|
|
|
jimbono1
|
 Posted: Fri, Nov 05 2010, 23:37 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Location: England
|
My Sovereign wrote: having them perma-death. That there is a problem. _________________ Khaldun Menetnashte KhalfaniVictor WilkinsonSilent2001 wrote: Jimbono1 is my favourite. ^totally not a lie or anything.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Sat, Nov 06 2010, 0:23 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
Quote: I remember the coalition to attack Kohl you refer to. The Banites were part of it, and I was leading them at the time. The lack of communication to the DM team was a symptom, not the cause for the collapse. The real reason is, there was a significant effort (and not by me) to have someone other than you and/or Ron running the defense. When it was found out that would not be possible, the leaders of the groups involved lost all faith in the viability of the endeavor. That is why no one (other than the Banites and I think one other group) bothered submitting their plans to Ron. We gave you your shot. That you balked is nothing you can blame me for. I'm sorry. Quote: How many faction areas would even be allowed to have such a powerful NPC guardian? I recall you being strongly opposed to the NPC army the Shadowflames used to have, and I further recall our Banite NPC's were significantly nerfed (and ironically enough, they played almost no part at all in the siege). Why is it then acceptable for Kohl? You will likely respond that Kohl is a city, not a faction area, but in reality it is both, and its unassailibility (even if that is only perceived) is a major contributing factor to the issue under discussion in this thread.
(I am not forgetting Arcanos by the way, and I think Tarkuul has the same problem.) I was not oppose dto the NPC army... I was opposed to the fact that they had such an army without roleplay. For example, the Horsemen of the Apocalypse are the closest thing on Amia to having an army now, but they have earned it with their blood, sweat, and tears, and I harbor them absolutely no ill will for it. Define "Acceptable for Kohl". Imperator has existed since before my DM tenure. It is not fair to blame "him" on me, really. He is actually more vulnerable and defeatable in his current state than he was when he was "living." It is funny you mention Arcanos and Tarkuul, since it was you who dug out Arcanos' dead body and brought it to Tarkuul and gave it that very same guardian. I apologize for the curtain lift there but I think it is worth noting, and should say a great deal to you: That by fully PC actions, you contributed to a powerful guardian and... perhaps... ironically, the very stagnancy that Yoss has laid upon the good guys for their actions. Quote: If Amia is predominantly good, it is because you collectively made it that way (or allow it to remain so). If evil can only be successful by laying low and plotting and scheming behind closed doors, it is due to that same setting, that you have collective control over. If open evil gets smited to the point where players are discouraged from even attempting anything, it is because of the environment that makes it inevitable that they WILL be smited so. I disagree. IF Amia is predominantly good then it is because of player actions and PCs being predominantly good. If evil gets smited then it is because a PC has liften their blade to smote it, generally. We do have collective final authority, but we exercise it on behalf of PC actions far more than we do for "ourselves" (note the quoteys). Evil can be successful in the open but I think you need a time table of actions and what to do. You guys got your castle, and... wlel, you... sat there? you did patrols but you didn't "go from there". Quote: You, the DM team, have the collective power to determine the environment and the setting. We, the players, can only populate it, and roleplay within the limited roles that we are allowed to have. Again, I absolutely disagree. We create the environment and the setting, but the PCs are the actors and the movers. We'r ejus tthe stage hands, really, and sometimes the director, but the actors have minds of their own. Quote: The attitude that bugs me is the whole "Evil! Smite it!" attitude that seems to permeate Amia. If Superman killed Lex Luthor after their first fight or Batman killed the Joker after their first fight or take a look at any other captivating narrative series and you see a trend develop. The good guys give the bad guys a slap on the wrist and send them on their way to lick their wounds and regroup to try again. Yes, and that is i character... for those personalities, just like it may be in character for some personalities on Amia but not others. PCs shouldn't be continually genre savvy or it feels just as useless to be a good guy as it does for you to bea bad guy.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Sat, Nov 06 2010, 6:36 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
Janna Ogder wrote: Yossarin wrote: And I will please ask you to stop telling players they are banished from settlement politics, especially in Cordor, when I've been practically [removed] inviting them to suck bureaucratic cock to earn it and all I keep hearing is, "I thought that wasn't allowed...?" *applies chapstick* Alright, where is it? Check the DM Event forum for starters. It's not too hard to find.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChickenChaser63
|
Posted: Mon, Nov 08 2010, 17:38 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
|
|
"I disagree. IF Amia is predominantly good then it is because of player actions and PCs being predominantly good. If evil gets smited then it is because a PC has liften their blade to smote it, generally. We do have collective final authority, but we exercise it on behalf of PC actions far more than we do for "ourselves" (note the quoteys). Evil can be successful in the open but I think you need a time table of actions and what to do. You guys got your castle, and... wlel, you... sat there? you did patrols but you didn't "go from there"."
