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

Israe wrote:

aaron22 wrote:no you need to have heard there is a really mean worg that is ripping experienced adventures up on the roads.

try again...

Huh? I'm pretty sure that's the point, goblins in UD compared to ones in the deeper mines are different CR, different gnolls. I can kill most npc commoners as if they are insects, yet here comes Ambrose Valexus and as a human gave me a thrashing. If players don't like the Malarite rp (which is incredibly good imo) you aren't forced to RP it. Btw Xanfyrst where's my damn marquis from the Amn/Gate war? Maybe we should focus on Continuity before slandering a group of players playstyles.

right. my response was from...

Hoihe wrote:Worgs are what, CR 8-10 creatures? (Based on Worg riders in Thundar's Ride.)

You see a Worg - for the RP out to be "run away", you need to metagame the fact that it's a player.

The roleplay is a theatre, IC conflict ≠ OOC conflict. Most players don't understand it and there is nothing you can do about it. My most interesting experience was playing evil toxic sorcerer who was constantly making conflicts, but it was also exhausting since many people were looking for any reasons to attack me, they were breaking characters and writing bullshit in my PM. I am not even saying that it was extremely hard to find a party. On the other hand, the most boring experience of mine was playing a paladin of Ilmather. I have deleted this crap when it hit 4th lvl.

P.S. I wasn't playing for a long time, who is that malarite everyone is talking about?

the more I hear of this worg player, the less impressed I am.

Where was this worg levels 1 - 15? 1-20?

Let me guess, his character was "not developed enough yet".

So he waits until he is all powerful and dangerous, before initiating conflict? Bloodlust only comes at level 25?

I may be wrong, maybe he was initiating conflict at lower level, when he could possibly be killed, but I never heard anything about it. Suddenly there is a high level worg running around attacking adventurers?

Doesn't sound like it to me.

If you are going to be evil, you should be evil at level 1. If you are PvP evil, you should be PvP evil when you are vulnerable too.

Like I said, not impressed. This community in general does not impress me. I stay for the gems, both figuratively and literally.

Somebody said it, and I'll say it too:

What fun is Batman without the Joker?

When you PvP, not only should you give an out before the battle... ...you SHOULD GIVE AN OUT AFTER! You need to find an excuse to flee, or "leave them for dead" or something. The villain needs to get away, to live again, to bring conflict next time, same Gate time, same Gate channel.

NeOmega wrote:Where was this worg levels 1 - 15? 1-20?

Let me guess, his character was "not developed enough yet".

So he waits until he is all powerful and dangerous, before initiating conflict? Bloodlust only comes at level 25?

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=62894

Steve wrote:

NeOmega wrote:Where was this worg levels 1 - 15? 1-20?

Let me guess, his character was "not developed enough yet".

So he waits until he is all powerful and dangerous, before initiating conflict? Bloodlust only comes at level 25?

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=62894

I remember Ivan. Ivan was a longtime, high level druid character. So basically, this guy was only playing this warg malarite at high levels.

NeOmega wrote:

Hidden: show

the more I hear of this worg player, the less impressed I am.

Where was this worg levels 1 - 15? 1-20?

Let me guess, his character was "not developed enough yet".

So he waits until he is all powerful and dangerous, before initiating conflict? Bloodlust only comes at level 25?

I may be wrong, maybe he was initiating conflict at lower level, when he could possibly be killed, but I never heard anything about it. Suddenly there is a high level worg running around attacking adventurers?

Doesn't sound like it to me.

If you are going to be evil, you should be evil at level 1. If you are PvP evil, you should be PvP evil when you are vulnerable too.

Like I said, not impressed. This community in general does not impress me. I stay for the gems, both figuratively and literally.

Somebody said it, and I'll say it too:

What fun is Batman without the Joker?

When you PvP, not only should you give an out before the battle... ...you SHOULD GIVE AN OUT AFTER! You need to find an excuse to flee, or "leave them for dead" or something. The villain needs to get away, to live again, to bring conflict next time, same Gate time, same Gate channel.

A major this. There's a considerable difference between getting knocked out with amnesia, being confused for already dead or being held at sword point with threats "not to do that again" vs getting maimed to death, be it on or off screen when it comes to play-along.

you have not heard of them before doesnt mean it wasnt there. doesnt mean it was either. im not saying that. my orcs have been on the server since 1 and have been evil and PvP. have you heard of them?

aaron22 wrote:you have not heard of them before doesnt mean it wasnt there. doesnt mean it was either. im not saying that. my orcs have been on the server since 1 and have been evil and PvP. have you heard of them?

