Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

Anything to say about roleplay? Want to share a story? This is the right place.

Moderator: Wizards

Locked
Message
Author
Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#1 Post by Olrane » Wed Jul 20, 2011 5:47 pm

I just logged out of Geas after being confused and disappointed with an encounter that involved nine or ten player characters and a host of demons in the Arborea forest.

I feel that metagaming ruined the encounter, and despite the fun of the actual combat, there was almost no meaning in the end.

A group of strange demons who singled out two Evrenite heretics as priority targets descended on a group of people in the woods. Others were called to the fight etc. This was all quite fine, generally.
What broke everything was the introduction of a deathpriest.

-The righteous defenders not only failed to rout the priest, but allowed him to assist them in killing the demons.
-The deathpriest continued to assist even after it was obvious that Evrenites were the demons' choice target (a deathpriest's direct enemy).
-The defenders worked directly with the priest but did NOT team with the priest. There was no justification for this outside of favour/karma/reputation metagaming.

What the heck? Even after the demon threat was routed, the priest was not harrassed adequately.

I feel that I am in large part to blame, because my character had ample opportunity to attack the priest but didn't. And, sadly, that also was somewhat due to metagaming:
I didn't feel I could trust the rest of you to act appropriately.

The last time Teek was around a group of regular neutral to good characters and a deathpriest showed up, I did have him engage the death priest. The other characters stood idly by while Teek was nearly bone speared to death, and then disappointed me with pleading that the thief return TO THE DEATHPRIEST his stolen item.

Demons, thieves, these are NOT reasons to quit roleplaying, guys. I want to know that I'm safe to shoot at someone and hope that they'll feel threatened AND that the rest of the goodies will back me up.

Mogwai
Veteran
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:15 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#2 Post by Mogwai » Wed Jul 20, 2011 8:58 pm

I would understand your statement if there were actual goodies there.
I would understand if there were actual 'righteous defenders' there such as crusaders and taniel priests.
The one 'goodie' there was actually a shao-lin and they have IC reasoning to not engage the death priest.

The deathpriest was justified, he was investigating a different potential enemy whom he had no alliance with.

Your thesis would be correct if there were 'goodies' but shao-lin and asrals aren't what I consider 'goodies'

User avatar
lili
Experienced
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 2:10 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#3 Post by lili » Wed Jul 20, 2011 9:23 pm

From what I understand there were two people from Evren's faith there, Those I would assume would in all aspects be 'goodies'
(= You guys need to vote =)

Mogwai
Veteran
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 12:15 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#4 Post by Mogwai » Wed Jul 20, 2011 10:39 pm

lili wrote:From what I understand there were two people from Evren's faith there, Those I would assume would in all aspects be 'goodies'
They were also in a guild with a non-aggression stance with said priest, so they IC reason why suddenly attacking that death priest would be going against another IC factor.

One cannot assume that just because the characters were evren followers doesn't mean there aren't other reasons for a lack of aggression.

There have been consequences for breaking IC ceasefires, orders and treaties that would be suffered IC.

On a shallow/surface view it would look like they made a strange decision but looking closer at it the 'goodies' do have reasonable IC reason for not engaging/harassing said death priest.

Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#5 Post by Olrane » Wed Jul 20, 2011 11:24 pm

Honestly, "goodie" in this sense does not simply mean Crusader, Tanielite, or Ranger.

Nor does a "non-aggression stance" justify it, in my eye. Any number of those characters could have continued, as Teek tried, to peaceably have the Sathonite leave the area.

What we had was not just an outlaw, but one who should have few sympathizers for belonging to a faction known for cannibalism, indiscriminate murder, torture, enslavement, dark rituals, and leaving walking death traps in civilized areas.

To associate with such a person requires some sort of motivation. Duress, perhaps, or a hefty monetary compensation. Happy-go-lucky demon hunting isn't really reasonable unless perhaps the demons could not have been defended against without said priest. I was there, and I am very confident that the involved characters could have handled themselves against the demon threat without the priest.

Players and characters who were involved (myself and Teek very much included) should be ashamed of themselves for how the situation was handled if they have any respect for law, for Arborea, or for, I don't know, freaking humanity - mass murdering psychopaths should be treated as such.

Back to my original point: I simply call metagaming. To address the Sathonite in an appropriate manner would have had actual IC consequences including possible deaths, breaches of agreement, or whatever. I didn't want to deal with death and a repeat of my last encounter (where Teek was again the bigger bad than the deathpriest). This rant is a reminder to myself and to others, and I hope it's appreciated by someone.

