Going to Leave the Evil to the DMs

[Nachti]

Allow guildhalls to be burned down and people will start fearing the loose of their "beloved home".

- The followers of Shar could use a spell to hide the moon for a brief time and then destroy the church of Selune by animating the night itself.
- The Red wizards of Thay could experiment with members of the Damwun to create blood orcs.
- Evil Druids could influence the earth to take back the citadel of the silver rose. Huge roots will rise from the ground, embrace the building and drag it into the earth - within a few weeks.
- Drows could try to build an outpost near baldurs gate but suddenly find themselves in the tunnels of Kraak Helzak dwarves. Of course they start to steal every treasure there and empty the guildhall of any worthful.
- The harpers found a conclave of devil workshippers, killed half of them and brought the survivers to jail. A pit fiend named "Xodrasan" takes revenge for crossing his plans and trades some ember guards from the city of brass and sends them to baldurs gate. They destroy the jail and free the cultists. From now on the harpers are blamed for bringing destruction.

Same could happen for evil guilds aswell.
(Let the area designer prepare a ruined version for every active guild).

Allow Evil to influence important NPCs which start to harass the good-doers.

Allow Evil Players to be the protagonists behind such events as the "plague".

Although that means he could die forever. In this case DMs merely play the role as advisor or assistant rather then playing another "year campaign".

Bring a new pvp fan club to live with agreed consequences. As example: 1-29: looser must take the way through myrkul xp loos. Level 30: looses 1 equipped item or permadeath.

[kleomenes]

All these ideas are all very well and good but consequences - and respect for danger - run both ways. I recall the assassination thread a while back where many posters seemed to want assassinations to cause consequences, yet also thought only evil characters would be undertaking such. For one, that is inaccurate (check out what happens to the Rundeen in 1349) but also really, it seemed like if assassination was more "evil", then at the very least there should be similar consequences for when a paladin posse track down and behead a bandit on the trade way. And that becomes a general discussion about PvP consequences like we seem to be having here.

I've both seen and experienced on a frequent basis that CvC conflict resolved through PvP ends up being amazing. I've also found sometimes its meaningless. Sometimes things are great, advances characters, and people RP about it appropriately - I laud those who do. At other times, the loser jumps up and walks it off and is back to doing the same thing the next day. I've noticed this particularly with the bandit/menacing troublemaker RP. Thids himself touched on this fact, that players of evil chars need to take into account "fear" in their own RP too.

Its depressing to RP out a tense and fun encounter to have it rendered effectively a waste of by the same char doing the same things in the same area again after a day. Strictly speaking its within the rules. But its crap storytelling. I mean no reaction at all to the RP encounter, its like it didn't happen.

Yet I am not big on players imposing consequences myself as there seems to be a tendency to impose far reaching consequences for one PvP (by both players of good and evil PCs). There's a host of negatives I can see with that:
- Encouraging powerbuilding above RP building
- Encouraging "power" RP, and leveraging OOC contacts (metagaming, basically) becuase the stakes are high
- Discouraging various archetypes that will come into conflict
- In some cases, outright breaking character
- A cycle of PvP based character interaction thats inevitably going to favour the more numerous goodly characters when taken together with their neutral but don't like murderers allies
- Some real crappy experiences in throwaway RP for low level characters.

Its not the sort of experience many people come to this server for. When it comes down to it people should be allowed to play their characters in some form

Some sort of recognition of the impact of an encounter though just gives weight to RP though and makes a positive RP experience for those involved. I just think its better done by encouraging a culture of voluntary acceptance, and dialogue. It doesn't need to be heavy. Even just rping licking one's wounds for a while can be enough. Or carrying the weight of the encounter. Even being spared can lead to character development

I think we can all agree laughing in the face of danger because of no permadeath is poor sportsmanship in an RP sense. Its all our responsibility to have our characters respond and act ICly. This goes for players of evil characters too.

(of course, I had Ameris respect the danger he faced quite diligently - he only stayed in guarded areas unless disguised and buffed to high heaven. That wasn't that popular either!)

