the Fugue Plane. That's just an OOC mechanic to allow you back to civilization. Also, I'm fairly certain that travel through a portal wand is instantaneous and you are not really aware of any subjective change other than exiting the portal in a new place.

There's just so much wrong with this advice. Please, for the sake of all that is divine, don't so any of this.


I am nerd raging so hard right now on the inside. This is not, at all, how Raise Dead scrolls work. There's actual lore to these things, you know. You can't just arbitrarily change how they work because you don't want your char to have died. Just, please, stop all of this. If you are dropped to -10 or less HP you are dead. No way around it unless a DM (or player in PvP) says otherwise. Eargh!

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

You could all just take up occultism and join the Velsharran church. There's rituals that'll bring you back from the dead automatically!*

*Terms and conditions apply. See your nearest Velsharran store for details.

_________________
Elwyn Sabel - Laura Jarshall - Mordoc Ebonhand

Discord: Bhaalorian#5715

I'll preface my response with the clause that I'm not touching PvP rulings. That's between players, or the DM overseeing it if it's an event.

I rarely outright state how someone should read my words, but I'll do so here. Read the following in a measured tone that isn't intended to antagonize or belittle.

My intent was to offer potential in-game solutions to an issue that has been (rightfully) raised in this thread. Under the implied social mandates of amiable discourse, I'd like to ask that you provide an alternative solution after you establish that you disagree with mine.



I'm genuinely sorry about my reaction to this, but this made me chuckle. A wandering NPC finding you in the middle of a dungeon and hauling your corpse however many miles back to the city is somehow more reasonable than the possibility that you suffered a non-fatal (but not necessarily non-lethal) injury? I understand that it's just an example, but...I might advise using a different one.



I never said there was an IC connection between the two. I stated, correctly, that the Fugue Plane must transport you to a location that is available on your portal wand, and therefore you can accomplish the same task, ICly, by using the latter. As for instantaneous transport, I credit that as accurate, but that doesn't mean disorientation isn't involved. And the teleportation effect itself is not actually immediate; it requires a warmup period for the portal to open and for you to step inside, assuming we ignore the time displacement caused by area loading screens, which is acceptable.

Remember: I'm offering up suggestions, not telling you what to do. I'm legitimately sorry that my post apparently upset you so much, but I'm not sorry that it was made. Incidentally, it would offer me some context if you might be able to help me access the information you are already aware of as noted here:



I was legitimately unaware that there was an absolute ruling behind this, especially since I've apparently seen it broken numerous times.

To be clear, I'm pleased that you responded, even though we fundamentally disagree. Your vehemence caught me a little off guard, but hopefully I can get on your level of experience, or closer to it, with additional information.

_________________
Contents subject to change without warning, reason, necessity, or logical imperative.

Just throwing another teo crnts in here by saying it's not odd we solve larger problems through mobs, because that's how every plot is eventually solved too.

_________________
I am not weird, I am limited edition

To put it bluntly: "F you, I won't do what you tell me." I've never heard or seen anything even implying this to be a rule. I've roleplayed PVE "death" (both my own character and that of other characters, if the others run with it) as being knocked unconcious or disabled many times, and in this case a Raise Dead scroll representing trauma aid to pull them back from the brink. And I do this exactly because of how much nonsense is involved in the death system in place, and because I find the necessary amount of suspension of disbelief of seeing someone hop to their feet and get on with things after being knocked out smaller than after being killed entirely. Especially considering people routinely "die" multiple times during events, or even just hunts. The whole process breaks immersion to begin with.

If this is declared to be a genuine rule, it would be a major reason if not the reason for me to quit altogether.

_________________
Aernoud Van Brabant: Heir of the House. Proprietor of the Beer Wagon.
"Go to the Mayfields, have a pint, and wait for this to blow over."
Aurelius: Sunmaster of Amaunator. Contemplative. Aspirant to Transcendance.
"Sol Invictus"

I took your post as suggestions, Overneath. I liked a lot of them.

Since I play an evil character that is considered evil on sight no matter what color the outfit. PVP is a possibility most of the time. Fortunately the number of times he's attacked immediately have been few BUT I ALWAYS tell the folks involved that they are not killed, just knocked out with the hilt of his sword. I've had players argue with me. However it's my call if my character is the victor. Its completely IC driven. And not cause my character is a nice guy, he's not. The RP has been great in all cases thus far.

Like others have mentioned in this thread, my character does not instantly heal either unless it's by an evil cleric or in an evil deities Temple. That's how I like to RP it, I don't expect others to do exactly what I do. My character has been stitched up a few times. Once a raise failed since the deity wasn't evil. Doh!