User avatar
luminier
Overlord
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:40 pm
Location: Manitoba Canada

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#6 Post by luminier » Thu Jul 21, 2011 12:02 am

Im inclined to agree with Olrane here. Based on what he described, the situation seems very odd.

If there was a treaty perhaps that can be used as a defence for the party in question's odd action. Sathonites and Evrenites are mortal enemies. They should never be working together at all, be it against demon or otherwise, in my opinion.

That is of course unless the person roleplays just being a horrible follower of their god and always having terrible karma and favour... somehow I don't think that is the case.
The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

Urik
Experienced
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:03 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#7 Post by Urik » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:42 am

Mogwai wrote:shao-lin and asrals
Shao-Lin usually don't attack unless they are attacked.
Asrals only hunt their enemies.

Was said deathpriest attacking the Shao?
--From what i take from this conversation, no. So the Shao wouldn't engage him.

Is the deathpriest an enemy of the Asrals?
--Again what i take is that he is not. So the Asrals wouldn't engage him.

Guild wise, there is no IC reason for either of these factions to get angry at this deathpriest and tell him to leave.
I went into a McDonald's yesterday and said, 'I'd like some fries.' The girl at the counter said, 'Would you like some fries with that?'

lanyara
Overlord
Posts: 1048
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:06 am

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#8 Post by lanyara » Thu Jul 21, 2011 5:34 am

What I find sad is that you want to think of clerics of Sathonys being able to roleplay in just one way and solely one way - instant and perpetual PvP.

I know why this has become the majority opinion - because the game code is in the wrong (karma system, cannibalism encouragement), encourages predefined conflicts and should be changed to allow more char-char interaction without in-the-box thinking instead.
I feel that I am in large part to blame, because my character had ample opportunity to attack the priest but didn't. And, sadly, that also was somewhat due to metagaming: I didn't feel I could trust the rest of you to act appropriately.
What I do not understand is why you bring in metagaming into this.

If any character has IC reasons to act in a specific way, for whatever reason, simply do so. But you also wrote "to act appropriately" and assume that OTHER characters need to act in a way you want to define for them, and I think you are making a big mistake here, because you want to think of other characters who MUST react in a way you think has to make sense to you (as a player).

But there are many reasons why characters react or respond in a certain way!

PO Urik gave a few examples. There are many more examples.

You seem to suggest to require an attack-on-sight solution. This is fine IC, and will fit many character concepts, but why is this an OOC opinion?

There is no "good" roleplay, there is no "bad" roleplay, there is simply only ROLEPLAY. Just because the underlying system wants to tell you that roleplay is "good" or "bad" doesn't mean that this is correct either.

Even opposing faiths do not need to instantly PK each other into eternity just because the underlying code wants you as a player to ROLEPLAY in such a way.

I really think it is time to mature the game into a roleplay environment where characters have IC reasons to act in one way or another. And when they do, they should do so without OOC factoring in into it. Players need to detach as much as possible from how they decide to roleplay their characters(s).

Last but not least, I also think it is problematic to discuss somewhat recent events on the board here. Not because I want to stifle discussion, but because these discussions tend to influence the IC world too much.
Best race: halflings.

Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#9 Post by Olrane » Thu Jul 21, 2011 11:36 am

Refusing to team with a character but working directly with that character = Metagaming. Avoiding conflict because it's too much hassle = Metagaming.

This was not a call for PvP, or saying that Sathos are expected to roleplay only in one way. I do, however, expect that Sathonites at best are treated with distant tolerance, not the kind of acceptance that I saw.

Let me be clear and say that I felt pressured to metagame MYSELF because the roleplay seemed so off as it had been in another recent encounter, where multiple characters treated my thief as if he were more offensive than the death priest.

Are people forced to roleplay as I like? No, of course not. But I'm trying to call to attention the absurdity of an association with Sathonites for nearly any character. Even Asralites should be disgusted by them, in my opinion.

Skeltim
Apprentice
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#10 Post by Skeltim » Thu Jul 21, 2011 11:54 am

As far as I know, (I myself arrived a bit late to the scenario,) the sathonite in question was fighting with all the others, without being in a team. If you are fighting together, is not the idea to be a 'team'? I found this, as well as both mine and Teek's prompts being ignored, somewhat disheartening. (Please, if your character is set on ignoring something, bloody emote it.)