[kleomenes]

- The harpers found a conclave of devil workshippers, killed half of them and brought the survivers to jail. A pit fiend named "Xodrasan" takes revenge for crossing his plans and trades some ember guards from the city of brass and sends them to baldurs gate. They destroy the jail and free the cultists. From now on the harpers are blamed for bringing destruction.

While my first reaction is "WOW we'd actually get an event aimed at us for the first time in years!" (Am I right mrm3ntalist? ), I have to ask, where does the fun come for us here? Its a genuine question. It seems like a plot that has NPCs undoing literally years of RP in a single night, without any comeback. There's adversity being good storytelling of course. Is that what you had in mind? Genuine question.

[dedude]

One of the big problems, as has already been mentioned many times, is that there is little to no fear/respect of death. Death should be the ultimate consequence of a conflict. There can be others, but rarely anything worse than death. Mechanically there is no reason to fear it, so it's easy to let that OOC knowledge seep into your IC choices.

I would suggest that each death had a chance to give the character a permastrike. Could for example be 1% chance per level of character, and then up the max permastrike number to 10.

I know something like this has little chance to be embraced here, there are probably too many players that just wanna run around OOC and kill stuff. I have played with a similiar system before, and it worked very well and brought some needed tension to pretty much all aspects of play.

[Invoker]

Yet I am not big on players imposing consequences myself as there seems to be a tendency to impose far reaching consequences for one PvP (by both players of good and evil PCs).

Correct.

In my experience, those afraid of losing are seldom gracious winners.

The problem with the PvP rules is the "Winner decides all" clause.

The outcome (a believable, rich, interesting outcome for BOTH sides) should be decided together, OOC friends among friends.

[Nachti]

They destroy the jail and free the cultists. From now on the harpers are blamed for bringing destruction.

Doesnt have to go this way.

As a DM I would whrite together 10 possible endings and the outcome would be based upon the cultists connection to the devil, the efreetis trade and the defenders reaction.

It seems like a plot that has NPCs undoing literally years of RP in a single night, without any comeback. There's adversity being good storytelling of course. Is that what you had in mind? Genuine question.

Whriting down a story and let the players "read the book" is boring. The involved players should whrite the story.

[Steve]

Yet I am not big on players imposing consequences myself as there seems to be a tendency to impose far reaching consequences for one PvP (by both players of good and evil PCs). There's a host of negatives I can see with that:
- Encouraging powerbuilding above RP building
- Encouraging "power" RP, and leveraging OOC contacts (metagaming, basically) becuase the stakes are high
- Discouraging various archetypes that will come into conflict
- In some cases, outright breaking character
- A cycle of PvP based character interaction thats inevitably going to favour the more numerous goodly characters when taken together with their neutral but don't like murderers allies
- Some real crappy experiences in throwaway RP for low level characters.

Its not the sort of experience many people come to this server for. When it comes down to it people should be allowed to play their characters in some form

I am not big on imposing consequences, either. I simply WANT consequence, as a fundamental, underlying backdrop to the WHY and BECAUSE of things, be they actions, or promise, or attempt (failed or realized).

I understand, clearly, that pushing OOC—and even IC—will turn people off, from any RP, be it Evil or Good. That is not any issue I really need to address more.

But look: if the DMs don't hold our Characters to lasting and definitive consequence, how do you think Players are going to hold themselves, and others, to it?!?

DMs are not babysitters, but they are the guides and upholders of the "laws" of the IG environment as well as the general sandbox (the OOC understanding of it). If they are the "masters" of the world we game in, they thus set the Rules. Events and Storylines without ultimate consequence(s) OUTSIDE the decision of the Player...you know, in the hands of the dice ...provide the unbiased basis for accepting consequence of action and being, without ascribing blame, upon another.

Like Invoker said: "The outcome (a believable, rich, interesting outcome for BOTH sides) should be decided together...." Thus, if you the Player bring it, and then FAIL by action and deserve consequence, AND this is decided by the Dice, it is simply as it is.

Player-initiated Evil RP is not about PvP mechanical fights as determining all results, final and undisputable. We know this doesn't work at all. Player-initiated Evil RP is about having options to manifest, support from Staff and recognition from Players. Period (and same goes for Good RP, of course).