The issue I see with RPing Death every time is that some characters - like mine *cof* - wouldn't be found by some wandering NPC or more to the point the wandering NPC would likely set them on fire gleefully. So if I'd like to play my character and not have them lying there....waiting....forever.... it's knocked out so he can limp his sorry ass to his hide out. I hope the DM's wouldn't call foul on that.

**And I highly recommend the Velsharoons assistance, their rituals are excellent.

_________________


2015 Mr. AMIA with the Fabulous Estara ~ 2015 Best Developed SOB Character: Rith'tar

---

http://www.amiaworld.net/about/pvp.html

You may want to read that link as I'm pretty sure it's been that way for a while. PvE Death, I'm a bit fuzzier on.

In my post I was specifically talking about PVE. PVP is another thing entirely, as far more context and followup is possible.

_________________
Aernoud Van Brabant: Heir of the House. Proprietor of the Beer Wagon.
"Go to the Mayfields, have a pint, and wait for this to blow over."
Aurelius: Sunmaster of Amaunator. Contemplative. Aspirant to Transcendance.
"Sol Invictus"

A valid point and I beg pardon, I misread your post (I read it at 4 in the morning local time after having been up the whole day)

I figured I ought to comment on DM support for evil groups, (at least, from my perspective).

First thing, it can and has happened. Perhaps less so than good or neutral groups, perhaps some evil groups got DM support while others did not. Why? Well, for starters, evil is not one big happy family. I don't recall the exact quoting, but I know one of the sourcebooks says something like "The desires and goals of selfish and destructive beings do not mesh well with the desires of other selfish and destructive beings", and there's some truth to that. Evil monsters, characters, etc, are significantly more prone to infighting than the neutral and/or good characters. It's not like evil characters can go to each other and say something like "Hey, I'm evil, you're evil, lets go kill everyone who isn't evil!". It just doesn't work that way, and in fact doesn't really make a lot of sense.

Thinking about places like Tarkuul, West Cordor, Underport, the Underdark, the NPCs there have their own goals, and in fact, even subfactions within those settlements have their own goals. Anyone who wants their support will have to work into their own schemes. Say you have a group of ax-crazy psychos who go ahead and hellball East Cordor in broad daylight, because well, they're ax-crazy. Assuming they survive the encounter, they go around evil settlements looking to go "Hey, come help me hellball Cordor into the ground!" They probably won't raise a lot of interest. Tarkuul sees more profit in trading with them, West Cordor isn't going to want someone who's that insane around their home, and the underdark settlements would wonder what's in it for them, and if there isn't anything, they're not going to sign up.

Similarly, that merry band of psychos likely isn't going to be welcome in such places if they extend the violence towards them. Tarkuul doesn't want people hellballing their streets, and in fact, anyone who does would be killed and turned into an undead servant in short order. The Illithid in Underport would turn anyone who does that in their home into a thrall. I've had a similar experience long ago on one of my evil characters, who's the ruthless and practical type. The other evil factions he had tried to get into were so violent and crazy, either attacking him on sight or trying to enslave him, that he couldn't possibly justify how joining them would serve his own interests, so went and joined up with more neutral ones.

Villains like Dirk Longstride and Gerald Edmund didn't get their positions of power by behaving like that. They've done plenty of nasty stuff, sure, however they also have a side that can be reasoned with, even sympathized with, and I think that makes them great villains. And it's also got a lot of the shady elements of West Cordor backing them up, because they have done much to help West Cordor in turn. (Though not all, vicious mob politics are expected). There's an example I've personally overseen, and there are plenty of others.

In summary, evil is supported, but the flashy "Kill everyone in sight" evils? Well, they're naturally going to have a hard time garnering support. More pragmatic or lawful evil characters are more than likely going to end up opposing them, especially if they're messing up their interests. Personally? I think conflict is best when it's more nuanced than just good and evil, because often times it leaves no reconcilable room, and will always just end up in a fight, because someone 100% evil isn't going to find any common ground with someone who is neutral or good on the alignment scale. That, and villains are more interesting when they're more nuanced. Things like ideological conflicts though (Common Man vs the Divine right of the Nobility), or the conflict between West and the rest of Cordor I find plenty more interesting, because West Cordor isn't 100% evil, nor is the rest of Cordor 100% good. A lot of the people there are just people who want to live their lives the way they want to live them.

_________________
I play:

West Cordor is probably the best example I can think of for all the things we're talking about here. DM facilitation and support with NPC's, a conflict concept that fits within the server's environment. A 'smart' evil. All the while, Kobra had been extremely fair to all involved.