I quit years before you joined, so, no.

I am not besmirching him... yet. If he has been playing this, IC, since level 1, cool. If he waited until he was uber-wulf, not cool.

Steve wrote:

NeOmega wrote:Where was this worg levels 1 - 15? 1-20?

Let me guess, his character was "not developed enough yet".

So he waits until he is all powerful and dangerous, before initiating conflict? Bloodlust only comes at level 25?

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=62894

Well, I'm being hunted now. He must not oocly like me. I'm going to make a new thread complaining.... syke! I welcome it, I harmed him IC, gave an IC reason to leave him alive, and trust this player to not force any rp on me that I don't feel ok with. He plays a Malarite well, though if he is to unite evil against me it's alright, I welcome the RP. If two evil players can have conflict, and not be asshats to each other why is this such an issue. I do play my evil Pc's from day 1 as evil, which has been painful for me as I layed at the feet to Valshar, Vithsiris, Alistaire, Vex, Kahanak, Greyfang, Laya, Thedron, Ivan, Mendel, Nai, Candlekeep

I've won some with players I now <3 such as Rania, Fenix, Kirias, Vala, Celestia, Kory, guilds such as PC, Selunites and Sunites, Michael.

Common theme, my list of positive experiences is far larger than my negatives, and I didn't list a lot of players. So maybe the playstyles isn't the issue it's the actual players who consider the server their playground and persistent world, as opposed to the communities

NeOmega wrote:

aaron22 wrote:you have not heard of them before doesnt mean it wasnt there. doesnt mean it was either. im not saying that. my orcs have been on the server since 1 and have been evil and PvP. have you heard of them?

I quit years before you joined, so, no.

Oh and let's not forget, recent 100 percent rcrs

I've played a hin assassin (Drogo) for a while, well, he was meant to be an assassin but I decided to turn him into a mercenary type character. Why? Because, in my experience people dislike PVP, I'm not sure why, but that seems to be the case. I generally ask in tell if people are okay with PVP, if they're not or reply with a remotely negative answer to the question, I move away from any thought of PVP. It can be immersion breaking, espescially if the person just hit you with a meteor by mistake, or other magics, but it is what it is. I find it's simply not worth the OOC drama/unhappiness.

My advice to evil players that enjoy pvp: only pvp with other characters that openly welcome it. For example people who state in their description that they're fine with PVP, or have literally said they'd be interested in PVP.

Oh, and people make mistakes, try not to hold a grudge.

Torgerias wrote:Can I take a moment to just point out that we're all playing make believe here? If another player's in-character actions are having a genuinely negative impact on you emotionally, try reminding yourself that it's all just pretend. If you can't make that distinction, then maybe you should re-assess whether you should be playing this game. There's being invested in your character, and then there's obsession.

EDIT: That came out meaner than I intended.

Didn't sound mean to me! Nail on the (do-me) head, sir.

#Torgeriasforpresident

Hoihe wrote:vs getting maimed to death, be it on or off screen when it comes to play-along.

Under the rules of this server, players can't give other players permastrikes. I'm not sure why everyone keeps treating this like "If a malarite mauls my character I have to be permanently disfigured," or any variation of that.

Torgerias wrote:

Hoihe wrote:vs getting maimed to death, be it on or off screen when it comes to play-along.

Under the rules of this server, players can't give other players permastrikes. I'm not sure why everyone keeps treating this like "If a malarite mauls my character I have to be permanently disfigured," or any variation of that.

Because there's an unspoken implication that if you don't do it, you're disrespecting their RP/are not a proper roleplayer who can "deal with consequences." Even if the player themselves don't do it, the forums have a clear hint of said mentality being present.

Hoihe wrote:

Torgerias wrote:

Hoihe wrote:vs getting maimed to death, be it on or off screen when it comes to play-along.

Under the rules of this server, players can't give other players permastrikes. I'm not sure why everyone keeps treating this like "If a malarite mauls my character I have to be permanently disfigured," or any variation of that.

Because there's an unspoken implication that if you don't do it, you're disrespecting their RP/are not a proper roleplayer who can "deal with consequences." Even if the player themselves don't do it, the forums have a clear hint of said mentality being present.

But....who cares??? If they are trying to guilt trip/peer pressure you in to doing it do you really want/need their approval or even want to interact with them again in the future? If what they are doing is within the rules, but takes away from your fun of the game then that should be reason enough for you to disassociate yourself from them all together and thus not subject yourself to their perceived approval/disapproval.