Any way you look it, nothing manifests in a environment changing way, unless the DMs are supporting it. So, why not let the DMs run the Evil for the Goods, because this already how it is going...and it is much easier to REACT in RP against this Evil coming from the DMs, then to a) make it occur as a Evil PC, b) react against/with it as an Evil PC.

My opinion!!

[Atlas]

What is being asked for here is for more concessions to make this server even more gank/cheap shot/dirty player friendly.

In my experience most players who toot their own horn about how good they are at pvp play the gank game, they don't square up to you in a fair environment because then victory is no longer assured for them. And they won't ever square up to you at all if in their mind there is even a chance of losing.

All of this talk about out of character mediations and negotiations about conflicts and storylines is a myth in my experience. Or otherwise it must be a group of friends/cliché privilege. I have certainly never experienced such a luxury from any of the foes my character has faced.

The culture we have here on BGTSCC, and what I have seen on most every other server I have witnessed is that of irresponsibility and some kind of nihilist vision that blurs the lines of storytelling where people enjoy making the most hideously horrible and evil characters and somehow get it into their heads that they have some kind of valid point to prove or social critique to make. And then the worst part is that every time they overstay their welcome they finish up by riding off into the sunset, or their deaths are a contrived and meaningless footnote of their own device for the express purpose of having nothing to do with those characters they have wronged and affected.

PVP in this game is ugly and unrewarding. It is not an enjoyable spectacle because combat in this game uses a free form system without any kind of movement restrictions.

If Nwn2 had a turn based combat mode and this server could utilize it then it might actually be fun.


I've already made posts about what would need to be implemented to make this server more combat or player vs player friendly in the past and fair in that regard.

The lines need to be drawn in the sand, and the factions or alliances need to be cemented in their roles for the ensuring wars or conflicts.

If you're going to make Baldur's Gate a Gotham City/Pirates of the Caribbean bastardization of apathy leaning towards low morals instead of high ones favouring old source book lore over years of server role play then the lawful good characters need a base of operations like Elturel and/or the other members of the lawful and good members of The Lord's Alliance.

Then a crap load of bad guys need to die violently and in a deserving fashion in a great battle to even out all of the staving off of the inevitable and doomsday clock plots and campaigns that have eroded the Sword Coast over and over and over again with nothing ever getting any better for the last seven years.

The good guys need their beyond heroic efforts against overwhelming odds finally recognized and rewarded.

There has to be some kind of justice and closure for the Amn-Gate War, and everything that has happened since. The gutters need to finally be washed clean, if only for a time.



Then when we're back on an even footing this server can have its alliance of good at odds with the alliance of evil, with the proper support and infrastructure provided for both sides.

-Pvp Lakes or battle grounds need to be created for BGTSCC so that two armies can meet each other fairly to settle a dispute.

-The heroes and leaders of the last eight years need to be recognized and installed into positions of power and authority to lead their armies.

-All of the cheap and dirty game mechanics would need to be fixed so that the arch types actually reflect what they are supposed to be.

[aaron22]

Hidden: show

What is being asked for here is for more concessions to make this server even more gank/cheap shot/dirty player friendly.

In my experience most players who toot their own horn about how good they are at pvp play the gank game, they don't square up to you in a fair environment because then victory is no longer assured for them. And they won't ever square up to you at all if in their mind there is even a chance of losing.

All of this talk about out of character mediations and negotiations about conflicts and storylines is a myth in my experience. Or otherwise it must be a group of friends/cliché privilege. I have certainly never experienced such a luxury from any of the foes my character has faced.

The culture we have here on BGTSCC, and what I have seen on most every other server I have witnessed is that of irresponsibility and some kind of nihilist vision that blurs the lines of storytelling where people enjoy making the most hideously horrible and evil characters and somehow get it into their heads that they have some kind of valid point to prove or social critique to make. And then the worst part is that every time they overstay their welcome they finish up by riding off into the sunset, or their deaths are a contrived and meaningless footnote of their own device for the express purpose of having nothing to do with those characters they have wronged and affected.

PVP in this game is ugly and unrewarding. It is not an enjoyable spectacle because combat in this game uses a free form system without any kind of movement restrictions.

If Nwn2 had a turn based combat mode and this server could utilize it then it might actually be fun.