I agree with Tormak on this point. If you want to be evil, then be evil. Make evil characters and take action. Nothing is going to just happen unless you make it happen. If you're sick of standing in one spot for hours, waiting for some action to pop up; then you are wasting your time and you are only boring yourself to death. You do not need a DM to give you permission on everything. All you have to do is follow the rules.
_________________
Christopher Von Gradwitz- Weapons Master
Vindel Rastana- Spellsword
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwagin
|
Posted: Mon, Nov 08 2010, 19:04 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Location: The Land of Nod
|
|
I've always tried to work within the constraints of what power does my character have. I've made concessions of power potential for setting up a theme for a PC before.
Does that make my PC weaker than other PCs which happen to have a build which coincides better with NWN/Amia mechanics?
Yes.
Does it set limits to what that PC can do?
Yes.
A strong PvM or PvP build helps in some situations, without a doubt, but only in certain situations. So much more can be done -without- it though.
_________________
Dwagin [Duh-wa-GIN] N. - 1a. Small and cute thingum, particularly fond of four legged scaled creatures of the metalic and chromatic varieties.
-Extraordinarily ordinary in the mostest of ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
xXxSuShiKunxXx
|
Posted: Mon, Nov 08 2010, 20:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 02 Dec 2008
Location: H-Town Texas
|
|
A great RP storyline involves several weak good (or semi-good) characters banning togeather to destroy one (Or a few) Strong evil character(s).
In Amia: There are many strong good characters, And comparatively, there are a few weak (Note:I say weak due to the limits some chars may have. IE: Its perfectly acceptable to roam the forest with 2 uber-buffed wolfs, but not a mummy.) Evil chars.
Just sayin.
(Makes damn good RP for banding evil chars though.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 11:22 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
|
To answer the original Question. "Evil Folks - Where are you?"
We are here. But since the complete oblivion of Bane's keep, We keep ourselves bloody low.
We realise that the forces of Good could damn well eradicate our very existence, Learned that from Bane's keep to. So we keep ourselves bloody low.
We learned the hard way, and Evil in daylight is nigh to transparent. So we keep bloody low.
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glyph
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 11:26 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
|
|
plot, rally, blow stuff up.
three steps to freedom. laying low isnt the only option >_> you could also add "where are the indifferent people?" since not everyone who could be seen more as good nessicarrily is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weylyn_SotW
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 11:32 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Mar 2010
Location: The Netherlands
|
|
Plot, rally, try to blow stuff up, get your own stuff blown up and then ground into the dust, start back from square one.
I'll pass, we're not even done rebuilding after the last time.
_________________
Shynt'iira, Ilharess d'lil Qu'ellar My'ana
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silent2001
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 11:51 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 19 Jun 2007
Location: United Kingdomshire
|
|
Pfft. Why give them something to blow up in the first place? Roam and pillage! rrarrgggh!
_________________  <3 MarynWe are going to die and that makes us the lucky ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimbono1
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 12:30 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Location: England
|
|
Vikings!! Raghagrh!!
_________________ Khaldun Menetnashte KhalfaniVictor WilkinsonSilent2001 wrote: Jimbono1 is my favourite. ^totally not a lie or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kraniumbrud
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 13:32 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Dec 2008
Location: Denmark
|
|
I agree with tormak's points here, and furthermore I would just like to point out that people do die in faerun alot, because of its conflicts, it is not the superman world where everyone goes home to lick thier wounds, its a brutal cruel world where evil really is evil and not just evil because they are bald and have a large company.
