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

Here only things goodly character need to fight here would be intrigues and distrust. If some external threat arises, they have to literally fight each other to be allowed to help lol

Very. 'specially in the Underdark. :^)

forgotten realms is happy land fantasy.

You have canonical lawful good rulers and the difference between the bad guys and the good guys is clear for the most part. I think that says it all about the setting. Personally i think it's a bad setting

i have more trouble believing in lawful good rulers than in dragons and faeries

cosmic ray wrote:forgotten realms is happy land fantasy.

You have canonical lawful good rulers and the difference between the bad guys and the good guys is clear for the most part. I think that says it all about the setting. Personally i think it's a bad setting

i have more trouble believing in lawful good rulers than in dragons and faeries

If you do things (and mostly successfully) to ensure about prosperity(good) and safety(lawful) of your people you are a lawful good ruler.
And believe or not there are lots of rulers throughout history that care and do things to ensure the prosperity and safety of their people.
But I agree, FR is a little too happy to my taste

*WARNING - CRITICISM AHEAD* Personally from someone who has been on this server for a number of years I have seen a lot of this places true personality. From the DM purge of 2011-12 to the favoritism that swept through the lands and the Radiant Heart and beyond. The problem is that "Good" is catered to on this server and thus creates a vast population of "good" because there are incentives to be good. There isn't much push-back as events are usually resolved with little consequence. Dash of Salt I was part of the Temple of Bane before the DM's allowed a good guild to essentially destroy our in-game area and kill any incentive and thus push us off of the server. This was prior to the great DM purge (I won't go into details because I'm sure the staff wants to forget about it) and still resonates in the world you all play in today. Evil comes and goes but is usually meta-gamed out of existence by people who just want to "Win" instead of play the game for the RP. So that is why you see so little evil being actively...well...evil. People take an evil characters actions OOCly, because they are "Trying to ruin their fun" and generally DM's side with that argument which makes people...not want to play evil...because they are either going to quickly find themselves KOS (even though its against the rules) or just generally ostracized out of character.

TLDR: Alot of unpopular opinions above demonstrated through actual experiences over the past 4 1/2 years of playing here. Tah dah.

zyztem wrote: The intention doesn't matter.

Read book of Vile Darkness, page 6.

NegInfinity wrote:

zyztem wrote: The intention doesn't matter.

Read book of Vile Darkness, page 6.

I will just delete what you quoted.
What I said still stand and you don't need to worry about my incompetance.
Win-win

Read book of Vile Darkness

Vile Darkness is not in the FR lore

Lockonnow wrote:

Read book of Vile Darkness

Vile Darkness is not in the FR lore

Now, guess from which book Warrior of Darkness originates. ^_^.
----

zyztem wrote: I will just delete what you quoted.
What I said still stand and you don't need to worry about my incompetance.
Win-win

It is a game, and I was just pointing you material you might consider interesting to read.

Basically, two books that cover good/evil are Book of Exhalted Deeds (covers good) and Book of Vile Darkness (covers evil). Vile Darkness is mature content, though.

...

I have a hunch if I continue that direction, the thread will spiral into another good-vs-evil pillow fight.

Steve wrote: The question I have for you is: how much effort have you put into joining these groups/individuals, or starting something of your own?

Certainly very little. My adventuring dwarves have always had a grim outlook on things compared to some ale--chugging comic reliefs that have come and gone through the years, but it's hardly making effort to the point. Nor is it really the point. The question is about the environment to better align oneself to it, rather than changing it altogether through my actions.

Kayan wrote:Honestly? The Forgotten Realms are just a framework for your own world building. The answer lies with you.

Hrm, maybe so. More for the DMs to consider though as they create the environment, and mostly for places that aren't detailed (which might be all places?).

Calantyr wrote:Te Sword Coast isn't as dark as it realistically should be.

cosmic ray wrote:forgotten realms is happy land fantasy.

I fear that's accurate from what I've read on this topic so far. Thanks for the input

ThelittleWiggle wrote:The problem is that "Good" is catered to on this server and thus creates a vast population of "good" because there are incentives to be good.

I don't think that's necessarily true. Threads on that subject pop up now and again, but I think it's missing the other side of the argument. There might not be too many incentives for evil (for the sake of argument), but if so it's the same for good. Good flourishes with struggle, overcoming oppression, protecting the weak and so on. If there is very little of that you end up with 20 would-be heroes volunteering to guard a merchant wagon for free just out of doing something. I think the feelings that evil isn't catered too is a symptom of the server being far more social than story-driven, which poses the same symtoms for good characters as they do evil ones.

I want to state that currently, we cater to all alignments. What we don't cater to is creating PvP conflict that we would be sponsoring. We find that player to player conflicts tend to go into the realm of OOC(whether through rules or simple hatred for each other) and that's where things become an issue we have to deal with. If players want to engage in this type of RP, within the rules(all of the rules), and with consent with each other, we will seldom interfere.

But we stay away from creating events or plots that would pit player against player mechanically. (although in some plots we can have what Player A did affect what Player B is going to face.)

Karond wrote:Certainly very little. My adventuring dwarves have always had a grim outlook on things compared to some ale--chugging comic reliefs that have come and gone through the years, but it's hardly making effort to the point. Nor is it really the point. The question is about the environment to better align oneself to it, rather than changing it altogether through my actions.

