PDA

View Full Version : Online Roleplaying Woes



Aron Times
2008-02-27, 12:44 AM
I play D&D online mainly through the Neverwinter Nights series and occasionally through OpenRPG and similar virtual tabletops. That said, my experiences with online roleplaying have been really, really bad.

I've tried numerous servers, but these five are the worst offenders:

1. An NWN1 Roleplaying Server - A bunch of evil PCs lure my character to a vampire's lair and gets him killed. A DM rules that this is perfectly acceptable behavior on the evil PCs part, which means that I just wasted all the time I spent roleplaying the character. Oh, and when I cry foul, I get banned from the server.

2. Another NWN1 Roleplaying Server - My character gets robbed of all his equipment twice, but the DMs don't do anything about it because "I should have been more careful".

3. An IRC Roleplaying Server - The DM was kind of delusional and most of the players were do-nothing drama queens.

4. An NWN2 Roleplaying Server - None of the players bother to roleplay, and one of them even offers to take me to the higher-level dungeons so I can leech XP off him.

5. Another NWN2 Roleplaying Server - I get accused of a wide range of offenses, and the DMs ban me without giving me a warning or asking for my side of the story. This was very disappointing because this was the best roleplaying server I have ever encountered ever.

Anyway, I was wondering if you guys have had better luck than me in online roleplaying. I've been burned so many times that I'm thinking about never roleplaying online again. I guess people can be meaner when they never see you in person.

So, should I try my luck with another server, or should I go back to face-to-face roleplaying?

mp122984
2008-02-27, 01:01 AM
Well, I'm still a novice at this stuff, but personal experience tells me that what matters more is that you find a group you enjoy playing with, whether on the table or online. Although based on what you've said, you might want to find a place where the dm and rest of the group is someone you can talk to, as opposed to people who don't have any real reason to care about your enjoyment.

Myself, I've been lucky enough to have found a really great L5R group I've played with for a long time. Even with only two other players at the moment, it's still something I look forward to every week.

Artanis
2008-02-27, 01:42 AM
It sounds like you're playing online and just hooking up with random people to play with, who (evidently) tend to turn out to be a******s. You should try getting into a group you trust, and then going online with them.

Solo
2008-02-27, 02:05 AM
I play D&D online mainly through the Neverwinter Nights series and occasionally through OpenRPG and similar virtual tabletops. That said, my experiences with online roleplaying have been really, really bad.

I've tried numerous servers, but these five are the worst offenders:

1. An NWN1 Roleplaying Server - A bunch of evil PCs lure my character to a vampire's lair and gets him killed. A DM rules that this is perfectly acceptable behavior on the evil PCs part, which means that I just wasted all the time I spent roleplaying the character. Oh, and when I cry foul, I get banned from the server.

2. Another NWN1 Roleplaying Server - My character gets robbed of all his equipment twice, but the DMs don't do anything about it because "I should have been more careful".

3. An IRC Roleplaying Server - The DM was kind of delusional and most of the players were do-nothing drama queens.

4. An NWN2 Roleplaying Server - None of the players bother to roleplay, and one of them even offers to take me to the higher-level dungeons so I can leech XP off him.

5. Another NWN2 Roleplaying Server - I get accused of a wide range of offenses, and the DMs ban me without giving me a warning or asking for my side of the story. This was very disappointing because this was the best roleplaying server I have ever encountered ever.

Anyway, I was wondering if you guys have had better luck than me in online roleplaying. I've been burned so many times that I'm thinking about never roleplaying online again. I guess people can be meaner when they never see you in person.

So, should I try my luck with another server, or should I go back to face-to-face roleplaying?

Advice:

1. Make sure you're not playing with *******s.
1a. Leave the server if it turns out that you are.

2. Make sure that you are not an ******* yourself.
2a. Make sure that you are not coming off as an *******.


3. Ask about the GitP roleplaying groups and Internet gaming groups.

4. ???

5. Profit.

Tengu
2008-02-27, 02:27 AM
Most NWN roleplaying servers are crap where evil characters are free to do as they want, thieves will rob you of all your equipment for giggles, it's hard to do anything unless you lick the DMs' arses and most people are drama queens. The best NWN1 server I played on banned stealing and evil characters, and the best NWN2 one has no pvp.

Also, I second Solo. Especially point four three.