And if you have a problem with the good side having too much power, please consider that in faerun, thats pretty much the situation, due to the evil gods pretty much hating eachother, bane despises cyric almost as much as the good god that killed him the first place, you will have to be smart to make it as a evil char, play on the weaknesses inhereted in the system, take cordor...many many evil followers are allowed there..so..why not preach to the people there, noone can stop you, mock the goods inactivity discreetly...read up on thier dogmas, learn your opponents, you will get a far stronger foothold to launch a proper assult, be it politically or physically
on a personal note, dont go around in black armor, it will exclude you abit in my oppion, be a new villian, keep in mind that while amia is not a place solely worshipping good forces, they do have many powerfull good people, and one should be aware that walking around in black armor yelling bane..will get your head smacked in..
because..thats paladins..thats thier way, the sword of the will of thier god, they are brutal against those enemies in most cases.
_________________
-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
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 15:13 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
|
Been there. Done that. Yawn.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimbono1
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 15:21 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Location: England
|
762 wrote: Been there. Done that. Yawn. QFE _________________ Khaldun Menetnashte KhalfaniVictor WilkinsonSilent2001 wrote: Jimbono1 is my favourite. ^totally not a lie or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 16:40 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
Far better to walk around in plain clothes with a lump of kryptonite handy, than to get into some kind of big exo-skeletal suit and yell at Superman, "Here I am, vaporise me with your heat vision!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 19:40 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
Can the evil people in this topic stop making vapid, mean, sarcastic comments anytime the good guy players, such as that guy from Koh, and Kraniumbrud, and the DMs even, make comments trying to constructively help the situation? While you may think their replies are old hat and worthless, they are genuinely trying to help here, and it's not constructive to the thread, or to your own in game in character purposes if you keep blowing them off like that. I'm talking about posts like this: Quote: Been there. Done that. Yawn. Quote: Plot, rally, try to blow stuff up, get your own stuff blown up and then ground into the dust, start back from square one.
I'll pass, we're not even done rebuilding after the last time. And others like it. If what you're looking for is an experience that more properly merges the RP of good and evil players, then I think I can, with some certainty, tell you that those sorts of posts aren't bringing you any closer to your goal.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 19:52 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
|
Here you go again.
Suggestions that evil just lay low and do things on the sly do not help the situation, because as experienced evil players have pointed out, they affect only very limited numbers of people that way.
Pointing that out is neither vapid, mean, nor sarcastic, Mr. Kettle.
As for you trying to help, you completely ignored every point I made above, and instead just tried to make excuses for maintaining the unsatisfactory status quo.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 20:08 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
I wh...
what?
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 20:10 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
|
Isn't that life? Destroying for a third time and rebuilding for a fourth time and destroying for a sixth time and rebuilding for a seventh time?
Honestly. I can't even count the number of times Iraq has been restructured now. (Please don't let that comment turn this into politics.)
Such is life.
We go on.
My point still stands: Let it affect you more, or don't. It's your choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 20:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
TormakSaber wrote: Again, I absolutely disagree. We create the environment and the setting, but the PCs are the actors and the movers. We'r ejus tthe stage hands, really, and sometimes the director, but the actors have minds of their own. You are the set designers, producers, executive producers, directors, and to a majority degree the story writers. We, the actors, are only allowed to have limited speaking roles and can only improvise our parts within the narrow parameters set by you.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 20:36 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
762 wrote: TormakSaber wrote: Again, I absolutely disagree. We create the environment and the setting, but the PCs are the actors and the movers. We'r ejus tthe stage hands, really, and sometimes the director, but the actors have minds of their own. You are the set designers, producers, executive producers, directors, and to a majority degree the story writers. We, the actors, are only allowed to have limited speaking roles and can only improvise our parts within the narrow parameters set by you. Yes. But we love to stand in the spotlight.