I guess what I am saying to you Karond is that being "dark," dark enough or really, dark enough...is a matter of perspective. The subjective definition of what an individual finds dark. As well, if you have little to no experience trying to initiate dark role-play, Evil role-play, by starting and carrying on with RP that promotes "rampant poverty, misery, greed and so on," would it not be prudent to try and find it, try and make it, in order to truly know for yourself what is or is not working/happening on this Forgotten Realms themed Server?

It seems that you are saying that it is the DMs responsibility to shape the environment. While they definitely have the power to do that, I would agree with other posters that they are not interested in that. I know personally that at least 2 of the current full DMs have a long history of playing Evil/dark PCs on BGTSCC. But as Pun Pun stated, they have a mandate to cater to all.

But one can also argue that that being dark, and being evil, are actually two different aspects. I think it is very possible to be a "dark" paladin, or at least, have a dark view and a dark environment from which a life is lived out. One could also be a Chaotic Good ranger living in the harshness of the Sharpteeth, where your human flesh is constantly sought out by a vicious Chieftain and Tribe, guided by a devil-worshipping shaman! That seems pretty dark to me.

But again, here is where I'm bringing it back onto the Player(s) to make this type of environment come alive.

Karond wrote:. I think the feelings that evil isn't catered too is a symptom of the server being far more social than story-driven, which poses the same symtoms for good characters as they do evil ones.

Yes, and we have discussed this at length, before. There is so much more that can be said!!!

But from my perspective on the Server, a truly dark setting involves the background fear of death and suffering. For our Toons. THAT is not upheld or designed into the Server, as a default. Something Players have to face, which brings a "grim reality" to the RP. The reason to live is defined by the concept of dying. If our Characters death is only an option when a Player decides it so, things such as fear and depression have zero weight in the experience for the Players (although there does exist the option to "act" out this fear, but I would say it qualifies more as a farce).

But I would argue that just because BGTSCC has a high level of "social server" RP going on, that does not mean that those "socialites" could not be RPing in opposition to each other. Just like many other games—checkers, chess, running, MMA—the idea is to win, against an opponent. Some games, we play with friends, some with enemies...some with frenemies!!! Like you pointed out earlier, if opposing forces, run by Players—good vs. evil as example—are not interested in working together—which is key—then the situation will fail.

Sure, DMs could, and often are, expected to take the form of the Evil side of things, in the very traditional D&D game. But I do not feel that the majority of current DMs are actually that interested nor that good, at being dark. So expecting that from them is probably not a good idea. However, requesting some support is totally possible, and they are skilled enough to be able to provide that (which could stand outside of generating dark RP, as I see it). But just like having Players that are interested, you need Staff to be interested. Dark RP is a collaboration, just like anything else!!!

Anyway, if you are interested in more, I hope you will "look me up." Dark-themed fantasy that you are pointing out is lacking is something that I am currently putting 90% of my game time towards. At least, under the themes you mentioned.

Karond wrote:I wonder how much of that is applicable to the sword coast,

Here is a short list, in my opinion, where you or any Player seeking the "Darkness" should be RPing,and making what you wish to see, come alive:

• Darkhold
  
  Soubar ("...a lawless culture full of brigands and ruffians.")
  
  Pirates Den, Ulgoth's Beard
  
  Roaringshore (Broken Goblet or in general)
  
  Water Queen's House (Baldur's Gate)
  
  The Blushing Mermaid Tavern (Baldur's Gate)
  
  Orc Home (northern region)
  
  Sharpteeth Wood (with or without being associated with the Orcs there).

zyztem wrote:

cosmic ray wrote:forgotten realms is happy land fantasy.

You have canonical lawful good rulers and the difference between the bad guys and the good guys is clear for the most part. I think that says it all about the setting. Personally i think it's a bad setting

i have more trouble believing in lawful good rulers than in dragons and faeries

If you do things (and mostly successfully) to ensure about prosperity(good) and safety(lawful) of your people you are a lawful good ruler.
And believe or not there are lots of rulers throughout history that care and do things to ensure the prosperity and safety of their people.
But I agree, FR is a little too happy to my taste

Cosmic, change https to http.

As per the topic, we did just have a year of plague and stuff. There's orphans looking for homes and factions are rebuilding from that. I'd say that was pretty dark in you want good vs. evil. On top of that there's residual effects from that same event as well as some bad ass orcs brewing in the north.

Possibly on the day to day stuff there may be less conflict. My sun elf had a run in with a dwarf and it turned out how you'd expect, the sun elf with his nose in the air and the dwarf calling him female. Of course others around were afraid they might fight but so it goes.

DM Pun Pun wrote:I want to state that currently, we cater to all alignments. What we don't cater to is creating PvP conflict that we would be sponsoring.

And that is why I came back this time around. What I was trying to get at is that in the past, this type of activity from the staff has and was a large part of the problem that still ripples out into the world today.

I guess when I mentioned catering to good, I feel that the design of the world as a whole kind of sets that precedence. I'm not here looking for PvP as OOC issues are kind of annoying and we like to act like adults. In the same respect however, Evil really has a hard time influencing the vanilla game as it stands. Anyone can protect a group of adventurers. It takes effort and DM association to affect the world as the world without directly leading to player conflict.