I've already made posts about what would need to be implemented to make this server more combat or player vs player friendly in the past and fair in that regard.

The lines need to be drawn in the sand, and the factions or alliances need to be cemented in their roles for the ensuring wars or conflicts.

If you're going to make Baldur's Gate a Gotham City/Pirates of the Caribbean bastardization of apathy leaning towards low morals instead of high ones favouring old source book lore over years of server role play then the lawful good characters need a base of operations like Elturel and/or the other members of the lawful and good members of The Lord's Alliance.

Then a crap load of bad guys need to die violently and in a deserving fashion in a great battle to even out all of the staving off of the inevitable and doomsday clock plots and campaigns that have eroded the Sword Coast over and over and over again with nothing ever getting any better for the last seven years.

The good guys need their beyond heroic efforts against overwhelming odds finally recognized and rewarded.

There has to be some kind of justice and closure for the Amn-Gate War, and everything that has happened since. The gutters need to finally be washed clean, if only for a time.



Then when we're back on an even footing this server can have its alliance of good at odds with the alliance of evil, with the proper support and infrastructure provided for both sides.

-Pvp Lakes or battle grounds need to be created for BGTSCC so that two armies can meet each other fairly to settle a dispute.

-The heroes and leaders of the last eight years need to be recognized and installed into positions of power and authority to lead their armies.

-All of the cheap and dirty game mechanics would need to be fixed so that the arch types actually reflect what they are supposed to be.

you are trolling right? funny joke? i hope so..

you want to put aside 8 years of DM events and story lines based on good vs DM run evil....

THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!!!!

for 8 years a handful of guilds and factions get more than weekly events focused on good vs dm evil... evil just wants to have something.. anything..

even footing??? seriously must be trolling

[Akroma666]

I'm just going to say it.. This topic keeps coming up.. I raised it twice in my 6+ year tenure.

I would like to ask the DM staff, if it keeps being brought up.. when will it actually be addressed for once? Like officially addressed.. I know Dialectic and Lobo tired for a while.. but both plots fizzled out.

Can we PLEASE get a dedicated evil DM or 2 that will run even something as simple as a highway robbery along the trade way?

Ideally I would love to see PvP actually be a thing rather than a "pain point" but I feel thats wishful thinking.

Thats my 2 cents.

[chad878262]

Can we PLEASE get a dedicated evil DM or 2

Aren't all DM's evil?

I think part of the issue is that there used to be DM's that were dedicated to certain guilds (this was before my time on the server though). My understanding from talking with other players is some folks got upset because they didn't want to be in a guild, but felt left out of plots and such.

I think it would be great if specific guilds/groups could have a dedicated DM, maybe that runs an event for them once every two weeks, or maybe runs events every week for a month to take them through a plot, then goes and works with other groups before circling back. My guess is that at the end of the day there is simply only so many bodies wearing the DM hat at any given time. In addition the server plot would be really complex to keep moving and not have DM's stepping on each others toes if team evil were to accomplish some task that could not have happened when team good were doing something else. After the fact there'd be fallout, retconning and hurt feelings.

While I agree with the sentiment, I think some understanding should be given for the difficulties DM's have with running good vs. evil events.

Maybe the answer is team evil should be based in the UD and team good on the surface, have a dedicated set of UD DM's and surface DM's and maybe once per year run a series of events that cause the two to clash... Of course this doesn't work because we have established evil groups on the surface that have spent years building a history on the server. So it goes back to guild DM's, which as I said, occurred in the past, but was stopped.

[Atlas]

you are trolling right? funny joke? i hope so..you want to put aside 8 years of DM events and story lines based on good vs DM run evil....THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT!!!!!!for 8 years a handful of guilds and factions get more than weekly events focused on good vs dm evil... evil just wants to have something.. anything.. even footing??? seriously must be trolling

I am not trolling, but this entire thread is ridiculous. The system I outlined would actually be fair though, as opposed to what everyone else in this thread has suggested.

You are mistaking eight years of storyline for eight years of disjointed DM Events that some people try and cobble together to create a greater narrative for. Almost everything important that has happened over the history of BGTSCC has been discarded or forgotten or ignored on a whim. Characters disappear without being finished off, and the consequences are never there.