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yossarin
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 21:54 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
|
While you may want to interpret Tormak's comments here in light of old conflict, 762, he really is just trying to encourage the debate between good and evil players going on here, but wants it done constructively. I happen to agree that "Yawn" is not a helpful response...even if I do it myself sometimes, in Request topics (accompanied almost always by approval, though), and even though I read it and kind of had the same "yawn" reaction. No offense intended, Kranium.  Other than that I've already said everything I think needs to be said (or that I need to say) in this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 21:58 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
Then in the spirit of constructive debate let me reiterate my salient point, which Kranium may have missed. Quote: Secretive evil by its nature does comparatively little to engender conflict RP. By definition it has to be limited in scope and touch relatively few people. Surely large numbers of people might feel the effects of it, as when the forest was burnt and the Banites took over Wharftown. But as far as the opportunities to get directly involved and affect the outcome, if you are not one of the small number who have access to the focal point being acted upon, you are likely just a spectator, watching how the event plays out, and wishing you could figure out a way to get more involved. And of course, I need not mention how a plot months in the making can be ruined overnight by one metagamer (or even a legit spy with no fear of permadeath).
By contrast, an overt, direct threat energizes the playerbase and creates a more epic conflict that can involve more people. This is what I regret Amia does not truly allow (at least, not for long).
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 22:30 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
|
In a world populated mostly by non-evil entities, evil can not expect to win out for long. Evil is the force that makes Good move. If there was no Evil left on Amia, then all the Good would stand around like statues. It can only sensibly be the hope of Evil to win out temporarily, holding sway as motivators and movers only until Good organizes itself and smacks Evil back down to the shadows. Understanding this point is the key to playing Evil on Amia. If you don't get it, you will be quite disappointed with what happens to your character.
_________________  "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dark Immolation
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 22:59 PM |
|
|
Developer
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
|
ainjyll wrote: In a world populated mostly by non-evil entities, evil can not expect to win out for long. I have to disagree with this on a certain level. I agree with you that on Amia, it is Good that plays the reactive role as I've said myself, but there's nothing to say that it can't survive. No alignment has or should have a guarantee to win out in the end, and I say that as someone who has 3 Good aligned PC's out of the 5 he plays. It just seems like a great deal of the evil PC players are saying "there's no way we can win" and the DM's are saying yes, but you have to try different methods. To which those players respond "we tried them X amount of times, and it still didn't work, so there must be no way and it's not fair." It's like trying to convince a hermit that it's okay to come outside, but they won't because the 2 times they did they got hit by a stray meteor. I should have said this earlier, but have the evily folks ever though about something other than destruction/corruption? And I'm not saying that to be funny, I'm saying it to make the point that evil need not always been destructive. You can be constructively evil too, you know. Build an evil empire, do something other than muck up the plans of Good settlements and people exclusively. That's one of the things that allows Good to be reactive on Amia. Good doesn't really need to seek Evil out because it keeps popping up and pissing in its cereal. Why not make your own bowl and wait for the paladins to come up and try to take it away from you? Make them want to crusade or something where you can finally play defense rather than offense. And as a sidenote, the same difficulty and unfruitfulness that comes with an Evily trying to corrupt a Good settlement is the same difficulty and unfruitfulness I'd expect a Goody trying to redeem an Evil settlement to endure. But again, that's never really been tried. There's no reason to. For the most part the same thing is done over and over. The palemasters run out of Tarkuul, up to Kohl's gate and moon it, then get mad when someone does something about it. And the sad thing is that what I just said is not a huge exaggeration from multiple IC experiences of my own.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:12 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
Dark Immolation wrote: ainjyll wrote: In a world populated mostly by non-evil entities, evil can not expect to win out for long. I have to disagree with this on a certain level. I agree with you that on Amia, it is Good that plays the reactive role as I've said myself, but there's nothing to say that it can't survive. No alignment has or should have a guarantee to win out in the end, and I say that as someone who has 3 Good aligned PC's out of the 5 he plays. Surviving is different from winning out. Surviving means living to fight another day, which unless we as a player or a DM says, is impossible for anyone to tell us our character's can't do. Winning out is creating a undefeated force. We'll use the Banites for an example. The Church of Bane was quite nasty and easily ran roughshod over almost every good faction on Amia at one point or another. It was a good run, but eventually the good factions joined forces and spanked us. This isn't to say that I'm angry it happened or anything like that, I expect such things to happen on an OOC level and revel in the RP they can create as the chaos settles. I'd like to add that a player having 3 out of 5 characters he/she plays being good isn't the factor for one player does not Amia make. I'd wager my savings that there is probably a 3:2 ratio of good to evil at the least and if you include the good-leaning neutrals you're probably looking at 2:1 or more. _________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Murex
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Dec 2009
|
|
Evil needs to get organized (as much as that can be possible). The thing about evil, is that they are often so selfish, they will rat out or turn on their companions. Good guys don't backstab.