BlackandGold
2008-02-27, 04:27 AM
Sorry to say that, but from my Experience, Roleplaying in MMORPG is nearly impossible. There are almost only two different Versions of "Roleplayers":

1. The Sitcom-Variant. Very dialogue-heavy, but these are very shallow and normally lead only to "Oh, I love you so much" "I you too" and so on.

2. The Beancounter-Variant. There the People will discuss, which Socks your Avatar wears and will make ridiculous rulings for more realistic "Roleplaying". For example, in a UO-Freeshard, they ruled, you cannot run in Plate Armor. No "Only for short Distances" or so. When I wrote on the Forum about my Real-World-Experience with metal armor (Larp in Germany is more like SCA), they put their collective Heads in their Butts and tried to ignore me.

My Conclusion is: Only a very small Group of People can use the Internet for proper Roleplaying. The A***-Quota is really high, so look for the few people, with whom you CAN play.

Tengu
2008-02-27, 04:46 AM
That's a very real observation, but NWN isn't an MMO.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-27, 05:45 AM
Aye, it's a SSMORPG (Small Scale Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game).

Maxymiuk
2008-02-27, 05:54 AM
Between the three campaigns I've GM-ed and two I've been in as a player on OpenRPG I've dealt with some 40-odd people. From those more than half were flaky and unreliable - frequently missing games, making a character but never showing up/quitting after one session, or never bothering to contact me again after declaring a desire to play in the game. A dozen or so were decent - they made up the core of the group, showed up regularly, but didn't stand out.
Then there were three I'd invite to game with me in a heartbeat. Not necessarily letter-perfect on the rules, but excellent roleplayers who understood that a tabletop game is about give and take - that the more a player contributes, the more the GM can give back in turn. Sadly, we either lost contact or our schedules diversed to the point of making scheduling a timeslot impossible.
There was also one drama hog. He was duly read the Riot Act, and upon showing no improvement promptly given The Boot.

So I can say that my experience with online tabletop was mostly positive. There are good people out there. You just have to find them.
And yes, these here forums would be a good start.

ColdBrew
2008-02-27, 10:42 AM
I gotta say, if you can find the right group of people in IRC, and have a few decent scripts to smooth things out, it can be just as fun as tabletop roleplaying. Even moreso, since some people really seem to open up to RP when they can hide behind a monitor and type. I guess it's the idea of not looking silly in person, but some of the best RP I've ever seen was in a long distance text format.

Aron Times
2008-02-27, 05:45 PM
An update on "Another NWN2 Roleplaying Server"... I asked the DMs to let me see the evidence against me, but they denied my request. Apparently, I might harass the ones who reported me. Not letting the accused tell his side of the story is bad, and not telling him exactly what he is guilty of is even worse.

I guess that's what happens when your server is the largest server in all categories.

Anyway, thanks for the advice. I've decided to stay away from online roleplaying right now. Currently, I'm having fun with Magic: The Gathering Online and Defense of the Ancients (Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne).

Grey Paladin
2008-02-27, 06:29 PM
You just need to find the correct server for your playstyle, which can be difficult.

Here's a hint: the more popular a server is, the higher the number of your average internet users playing on it>>>idiots.

Lolth
2008-02-27, 09:35 PM
Can try us, we're chat-based, not MMORPG (or however the acronym goes), have multiple DMs (and always looking for more good ones) and are pretty active.

Hope to see you around!

Titanium Dragon
2008-02-28, 12:26 AM
Different roleplaying servers have different rules. In some worlds, evil PCs are allowed to be evil, good PCs are allowed to be good, and it is pretty free-form within the world - you can do what you want as long as you remain in character. There's nothing at all wrong with a world where evil PCs can trick your character into coming to a cave, then kill you and steal all your gear. Nothing at all. However, if you don't LIKE that world, then you shouldn't play there. Don't whine about their rules; obviously if a lot of people are playing there then they DO like the rules and are willing to abide by them. Remember, you don't own the server, they do. You're under no obligation to play there.

If you want to find a good server for NWN (say), what you need to do is go look at the servers and their rules online on their websites. Read their rules, understand them, and ask questions. If you just log in without reading the rules, not only are you likely to break those rules but you're likely to annoy people, and indeed you're likely to waste your time if you don't like the rules. The simple solution is not to play in a world where you don't like the rules.

I've played in hardcore NWN servers, where you could do whatever you wanted, and it was okay, but not quite my cup of tea - not due to the unlimited character interactions but due to permadeath.

