Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

Testmon.. for every example you mentioned, there is another for the other side as well. You go down that road, it never ends. The biggest problem Evil characters had, was not having an area they can openly be evil and do their thing. That area is almost ready so there goes that.

As far as how can metagaming hurt the good guys, it is not only to hurt, but not to hurt as well. For example, having IC knowledge of an evil "safehouse" but not doing anything because it is known OOC that is a players guildhouse. Another example is the awesome "In Disguise" feature that allows a character - with any or none skills - to spend hours in a populated place, partake in conversations with others, pick fights even take part in events with others, but in the end he is in disguise so you cannot identify or be suspicious of that person. I asked the DMs, how that awesome "feature" works - like if there is a way to identify someone with that word in his bio - but havent got any reply yet.

I am sure with darkhold in, some or hopefully most of these issues will be resolved.

-

mrm3ntalist wrote:Testmon.. for every example you mentioned, there is another for the other side as well. You go down that road, it never ends. The biggest problem Evil characters had, was not having an area they can openly be evil and do their thing. That area is almost ready so there goes that.

i...disagree.
first i fully acknowledge that there is hardships good guys suffer as well. evil PvP-ers PvP indiscriminately, they're just going to attack a goody as well as a baddie. but i sincerely doubt that we are anywhere close to an equilibrium.
the whole setting of multiple cities and areas neutral but leaning to order and good goes against that. the whole acceptance of paladins as semi authority goes against that. (isn't player triels in BG basicaly a judge and half a jury of paladins?)


the whole setting so far is that evil has to hide while good/neutral walks freely. (don't get me wrong here, i love that we have PvP rules, but they also take evils biggest advantage of striking without any honor, warning or proof)

and i do not think that Darkhold will be that much of a change. i think as long as it is not like "we are the Zhents your masters, you have to obey us" inside the gates and rather "democratic" then Darkhold can be a lot of fun, but RP comes from players interacting and putting all evil players into some corner in the north is not going to do that. under the right circumstances it will allow evils to gether, but interaction will still have to happen on goodies hometurf


edit: and my whole own example i mentioned was to show that evils do not only face the day-to-day dangers of being evil, but rather also the dangers of goodies being hellbend to screw with them no matter what, no matter how long it takes and no matter how many others to involve...rather, the more others to involve the better

As far as how can metagaming hurt the good guys, it is not only to hurt, but not to hurt as well. For example, having IC knowledge of an evil "safehouse" but not doing anything because it is known OOC that is a players guildhouse.

so i do not fully understand why thats stopping you, but your big problem is that you are not allowed to stomp down evil wherever you find it? because i know like 5 places (RH, SR, DA, CK, EVE) where the goodies life that baddies are not allowed to stomp down on a whim

Another example is the awesome "In Disguise" feature that allows a character - with any or none skills - to spend hours in a populated place, partake in conversations with others, pick fights even take part in events with others, but in the end he is in disguise so you cannot identify or be suspicious of that person. I asked the DMs, how that awesome "feature" works - like if there is a way to identify someone with that word in his bio - but havent got any reply yet

...so..you are angry, and actually went to the DMs about it, that there is features that allow evil players to interact with the server and partake in events without being constantly harassed for being evil? because if it is like i interpret your argument here then your argument is exactly why i say that evils have it harder here, good guys trying to stomp on them whereever they can.

make half the surface evil, give both areas the same amount of DM attention and then we start to get on the same page.

...that would obviously be a bad move.

Okay Players, take the foot of the gas pedal. Valefort's Original Post was easy going and polite, maybe a little one-sided, but if you take it as an Opinion, then you shall ease into a good debate. So watch it with the mud slinging, please.

mrm3ntalist wrote:For example, having IC knowledge of an evil "safehouse" but not doing anything because it is known OOC that is a players guildhouse.

I can read this as the Choice you make mrm3ntalist, as a Player. And Players—on both sides of the fence—need to accept that sometimes, their PCs fail, at doing action. Even if that action is something they are immensely skilled in. Sometimes the Dice do not roll in your PCs favor.

mrm3ntalist wrote:Another example is the awesome "In Disguise" feature that allows a character - with any or none skills - to spend hours in a populated place, partake in conversations with others, pick fights even take part in events with others, but in the end he is in disguise so you cannot identify or be suspicious of that person. I asked the DMs, how that awesome "feature" works - like if there is a way to identify someone with that word in his bio - but havent got any reply yet.

It is my opinion that if a "disguised" PC arrives/hangs out/parks their butt in the same place three times in the same disguise in-game (meaning, the same clothing/appearance), that disguise is now and should be considered, recognizable. Whatever facial characteristics viewable, voice, movements, etc..

However, a "disguise" can also become an Identity. Thus, if a "disguised" PC is always in that disguise, then that becomes their known identity. For another PC that "knows" them well in this disguise—three times of more—would then see them in their "true" appearance, it would definitely cause a surprise, possibly a revelation, and confusion. That is Role-play.