I think the HOA are the closest example of an encompassing evil(ish?) faction- and there are reasons for this that can be emulated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:42 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
Dark Immolation wrote: I should have said this earlier, but have the evily folks ever though about something other than destruction/corruption? And I'm not saying that to be funny, I'm saying it to make the point that evil need not always been destructive. You can be constructively evil too, you know. Build an evil empire, do something other than muck up the plans of Good settlements and people exclusively. That's one of the things that allows Good to be reactive on Amia. Good doesn't really need to seek Evil out because it keeps popping up and pissing in its cereal. Why not make your own bowl and wait for the paladins to come up and try to take it away from you? Make them want to crusade or something where you can finally play defense rather than offense. The Banites have done it more than once. Most recently in Guldorand. We actually made quite an effort to help the people there, avoid pissing in their Cheerios, and seem less like occupiers and more like good neighbors. The DM's were less than accommodating with it. We had a five point plan for Guldorand, most of which required DM interaction, and I think only one point ever got a DM to help us with it. By contrast Mynna, a convicted terrorist who had bombed the Cordor jail (and you can believe we played that up), was able to show up overnight and call a town meeting, with the end result of evacuating the town (after a while). I never expected the Guldorandis to like the Banites. But the contrast in DM cooperation there really stung. Different things have been tried over the years, trust me. No one here is whining over one given failure. Dark Immolation wrote: It just seems like a great deal of the evil PC players are saying "there's no way we can win" and the DM's are saying yes, but you have to try different methods. To which those players respond "we tried them X amount of times, and it still didn't work, so there must be no way and it's not fair." It's like trying to convince a hermit that it's okay to come outside, but they won't because the 2 times they did they got hit by a stray meteor. This rings so true.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
Last edited by 762 on Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:50 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:50 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
Overt and direct threats may be energising, but when they go on for too long they can have the opposite effect as players begin to tire of the same thing being thrust in their face when they log in. Conflict is good in short bursts with breaks in between. As you have already pointed out, secretive threats can only involve a select number of people and don't have the same capacity to directly involve others. But their usefulness is not to be discounted. For example, if you know someone whom you trusted is now a double agent, you wouldn't exactly be surprised when they betray you. An important element which is neither covert or overt is tension. If characters are not being covert about their activities, but are also not being overtly threatening, then there is tension because the other guys don't know what's coming next, but based on past experience they know that something is coming. Tension can be perceived as boring by players. What they don't realise is that it stops physical conflict from happening until characters are fully committed to inflicting harm on others. Swinging swords and slinging spells is all fun until someone loses an arm or gets burned to a crisp. No matter whether you're good or evil, the grim reality of conflict is that you and your allies can be hurt, captured and killed. Now, a character might ignore the grim reality and commit themselves to a fight they might not win, or they might realise just how bleak the situation is and seek the means to avoid a costly confrontation. Whichever course of action they choose, that's the breaking point as far as tension is concerned. How long does it take to get to the breaking point? As long as it takes. My point is, conflict is not something that just switches on in the same way as if someone was to set someone else hostile. It requires tension between characters, and that commitment to inflicting harm upon one another. I don't mean that they need to fling insults back and forward for half an hour, unless they're dwarves in which case the first five minutes of it is a proper dwarven greeting anyway. I mean that they should be psyching each other out long before the fighting actually starts, and for the players it's more fun to fight someone who acts and speaks like more than a mere pixel cut-out. If you're not getting a real sense of who the other guys are, then you have a winner and a loser at the end of the fight but you don't know anything about who you were fighting or what they were fighting for. For example, you'd rather know whether they were fighting against what you stand for, or just fighting because someone paid them well. Of course, that's mainly the good storyteller in me speaking, so don't put too much faith in what I just wrote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yossarin
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:50 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
|
|
On the other hand, I know evils who have succeeded and are keeping their mouths shut in this thread to avoid being pointed out for them.