The NWN servers I preferred had some penalties for dying, with varying levels of severity - one would take away some xp and leave your body to loot, another forced you to walk back to town as a zombie and get raised from the dead (which, while not all that annoying in terms of game-penalty was a pretty big discouragement - if you died, you'd spend 5-10 minutes hiking back and another few getting raised). The idea was to discourage people from dying but not prevent them from RPing further with the same characters.

One server had a stricter PvP policy than the other, but really, its ultimately pretty self-sustaining. On one of them, you could loot people you killed as much as you liked, but there was something of a gentleman's agreement - while people killed each other all the time, because people came back to life it could have severe consequences and IC friends could gang up on you and probably kill you, so dry-looting was not a good idea in the long-run. Sometimes people would do it as punishment, but it generally wouldn't last very long. I played a bandit on that server, and it was a lot of fun playing outside the normal gentleman's agreement, but eventually it got boring as we were winning too much, and in the end the group dispersed and things went back to normal. Killing each other was perfectly allowed, but there were in-game consequences, ranging from being attacked by guards to other characters, so it was dangerous in its own ways.

The other server had full PvP but people seldom killed each other because the community was small so everyone had to deal with everyone else from time to time, and bitter emnity made dealing with other people in camp much harder.

Both also had a great deal of IC/OOC segregation; people my characters were enemies with often liked me as a player, and vice-versa, and some players I couldn't stand OOC I could deal with fine IC. I think that is at least in part key to a successful server - if players get mad over IC actions OOC (as you seem to do) then you need to play on PvPless servers where such things are less likely to occur. It will make you and everyone else a lot happier.

My advice is to read on websites and ask questions, and people will tell you whether or not you'll be a good fit.

Aron Times
2008-02-28, 12:30 AM
Can try us, we're chat-based, not MMORPG (or however the acronym goes), have multiple DMs (and always looking for more good ones) and are pretty active.

Hope to see you around!
I just signed up, and I'm waiting to be approved. So, what can you tell me about your campaign setting?

Tengu
2008-02-28, 12:44 AM
Different roleplaying servers have different rules. In some worlds, evil PCs are allowed to be evil, good PCs are allowed to be good, and it is pretty free-form within the world - you can do what you want as long as you remain in character. There's nothing at all wrong with a world where evil PCs can trick your character into coming to a cave, then kill you and steal all your gear. Nothing at all. However, if you don't LIKE that world, then you shouldn't play there. Don't whine about their rules; obviously if a lot of people are playing there then they DO like the rules and are willing to abide by them. Remember, you don't own the server, they do. You're under no obligation to play there.


Except that it encourages people to act like total di**s towards others, while having the excuse "that's because I'm playing an evil character".

Kizara
2008-02-28, 01:00 AM
An update on "Another NWN2 Roleplaying Server"... I asked the DMs to let me see the evidence against me, but they denied my request. Apparently, I might harass the ones who reported me. Not letting the accused tell his side of the story is bad, and not telling him exactly what he is guilty of is even worse.

I guess that's what happens when your server is the largest server in all categories.

Anyway, thanks for the advice. I've decided to stay away from online roleplaying right now. Currently, I'm having fun with Magic: The Gathering Online and Defense of the Ancients (Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne).

What server you play on? (DotA)

I'm pretty active and used to be really involved with the scene. Stop by Clan WDL on west sometime and ask for Starfires. Alternately, stop by Tkx and ask for Star_Moon. (Tkx is my main team, but WDL is much more active)

Aron Times
2008-02-28, 01:22 AM
What server you play on? (DotA)

I'm pretty active and used to be really involved with the scene. Stop by Clan WDL on west sometime and ask for Starfires. Alternately, stop by Tkx and ask for Star_Moon. (Tkx is my main team, but WDL is much more active)

I play on US East, and my nickname is Chachamaru.

Xuincherguixe
2008-02-28, 02:16 AM
Yeah, that's pretty bad stuff. You deserve more respect than that.

I like evil and all, but not when it's used as an excuse to be a jerk. NPCs should be the victims. The difference here is that you're only playing a jerk. Evil Campaigns can work, but it's a bad idea online. If it's not a roleplaying server though, it's not such a big deal.


Power tripping admins are never fun, and people who are nice will get driven away fast.

That being said, if you give anything like this another shot I vote test the waters out before getting too emotionally attached to any of your characters. And remember, you can always reuse character concepts. Especially if they go out in particularly lame ways.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-28, 04:44 AM
Except that it encourages people to act like total di**s towards others, while having the excuse "that's because I'm playing an evil character".