BGTSCC is currently short on a clear set of contemporary Disguise Rules because of the mid-way point between testing and implementing Rasael's Disguise System. There is literally too much good stuff waiting to be put in for testing, and the Staff simply has to take it one slow step at a time.

mrm3ntalist wrote:I am sure with darkhold in, some or hopefully most of these issues will be resolved.

That remains to be seen. Behind the Client, I witness more dumb moves by so many PCs that are very thinly playing their PC's alignment, regardless of what environment or map or city they are active in, that I sometimes can do nothing but *facepalm*.

If a Player is here to Role-play, and they respect their Character Sheet, their PC's background and the life that PC has lived—short or long—on this Server, then by simply interacting in that Role, your PC will find it's place soon enough. One new Area or turning half the Server into Evil areas (which they kind of already are) is not going to solve anything.

What will solve or improve the situation is if Players respect each others "way of going about Role-play" as long as it fits within our short General Server Rules. Better yet, Players on opposite sides of the fence should be actually working together, in order to make their PCs have a greater, more challenging "life" on the Sword Coast. Instead of bickering OOC, try to work out the differences and create a story between the opposed alignment PCs or Guilds, and make a bit of history for each other. Each PC gets three perma-strikes before the Fat Lady Sings...

I guess that is a tip for all alignments (IC and OOC).

Testmon...

What stopped me or the places you know or whether i am angry or not is not the case. The case is that these are examples of how metagaming can work 2ways.

PvP between evil and good chars, does not play a big role - i hope - in the DMs desicion making about this issue. The setting has never allowed a good/bad person to walk freely or not. There are places with laws, so good or evil, if you break the law and get caught, you pay the price. Even before Darkhold there were lawless areas but with Darkhold in, there is big hub for Evil RP.

Finally i cant make half the surface evil, nor give someone DM attention, if that is whats bothering you. Ask a DM for attention about an Evil plot. I dont think any DM will deny you that just because you play an Evil character

DM Novus wrote: It is my opinion that if a "disguised" PC arrives/hangs out/parks their butt in the same place three times in the same disguise in-game (meaning, the same clothing/appearance), that disguise is now and should be considered, recognizable. Whatever facial characteristics viewable, voice, movements, etc..

However, a "disguise" can also become an Identity. Thus, if a "disguised" PC is always in that disguise, then that becomes their known identity. For another PC that "knows" them well in this disguise—three times of more—would then see them in their "true" appearance, it would definitely cause a surprise, possibly a revelation, and confusion. That is Role-play.

sorry just to clear things out.
you start that thing with "it is my opinion" so this is not a hard rule?

and you say the disguise should be recognize able, as in "hey i saw this black hooded person before" but not the person behind the disguise, right? just wanting to be 100% clear on those things.

mrm3ntalist wrote: Finally i cant make half the surface evil, nor give someone DM attention, if that is whats bothering you. Ask a DM for attention about an Evil plot. I dont think any DM will deny you that just because you play an Evil character

no, i said that that would be a stupid idea. i was just pointing out that the setting is in favor of law abiding and good screwing over evils, hence for some disguises are simply needed because otherwise, thanks to a limited amount of players and areas, someone once recognized as evil would be unable to interact with huge amounts of the surface world.

testmon wrote:i was just pointing out that the setting is in favor of law abiding and good screwing over evils, hence for some disguises are simply needed because otherwise, thanks to a limited amount of players and areas, someone once recognized as evil would be unable to interact with huge amounts of the surface world.

No disagreement there. But you can see how a feat like this, with no rules or mechanics can be metagamed if taken to the extreme, right?

Deleted.

mrm3ntalist wrote: No disagreement there. But you can see how a feat like this, with no rules or mechanics can be metagamed if taken to the extreme, right?

what do you mean? see my problem is that people always try to find ways around things. i make an effort to have 2 different disguised descriptions which both state my char speaks with a different voice.
yet i had enough people either not read it and just assume they recognize it by voice or throwing listen checks at me. or by smell, the eyes etc.

for me, except that it stops people from harassing others i see not much lost by saying that disguise means unrecognizeable as long as the char does not do something stupid.


on the other hand i can see a lot of things going south if people wil in future just be able to powerskill into a certain skill and run around recognizing everyone. every event would just start to have one or two of those around.

The issue at play is that because this is a game, people want to win. If they see one side having more opportunities to win than their side, they get annoyed. And when they don't win, often the thought is that the effort put in has been wasted.

I'd say don't treat BGTSCC as a game, treat it as an interactive storytelling device. Enjoy the journey, not the destination.

And a bit about my character, which you can read if you so wish. It's not all that surprising, really.
Edit: I was going to send this in response to a PM I was sent, but thought it may warrant posting in public instead

I played a Red Wizard for a few months earlier this year. He was actually quite pleasant (high charisma, diplomatic, more interested in following the Khazark's orders to re-establish the Enclave's trading operation than doing "evil") and still "good" players hounded, threatened and bullied him mercilessly, asked about his slaves and all the usual passive-aggressive stuff you can get away with when you're "epic" and you encounter a lvl10 'villain'.