It is like if there was a tv show that got the axe half way through the first season, and then somehow for the next eight years that same tv show gets rebooted and axed again half way through each consecutive year.

Would you not get tired of the hundredth Infernal or Elemental Cult or band of Mercenaries or whatever that never fail to replace the ones before them, when stories from years and years ago were just frozen or didn't even end in a way to give the players closure or even end at all?


I know you think the Order of the Radiant Heart Auxiliary is one of these favoured few factions that get showered in attention and glory but you are sadly mistaken. We haven't even had a DM run an event for us since sometime last year that I can't even recall off the top of my head.

And to tell you the truth most of the events, and almost all of the DMs we were assigned to fit into this social critique/point to prove criteria I spoke of that in actuality drove most of our members to quit the faction or game or both.



I am all for the staff controlling the main villains and antagonists as npcs and creating a Warcraft Expansion type meta plot each year for BGTSCC, but that never really happens either, and as I have already explained, we don't even have all of the bases covered for a proper meta plot that would be enjoyable for everyone.

For that to happen there needs to be a base of power for each and every major faction in the setting, by means of if you are character a who is class b who serves purpose c then you can join [insert base of power here] and have a way to progress in an actual tangible form both for your character and the story.

[flipside43]

I don't really think it's fair to generalize and say it's the same handful of guilds over the past 8 years have gotten all the events and evil has gone without.

But to pull this train back on track, I honestly don't think it's at all about the DM's on this. For evil RP to thrive among the playerbase there needs to be more than simple PvP every time someone crosses them. There needs to be actually rich storytelling, intrigue and rivalries built. So that when there is PvP it is meaningful as it's an eventual showdown that has been coming for X days/months. Not just the 10th time this week character evilflag and holyguy ran into each other. What this needs though is trust on both sides and honestly, something I see severely lacking in the community. Both with people wanting to force consequences on people and PvP stomping as a form of evil RP.

If there's a problem with consequences and a suspension of belief with all the PvP, perhaps do it less so it's more meaningful? Focus on storytelling instead? Just my two cents, for what it's worth.

[Nachti]

Are there even active evil guilds?

Red Wizards - Yes
Church of Myrkul - Yes
Cult of Tiamat - Yes

Church of Shar - No
Temple of Auril - Maybe
Zhentarim - Maybe
Church of Bhaal - Maybe
Cult of the Dragon - No

[Laughing Octopus]

We're all just basically playing cops & robbers. Kids only play along if it's fun. Sure you'll have the jerk kid who has everything to prove saying he's "immune to bullets" or some such nonsense, and yeah, that'll ruin the others' fun, but there's no way you can effectively make that kid you shot fall dead.

In the same way, there's nothing saying your character has to shit himself because some other character with 50 intimidate said "ooga booga". What it comes down to is what's fun. If you're trying to inspire fear, or hatred, or sadness, you have to sell it. The player of that character you're trying to influence has to see it as more fun to play along and get angry or spooked, if the interaction is going to be satisfying for both parties.

The reason people usually play along in DMed scenarios is because DMs have the pretense that they're there to provide fun for everybody involved, including themselves. By playing along, you're basically moving with the hopes that the story they're taking part in will get interesting, either in the span of the next five minutes or the next five months.

But people don't have that kind of expectation, and in fact some skepticism, in PC antagonists. Will the interaction be interesting to me? Will it just be him yelling at me and beating me up when I'm just trying to have a conversation? Will he just shut down my own roleplay and just enforce his own? Will my cool guy character still be a cool guy after this interaction? These are questions an antagonist will have to contend with, and rules and restrictions, death mechanics, or item penalties won't change that.

Basically, you just have to sell it, make it more fun to play along than to not. I can understand getting disheartened if nobody bites, but all I can say is don't give up! Change your approach, try it on different character, and eventually you'll get that meaningful approach.

As for good and evil roleplay areas, I think that would accomplish the opposite effect, and isolate the groups much like the underdark and the surface. Really I think the groups should mixed together, have evil and good people in the same plots, with different, sometimes opposing agendas. But I think that's on the players more than the DMs.