Though don't argue that point, I am aware that that is not really what this thread is about. This thread is about evil wanting to be evil and actually wanting to be KNOWN FOR BEING EVIL. Which in my book is pretty damn vital in spite of the "be smarter" argument because you deserve to have an impact on the world and summarily have your asses kicked by the throng of good PCs for doing so.
The problem is it seems you often don't even get the opportunity to be an evil asshole before your ass is kicked, anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Tue, Nov 09 2010, 23:55 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
|
Selmak, I am not running down the role of secretive evil at all. Secretive and overt evil are not mutually exclusive. I don't want to see either one missing.
As to tension. How much tension was there in Minas Tirith before Sauron attacked? It seems like you think I am pushing mass PvP as the end all and be all, and that is not at all what I am at. Though that can certainly serve as the culminating factor in a long buildup of tension, as it did in LoTR.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 0:49 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
Yossarin wrote: The problem is it seems you often don't even get the opportunity to be an evil [removed] before your ass is kicked, anyway. Yoss just hit the nail on the head. _________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
billytheid
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 2:25 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Location: Terra Australis
|
ainjyll wrote: Yossarin wrote: The problem is it seems you often don't even get the opportunity to be an evil [removed] before your ass is kicked, anyway. Yoss just hit the nail on the head. QFE Some scary evil that good guys had to work hard to overcome as opposed to just ganging up and spaming epic stuff would be cool.
_________________
Jess Incognito: F.L.A.G. Inc.
Gharl Killith: Hobgoblin Headhunter
Olaf Grudgebringer: Bad tempered Dwarvern Weaponsmith
"But thats mainly because I'm an Aussie and what you guys call flaming and rudeness I call a normal conversation."
|
|
|
|
|
|
RaveN
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 2:41 AM |
|
|
Administrative Developer
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
|
Dark Immolation wrote: It just seems like a great deal of the evil PC players are saying "there's no way we can win" and the DM's are saying yes, but you have to try different methods. To which those players respond "we tried them X amount of times, and it still didn't work, so there must be no way and it's not fair." It's like trying to convince a hermit that it's okay to come outside, but they won't because the 2 times they did they got hit by a stray meteor. Yossarin wrote: The problem is it seems you often don't even get the opportunity to be an evil [removed] before your ass is kicked, anyway. billytheid wrote: Some scary evil that good guys had to work hard to overcome as opposed to just ganging up and spaming epic stuff would be cool. Combine all three and there you go. That's the whole problem.
_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata
|
|
|
|
|
|
boobookittyscrew
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 2:47 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 09 Oct 2010
|
|
If you consider it, if all the good guys are like superman(which they may as well be since they outnumber us and out match us)...then we as baddies need to be like his nemesis, Lex Luthor.
Everything else will get pummeled, eye beamed, and destroyed.
And how is Lex Luthor? He is cunning...and avoids direct confrontation with Superman except in the most extreme cases.
Honestly in order for evil to succeed in anything here....we have to think smart and run for our lives when neccessary.
Evil will die only when we evil baddy players completely give up...and no other time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selvec Darkon
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 3:54 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Location: On a Disk, carried by four elephants, which stand on a gigantic turtle.
|
boobookittyscrew wrote: If you consider it, if all the good guys are like superman(which they may as well be since they outnumber us and out match us)...then we as baddies need to be like his nemesis, Lex Luthor.
Everything else will get pummeled, eye beamed, and destroyed.
And how is Lex Luthor? He is cunning...and avoids direct confrontation with Superman except in the most extreme cases.
Honestly in order for evil to succeed in anything here....we have to think smart and run for our lives when neccessary.