No, the 'excuse' is "I'm a bandit, I care little for the lives of others and am greedy, and thus I have chosen this profession"

Kizara
2008-02-28, 05:26 AM
No, the 'excuse' is "I'm a bandit, I care little for the lives of others and am greedy, and thus I have chosen this profession"

Yea and having everyone do that is really conductive to character development.

Cause I really want to RP someone that gets mugged and killed, that was totally my character direction.

Tengu
2008-02-28, 06:50 AM
No, the 'excuse' is "I'm a bandit, I care little for the lives of others and am greedy, and thus I have chosen this profession"

Doesn't matter. It's still just an excuse to ruin other players' fun.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-28, 06:55 AM
Or create climatic rivalry. It only sucks if the killed guy is a loser and you didn't do it with style.

Tengu
2008-02-28, 06:59 AM
I fail to see anything climatic or any potential for rivalry in someone killing a guy several levels underneath him (because such people practically never prey on equals when it comes to power) and taking his stuff, or abusing pickpocketing to steal everything he had. It's just frustrating for the victim and nothing more.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-28, 07:01 AM
You see, I'm not talking about THAT kind of player. One can play a cool bandit without being an idiot.

Tengu
2008-02-28, 07:03 AM
But that almost never happens. And most roleplaying NWN servers have harsh penalties for dying and slow experience gain from killing monsters, so dying is very frustrating anyway.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-28, 07:06 AM
Yeah, I know that. Point is, players who can do a concept like that exist. Sadly, there must be only 2 or three who play NWN.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-28, 08:14 AM
Conflict is the heart of any roleplaying server, if you got yourself killed in a damp cave somewhere you are screwed as there will be no consequences for the killers, this is exactly why traveling alone is dangerous and you should never do so, if even one non-corporative witness escapes successfully and proves the guilt of the bandits a bounty will usually go up and the killers are pretty much screwed as they get AOS in all nearby towns and are forced to move to survive.

NWN servers aren't like normal D&D in the sense that you can, indeed, lose- but the roleplaying is vastly superior because the world doesn't actively rearranges itself to fit the needs of few, and actual cunning and skill are often required to solve problems.

Of course, all this doesn't applies if the server itself is ran by morons, like most popular servers that have a playerbase over 50-200

Tengu
2008-02-28, 08:22 AM
Conflict is the heart of any roleplaying server,

Yes - conflict between players and DM-run NPCs. DND mechanics are not balanced for PVP and NWN is a game that not only does little to fix that, but also has many abusable elements on its own. The only PVP elements I can understand are when both parties willingly engage in the battle, which is not the case in ganking.



NWN servers aren't like normal D&D in the sense that you can, indeed, lose- but the roleplaying is vastly superior because the world doesn't actively rearranges itself to fit the needs of few, and actual cunning and skill are often required to solve problems.


I really hope you're being ironic here. Because of the limitations of the world and a DM not being around all the time to react to players' actions, roleplaying in NWN, MUDs or any other similar online games will never be as good as having a good DM. And those cunning and skills more often than not just mean "having a high level and superior pvp build".



Of course, all this doesn't applies if the server itself is ran by morons, like most popular servers that have a playerbase over 50-200

Trust my experience, small servers can be full of idiots too - and you have a higher chance of meeting snot-nosed elitists there.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-28, 08:55 AM
Not all classes are balanced for PvP, nor should they be, the best servers I played on focused on conflict between player-ran organizations and more often then not your political skill/wealth outweighted the importance of your combat capabilities.

As to the roleplaying, the fact you have a graphical interface doesn't means you have to stop playing D&D the same way, a single DM just isn't capable of thinking of so many diverse personalities with their own agendas, dreams, hopes, and background, or write 400+ areas and create a realistic living economy.

As to skill, I have once took down a highly powerful guild full of high level characters with my level 6 rogue using clever manipulation of the city's laws and the assassination of a level 15 fighter.

As to your experience, while you haven't stated a number I'd guess mine is more vast, I've been playing NWN online since 6 months after its release (up until now), and while finding a good server is difficult I have found that the higher the population, the lower the quality of RP becomes due to reduced DM attention- it is true that low population servers aren't automatically good, they just tend to be better.

JadedDM
2008-02-28, 09:26 AM
Wait...what? D&D mechanics are not designed for PvP?