Really, if there's any short way to express our opinions, it's probably this: "More West Cordor styled Projects, please."

Leaving aside that the issue of character death and its mechanical meaningless-ness is being debated elsewhere and naturally going nowhere as well... What exactly is your source for this rule and more to the point, why haven't the dozens of players who do it been banned by the the RP police which you seem to be a member? Or is the point of this thread to not come up with alternative ways to overcome existing player and/or mechanical issues?

_________________
Thine taste in horrid footwear not withstanding, I did not say that thou were in fact an idiot, I merely implied that such things were self evident.

-Krrja

I may not be a DM, but I'm noticing a bit of hostility in some recent posts. Just giving a friendly post to remind folks that they should probably calm down a little before posting. This is a good thread (even though I don't have a great deal to submit to it), so people should try to keep things civil. Don't want it getting locked or whatever, for getting out of hand. No real reason for hostile comments, either.

_________________

And to those very few who are showing a little hostility, the playerbase is doing remarkably well at managing the discussion and moving away from that without the need for DMs to intervene. So cheers!

Hey man, just wanted to say that I didn't mean to come off like such a buttface. It was late, I couldn't sleep, and as such I probably shouldn't have been checking the forums, heh. Certain things jostle my inner nerd, and I shouldn't have spewed such Dorito-induced angst at you. Yes, I'm being silly in this post, but my apology is sincere.

Also, curse you Terallis and Yoss for posting before I could get this finished >8U Now I look like I'm not doing this of my own conscious!

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

< :

_________________

This might be a little hostile, but he's definitely got a point. Myself, I've been wondering this question since it's been dancing in circles for about 5 years and it's still just as broken as it was then. Just about anything is better than the PvP/Death system we have on Amia.

The DM's and playerbase even often bring it up and say "oh this is a problem" then enough people come along and say "we'll discuss in the DM channels" and then they encourage the playerbase to come up with good ideas. Then somehow I guess people decide it's okay to ignore the issue since it's just PvP anyways to them, and somewhere along the line the DM's discuss it and probably after 2 weeks, they come up with the consensus that "some people won't like it". Well, here's the fact: Basically noone I know likes the current PvP system.

What if it wasn't just PvP? What if it was the catalyst and missing spark to bring back consequences and RP with meaning? Conflict RP even? What if people don't do conflict RP because this? My money is on that.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

Fully agreed and that's often how I RP death/injury. But RPly downgrading the seriousness of wounds and the power of curative magics until Raise Dead is a can of Red Bull still doesn't deal with the 'combat culture' of NWN. And that's the rock on which playing evil has heretofore foundered. In the end, climactic Good-Evil PvP fests cannot be what decides (most) long-term plots.


The general feedback posts on the mood of the citizenry in the Cordor forums are a start on this path and I'm looking forward to more of this. IMO, vocal/active NPCs or groups (like Citizens for South Cordor) need more love.

_________________

~Sharess on AmiaWiki~
Priestess, politician, prostitute
"[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt
AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)

The big dilemma seems to be:

I'd like a PvP system with consequences, so that death means something -- vs-- I don't want to empower PvP griefers with the ability to apply severe consequences without quality Rp to back it up.

Out of all the arguments I've seen for changes to the PvP system, I think that's a fair boiling down of both sides of the argument. Both sides also, I think, have merit.

Can we maybe agree to try it out for a bit, though? If we get something working, something feasible-- could those worried of griefers be asked to bear it for a little while, to see if it's really true? If we're being honest, the anti-griefers have a much stronger community voice than any potential griefers I know. If things get out of hand, we could easily ask and succeed with getting a rollback.

If you read in this thread, even, you can see that both sides of conflict are both frustrated with how flippant death is treated, and are also prone to becoming victims of death. Bad guys may kill good guys-- but get mobbed and killed themselves, right? Both people are subject to it. I think it's worth experimenting, to add some spice and to further diagnose the Amian conflict issues.

If I had to guess, Mimiron, I don't think the issue is one of anyone disagreeing it is a problem, or of not wanting to do something about it. I think there is a huge paralysis in terms of WHAT should be done, and even moreso, whom should do it. Pony had a good idea and a drive to do it, even though it was a daunting task, but without a full or even majority support of the playerbase I think that idea just had nowhere to go.

I think you know my feelings as I have made them clear in the past, and they really are not helpful. PvP and conflict really do not figure into my enjoyment of the server in any way and I could roll with whatever. But from a utilitarian standpoint, I do want a majority of the server to be happy so I support whatever accomplishes that.

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?