Evil will die only when we evil baddy players completely give up...and no other time. This. Though I admit it may be a little hard for you lot to rise to my level of pure genius. *Eyebrow Wiggle* 
_________________
I keels u with my axe!
"Do ye know where the Holy-Flamin' Frost-brand Gronk-slayin' Vorpal Hammer o' woundin' an' returnin' an' Shootin'-Lightnin'-out-yer-bum is?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 4:20 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
Murex wrote: Good guys don't backstab.
Sooo wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
blackvswhite
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 6:25 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 08 Nov 2008
|
|
when evil players have to go out of their way to create fun conflict and good players get to sit and wait for evil to pop up then go quell it, there tends to be an obvious trend towards the one that requires less effort. For many many people, good = standing around and being nice, then smashing the shit out of banites/horsemen/necromancers when they try to make the game more interesting. The burden is squarely on the evil players, and it requires DM interaction which is lacking, so not enough gets done. This game doesn't run itself, but its closer for the good guys with their populated towns than the bad guys who have to sneak around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 7:16 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
boobookittyscrew wrote: If you consider it, if all the good guys are like superman(which they may as well be since they outnumber us and out match us)...then we as baddies need to be like his nemesis, Lex Luthor.
Everything else will get pummeled, eye beamed, and destroyed.
And how is Lex Luthor? He is cunning...and avoids direct confrontation with Superman except in the most extreme cases.
Honestly in order for evil to succeed in anything here....we have to think smart and run for our lives when neccessary.
Evil will die only when we evil baddy players completely give up...and no other time. One problem with this example. Superman didn't kill Lex. He didn't destroy Lex's HQ. Superman disabled whatever nasty plan Lex had and sent Lex home to lick his wounds. That's the issue I see with blatant or "open" evil on Amia. You get monkeystomped every time. There is no quarter given... ever. Which is fine as none is expected, at least I don't think so. But seeing as Good is reactionary, it becomes very hard for Evil to foil the plans of Good as mostly they stick to standing around waiting for an Evil PC to do something or for a DM to begin a storyline with some Evil in it. This isn't to say that they're wrong in doing that. It's a basic tenet of many hero stories. Hero sits around minding his own business. Bad Guy comes along and does something evil. Hero smacks down Bad Guy. Hero returns to everyday life. End of story. _________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 7:26 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
|
Oh and not all heroes stand around! Some patrol and actively seek out evil. And sometimes try to destroy it even if it's not doing anything.
And that's why sometimes Good guys get called Evil!
...and backstabbed, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ainjyll
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 7:32 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Location: wilmington, nc
|
|
There are exceptions to every rule, but I'm speaking in generalities.
_________________ "I once took the high road and it took me straight to hell and I stood there all by myself." -Hank III
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 7:43 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
|
My point was that I disagree that it's the norm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
boobookittyscrew
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 7:44 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 09 Oct 2010
|
|
Actually the thing is most evil guys quit when their own plan fails. Most never think someone else's plan has merit because their own failed. In the end what you get is many of them growing frustrated and leaving......
But....
There are some who continually try things at different angles. What they cannot win in PvP, they try in infiltration, what they can't do in infiltration, they try yet another tactic. And only when every single tactic has been used(which is actually never), only then should they quit.
Since all tactics actually have never been exhausted, no one should really quit.
The worst thing that almost kills my idea of evil(But not really) is actually those evil types whose plan have failed, and thus they must down on everyone else's plans, voice the most implausible ways for your own plan to fail, then say "yeah, it'll fail completely", simply cause their own plan of "run in the forest and try to bash things and die" failed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Murex
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 8:03 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Dec 2009
|
|
You almost never see a group of baddies gather around a lone paladin and pick on him [or her].