User avatar
luminier
Overlord
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:40 pm
Location: Manitoba Canada

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#11 Post by luminier » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:03 pm

Urik wrote:
Mogwai wrote:shao-lin and asrals
Shao-Lin usually don't attack unless they are attacked.
Asrals only hunt their enemies.

Was said deathpriest attacking the Shao?
--From what i take from this conversation, no. So the Shao wouldn't engage him.

Is the deathpriest an enemy of the Asrals?
--Again what i take is that he is not. So the Asrals wouldn't engage him.

Guild wise, there is no IC reason for either of these factions to get angry at this deathpriest and tell him to leave.
I don't think Olrane meant that the Asrals and Shaolin shouldve attacked the Sathonite... that's what a Crusader or Taniel Cleric should do. Having said that, you are correct - Shaolin and Asrals are not expected to attack Sathonites. What Olrane meant was that there were Evrenites present, who are mortal enemies of Sathonys, and they were working together to defeat a demon. Evrenites are not expected to attack them on sight obviously, but to disagree to a team then just fight along side them anyways sounds bad.

You might argue that defeating a demon is a noble cause to work together, but, I've heard that argument before IC for killing lilithians like goblins/ogres/ etc/ and frankly thats similar to hunting deadly animals with a mass murderer... sure you did a good thing, but people are still going to think you are weird. (so don't be upset if people treat you badly for your decisions)

lanyara wrote:What I find sad is that you want to think of clerics of Sathonys being able to roleplay in just one way and solely one way - instant and perpetual PvP.....(cut down for wall of text reasons)..... discuss somewhat recent events on the board here. Not because I want to stifle discussion, but because these discussions tend to influence the IC world too much.

Olrane did not say that this was the only way for Sathonites to roleplay. But people should recognize that they(the sathonites) have to roleplay evil people and they have to be treated like that. Like you said Lanyara, someone acts and people must REACT. How everyone else chooses to see how someones action affects them is Roleplay. How they want their character to think or act is roleplay. Characters should try to react the same way to certain situations though to have "good roleplay" UNLESS something VERY life changing happened to them (does that make sense? if not I can clarify further).

A lot of how they(the sathonites) interact with other characters -is PvP- just for the sake of how they are, evil (I won't pretend like they don't PvP a lot). It's like law enforcement and known criminals... the law doesn't take them out for lunch and a nice chat, they try to arrest them. I want to reiterate though, Olrane and I did not suggest PvP all the time unless they are engaging Crusaders. (Crusaders to have good roleplay MUST engage in PvP all the time with evils, it's literally forced on them)

Olrane brought metagaming into this because he believes it is metagaming. For example, it's metagaming if you(an evrenite) enlist the help of others your character would normally hate and avoid(a sathonite) to defeat a demon just for an OOC reason like it would be easier. It's -not- metagaming if you have a reason IC to fight alongside a Sathonite, but, be prepared to face the consequences IC!!! People will (should) think this action is odd if they roleplay a "good" character!

Neither Olrane or I suggested that instant attack shouldve been the plan here. If the Evrenite was true to their faith and indeed had a non aggression treaty, they shouldve told the Sathonite to leave or leave themselves. If they are terrible followers and thats how they wanted to roleplay, then yes by all means fight alongside the Sathonite. A terrible Evrenite follower would be in line with "good roleplay" to team with a Sathonite.

There is "good" and "bad" roleplay definitely. This next example is probably the most simple. If Luminier teamed with a Sathonite to achieve a certain end, that would be bad roleplay because everyone knows that Luminier was the most extreme of goodness. Enlisting the help of someone on the polar opposite end of the good spectrum is terrible roleplay, even with an apparently "good" reason. If I did this IC it would be such bad roleplay it could easily be construed as metagaming.

Lastly, I think it's important to discuss proper roleplay on the forum. It make everyone better in my opinion.
The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

Phelan
Professional
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:13 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#12 Post by Phelan » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:07 pm

Since you are talking about me I feel the urge to clarify some things here. When Phelan ran into that group by the nibbler hut, nobody had called him, and all present persons are in negotiations with Phelan. Therefore, there was no intention of any part to engage in a fight. If some of those persons follow Evren, well that is something Phelan isn't aware of, and it doesn't matter.

As suddenly those twisted humans showed up and attacked, ALL of them turned on Phelan. It was the first time Phelan encountered those twisted humans and had no idea who or what they were. So he fought them to find out more about them and how they can be defeated.