All in all, it wasn't much fun, despite the (at the time) great RP we were able to have inside the Enclave. Now the Red Wizards have withered away to almost-nothing again and the surface's evil is undercover, Zhentarim or that other group.

The spoilered information above is presented in good faith. If it ends up being used against me, it's not a problem - it will make things more interesting. But sometimes good and evil are on the same side (see Triel recently, to an extent).

Tangentially, I read a rather sad post by a player who had a cleric of Umberlee some years back. Her main interest was ensuring the continued safety and interests of the goddess' temple in Baldur's Gate, which meant that her goals (protect Baldur's Gate's harbor and trade) generally aligned with the good factions, who wanted nothing to do with her, and were opposed to those proponents of evil who sought the destruction or disruption of the city (specifically the clergy of the other Deities of Fury). The character eventually ended up being retired as she had nobody to RP with.

Valefort wrote: How about the fact that good guys don't agree with each other either ? It's not Alice in Wonderland and the powerplay and dissent among good guys is present, as is the constant threat of backstabbery by hidden infilitrators.

Not the same as Baddies not agreeing, which often involves bloodshedding and worse. Testmon already covered this.

I'm sure the DM team throws stuff at you but really, can it compare to the rest ? Sorry I'm not buying that Xanfryst. As for metagaming hurting evil more than good ... just no, it is as hurtful for everyone. Between that and your last sentence toning down the arrogance would be wonderful, it's a cooperative story telling and you're not helping with derogatory comments and this condescending attitude, you're no better.

Yeah, they can compare. You also forget that certain Baddies, such as the Zhentarim and the Thayans aren't interested in a Sword Coast that is burning. They are interested in money and political power. You don't get that from burned out husks and razed down buildings. So, such groups of Baddies often have the same plights that Goodies have.

And meta-gaming IS more hurtful for Evil as it can ruin months or years of work. Sure, Goodies such as Harpers also risk getting outed, but that's not exactly just as devastating. An outed Harper may be forgiven, a Zhentarim infiltrator won't. Ever.

And it's not arrogance or meant as an insult, it's just the bloody truth. I play on both sides and every time I'm on my goodie and I join an event, I either see Team Good run around like a headless chicken, or if they have a resemblance of order, they choose the wrong leaders and take the wrong decisions, in spite of protests from those few who knows how to deal with the situation. I've seen this countless times now and I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

DM Asgorath wrote:
Evil guys aren't bereft of occasions to hugely screw it up as well. I'd say that things are currently balanced between goodies vs baddies, in the sense that no side is hugely advantaged against the other, the way things currently are (especially after the showdown at Triel).

.

You know quite well that the Triel thing wasn't a screw-up by the Zhentarim.

Xanfyrst wrote:
Evil guys aren't bereft of occasions to hugely screw it up as well. I'd say that things are currently balanced between goodies vs baddies, in the sense that no side is hugely advantaged against the other, the way things currently are (especially after the showdown at Triel).

.

You know quite well that the Triel thing wasn't a screw-up by the Zhentarim.[/quote]

Truthfully, I meant that Triel's destruction caused the Zhentarim line of influence to retrocede. As already stated after the event's conclusion, if someone would have bothered with scouting that recently-abandoned orcish settlement, things would have gone VERY differently....

I could write a kilometres-long list of all the factors that led to Triel's ultimate fate, but doing so would also reveal quite a lot of behind-the-scenes things that are best left to the dm area.

In the end, the zhents got out of the thing with an advantage and played it far more smartly than the goodies (not that outwitting the goodies was particularly difficult per se, considering how open they've been, especially around the campfires).

Are the Zhentarims 100% fail-proof, though? I would say no. And the fact that everyone forgot to scout that little encampment supports that.

Step down from your high horses and show some humility, admitting you don't know much about other people's intentions sure is a good step. Expect the better, and if mistaken try to understand why instead of thinking "dumb".....................................................

It is true. Playing an evil character is hard. Deacon is having the most difficult time at being evil. *quickly hides in a bush*

I've played good, neutral and evil characters on this server, this is what I think.

Good: Much like Valefort said in his original post, a good, dedicated good guy, can never sleep on this server, much less ever sit down. It's a long excruciating journey to a broken soul.

Neutral: Arguably the most fun alignment to play. A neutral person can choose whatever way they want to act, and won't be blamed for it. Nor do they have responsibilities if they don't want them.

Evil: Presumably you only play evil if you know what you are doing. You don't possess the same benevolent worries of the good guy, rather, you focus only on your next personal objective and everything/one else can go to meet their makers. Much like the neutral side, they focus only on their own endeavours. Due to the fact this is a game however, there are things to worry about which our characters normally wouldn't face, like running a guild, or fulfilling our own social needs. I constantly see a player's PLAYERSIDE issues becoming their CHARACTER's issues, completely regardless of alignment.

I think the point Valefort was trying to make was that only the good guys truly "worry" about the world and everything in it.