|
|
|
|
|
|
Silvarus
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 10:02 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Sep 2005
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland, Europe
|
Murex wrote: You almost never see a group of baddies gather around a lone paladin and pick on him [or her]. Yup. It is usually a bunch of good guys ganging up on an EO paladin. There is no need for the bad guys to bother. ;P
_________________
Gagis Silvarna, the Robocop with wings who shoots lasers from his fingertips
Lily Havthorn, the Waukeenar
Silwe, the elf
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estara
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 15:32 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
|
Murex wrote: You almost never see a group of baddies gather around a lone paladin and pick on him [or her]. It's because they're scared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
jimbono1
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 18:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
Location: England
|
Estara wrote: Murex wrote: You almost never see a group of baddies gather around a lone paladin and pick on him [or her]. It's because they're scared. I'd say its more because there is a lack of Evil players, or at least Evil players that know of each other/willing to work with each other. And maybe also the fact that most paladins can just go "Lol i have stupid high saves and i can 1shot nearly any evil guy with smite evil!" _________________ Khaldun Menetnashte KhalfaniVictor WilkinsonSilent2001 wrote: Jimbono1 is my favourite. ^totally not a lie or anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tertsökkeldsdönner
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 19:49 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
|
jimbono1 wrote: I'd say its more because there is a lack of Evil players, or at least Evil players that know of each other/willing to work with each other. And maybe also the fact that most paladins can just go "Lol i have stupid high saves and i can 1shot nearly any evil guy with smite evil!" That and the fact you cannot really combine Being Well Known Evil & Rule The World together, because it just doesn't work! If try that then rest of the world just combines to threaten your power. So its either 1) Be well known evil and get your arse kicked or 2) Rule the world in secret and try to stay hidden Number 2 happens to work in real world as well..
_________________
We believe only what we want to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pony
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 21:41 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 May 2005
|
|
I do not think that evil needs to be secretive or pretend to be good for it to succeed. I for one do not only want to see the "tyrannic taxcollector" or the "unknown sharran" around. I want some foes I can battle with and not only on the fields of politics. I do want the banite knights of the statute of Darthion and necromancers known like Nathano. That is needed and I hope they do not ever disappear. The world would be quite more boring if there were none like that.
Though it has little to do with that we want good to always win and hence evil has always to be defeated. However, amia is a place where evil does not rule such as in Thay. So evil needs to be careful as most characters and npcs see vile things, as... well vile and criminal. If you are a giant embodiment of sin and slaughter then you best look carefully where you apply it. No sense in slaughtering at a place or a person that you know will cause great trouble for you.
To dominate lands you can not have everyone rise against you. I think if the Banites would have stepped away from the many battles and "settled down", becomming the lord's of the people of Guldorand and ruled them in all the harshness of their laws (tyranny, not have demons walk about and turn their babies into undead to exaggerate extremely) I think they could have done well for themselves. ((Ravenloft setting has a nice portrayl of bane as the lawgiver)) They were great to have around like that, but the destruction of the keep was absolutely foreseeable.
Playing an evil character means you should have small goals. Big stuff is fun but it should not be your payment but a bonus.
On a server there was a character concept which I would love to see more of on amia. It was a witch who did the most despicable deeds, really horrific. But she did not pick off the mighty adventurers but lured the weaker to her to conduct her despicable deeds. She was in no faction. But she gained power through fear and studies. She did not need to show off her evil outfit in Cordor but her reputation spread even if most did not see her before. (Earning DCs can buy you new fancy spells you could rp developing upon experimentation on people). If you make sure not to pick on those players who you know are not really fine with consequences happening to their characters I think it can work well.
I see not why such a concept of open evilness can not work and be extremely rewarding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
762
|
Posted: Wed, Nov 10 2010, 21:45 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Location: Florida
|
KrautBoy wrote: To dominate lands you can not have everyone rise against you. I think if the Banites would have stepped away from the many battles and "settled down", becomming the lord's of the people of Guldorand and ruled them in all the harshness of their laws (tyranny, not have demons walk about and turn their babies into undead to exaggerate extremely) I think they could have done well for themselves. ((Ravenloft setting has a nice portrayl of bane as the lawgiver)) They were great to have around like that, but the destruction of the keep was absolutely foreseeable. That's exactly what we DID do, even somewhat lower key than that. The good guys rose up anyway. As soon as they see a target they can go after, they go after it.
_________________
Araxus Balmor
Gurth Balmor (retired)
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 61 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