If you consider that bad role play, well that is your opinion which I don't share. Apparently, you prefer that Deathpriests just run around and kill anything and anyone instead of interacting with other players.

poPhelan

Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#13 Post by Olrane » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:34 pm

Mostly I just want evil to be taken seriously.

Murder, preaching with intent to convert, enslavement, and torture are all player-to-player interactions, no?

I admit that I don't know Phelan very well. But a deathpriest is exactly that, not a member of southern society.

In Phelan's situation, I think it would have been more appropriate to defend himself and then flee from that point or to assist the demons against the Evrenites. Being caught between Lilith and Evren isn't where I'd have expected him to stay.

This isn't just about you, though, it's about every person interacting with any Sathonite ever. They need to be given respect for what they are.

Nyst
Newbie
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:45 am

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#14 Post by Nyst » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:37 pm

Before I begin, I should clarify: First, there was no teaming with the Sathonite. Second, as has recently been put elsewhere on the forum, 'good' and 'evil' are relative on this mud because of the multiplicity of gods and moralities. Luminier was the most extreme of goodness to those who measured 'good' the way Luminier did. He was exceptionally evil to those who measure 'good' according to their other god's perspectives. It's only good philosophy to recognize the relativity at work on Geas. It's also very difficult to play out if you don't see it - since most people default to their modern/personal philosophies to fill in the gaps in what is at hand in the Geas world.

Now: I won't reveal my character's philosophy other than to say that it's founded on what I think are logical conclusions based on one way to blend his faith and his guild's values. And it led him to do (or not do) what he did in both of those 'recent encounters' that Teek had.

And I won't reveal some of the RP situations that my character has gone through with several of the other characters in the game - even though revealing them would help you Olrane, to understand more clearly some of what Teek has seen.

There is another thread elsewhere on this forum that goes into some detail as to why you're thinking that this is something that it's not. But here I will put this: Almost everyone's character who was in that demon attack was played by an experienced player on Geas. I was probably the least experienced of all of us. But the RP that has gone on without Teek's major involvement lent to exactly what went on in front of Teek in both of those 'recent encounters'.

The disgust you speak of that our characters 'should' be feeling (if all things are as you're assuming they are) has been taken into consideration, at least with my character's philosophy.

I was disappointed to learn that Teek's indignation is actually built on OOC concerns. :( It's unfortunate that it's public knowledge now, since it will likely be difficult to avoid resorting to 'metagaming' to play it out.

Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#15 Post by Olrane » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:42 pm

I'll just let it go, guys. We'll see it worked out ICly.

But for the record, Teek's anti-Satho independently of me. I personally don't understand how Sathos can be tolerated, but I guess I'll have to find out ICly.

Skeltim
Apprentice
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#16 Post by Skeltim » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:54 pm

Nyst wrote:Before I begin, I should clarify: First, there was no teaming with the Sathonite.
If Phelan joined in on the fight on your side, should he not have been teaming with you?...

User avatar
luminier
Overlord
Posts: 2732
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:40 pm
Location: Manitoba Canada

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#17 Post by luminier » Thu Jul 21, 2011 2:56 pm

Phelan - if you plain didn't know it's hardly your fault then. If you consciously made the effort to team with evrenites then the story would be different.

Nyst - Teaming is just an OOC mechanic to make moving around and attacking in groups easier. If you are fighting along side someone against something else ICly it could be argued that you were teaming together even though you never actually typed "invite X" "join X". Does that make sense?

Ill give you the fact that evil and good are relative but for the sake of argument you have to define your points, I just tried to define them in a way that everyone could understand and so my examples made sense.

If your character acted how you feel your character should have acted then you aren't the player that Olrane and I are worried about.
The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world.

Olrane
Champion
Posts: 780
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 12:56 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#18 Post by Olrane » Thu Jul 21, 2011 3:00 pm

I admit that my indignation was informed by the assumption that Phelan DID see the prompts from the demons about killing Evrenites. They came pretty frequently.

If that is not true, I apologize.

Anyway, as I said, I metagamed by not typing "shoot at Phelan" as Teek would have done. It troubled me that it felt so awkward.

per
Master
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Demons?! Abandon roleplay!

#19 Post by per » Thu Jul 21, 2011 6:55 pm

Thread locked. Contact me if there are further concerns and I'll look into it.

Locked