Can someone explain to me the difference in a PC fighter battling with a PC wizard and a PC fighter battling with an NPC wizard (with the exact same level, ability scores, spells, gear, etc.?)

Tengu
2008-02-28, 11:09 AM
Because, if it's a battle at higher levels, the PC fighter wins with the NPC wizard only because the DM goes easy on the player and does not play the NPC's abilities to their fullest, while in the pvp battle everything goes completely objective and the wizard wins. Not to turn it into another "wizards are overpowered" debate, but that's just the way it is. If a system is to be designed for pvp, class balance is crucial.



As to the roleplaying, the fact you have a graphical interface doesn't means you have to stop playing D&D the same way, a single DM just isn't capable of thinking of so many diverse personalities with their own agendas, dreams, hopes, and background, or write 400+ areas and create a realistic living economy.


The difference here is that in pencil and paper games, the DM is there constantly, while in NWN not only are you left alone without him for most of the time, but there are also multiple DMs who communicate with each other but usually do separate storylines in the end. Because of this difference your options are much more limited most of the time.
(I wanted to state the above paragraph better, but I'm a stupid fu**tard whose English skills fail at times.)
I won't comment on the rest of your post, because both of us mean completely different ways of player versus player interaction - you're talking about faction conflicts that, in the end, would not be possible without DM supervision, I'm talking about simple pvp combat.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-28, 03:00 PM
Simple PvP is the result of faction PvP.

JadedDM
2008-02-28, 04:28 PM
...because the DM goes easy on the player and does not play the NPC's abilities to their fullest

Eh? They do? I don't do that. I would play the NPC's abilities to their fullest. So it makes no difference whether you're fighting a PC or NPC. Really, both groups use the same mechanics and follow the same rules.

Rutee
2008-02-28, 04:29 PM
Eh? They do? I don't do that. I would play the NPC's abilities to their fullest. So it makes no difference whether you're fighting a PC or NPC. Really, both groups use the same mechanics and follow the same rules.

...Sucks to be melee in your campaigns, I guess. Tengu is, perhaps remarkably to you, correct on SOP for NPCs, even if it's not /your/ SOP. Most people don't even know HOW to optimize a Wizard, so a DM doing it is still unlikely in practice.

Artanis
2008-02-28, 04:30 PM
Eh? They do? I don't do that. I would play the NPC's abilities to their fullest. So it makes no difference whether you're fighting a PC or NPC. Really, both groups use the same mechanics and follow the same rules.
He specifically mentioned PC Fighter vs. NPC Wizard, a matchup in which the Fighter would be absolutely humiliated, butchered, decapitated, and left on a spike as an example...unless the Wizard goes easy on him.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-28, 04:54 PM
...Sucks to be melee in your campaigns, I guess. Tengu is, perhaps remarkably to you, correct on SOP for NPCs, even if it's not /your/ SOP. Most people don't even know HOW to optimize a Wizard, so a DM doing it is still unlikely in practice.Sucks to be in your campaigns, I guess. If an enemy could kill me in 3 rounds and doesn't, it makes it harder for me to believe the world. I had a DM one-shot a player on a crit before. Our characters mourned and we accepted it. Adventuring is supposed to be risky. If you don't have the risk of failure, how can you enjoy success?

Rutee
2008-02-28, 04:57 PM
Wizard vs. Fighter isn't "Risk". It's Suicide. Instant Kill Quicks without fail are not what I would call an "Interesting campaign".

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-28, 05:02 PM
No, but we don't play fighters for that reason. ToB FTW. We also avoid high level play(above 15), because of that brokenness. We just accept going into it that this will be harsh and the DM won't pull punches. We enjoy that.

Rutee
2008-02-28, 05:05 PM
Now, see, I love ToB, and will never play a fighter (Or almost any other non-ToB Melee) for it, but do you not understand how this becomes a problem that prevents a game from really claiming it's "Good for PvP"? Especially in the context of Neverwinter Nights, which very well may not have ToB at all?

Notwithstanding that pointless death is pretty stupid narratively, no matter how ya slice it.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-28, 05:09 PM
And we're back to you preferring a story and me preferring a world. :smallamused:

And I was responding to the PC v. NPC section, not the NWN section.

Rutee
2008-02-28, 05:11 PM
See, how do you even experience the world when death is that easy to happen. :P

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-28, 05:21 PM
We don't die. We work our butts off, our adventurers are usually cautious types with at least average wis and int scores and we don't take risks. We attack our enemies from hiding, we start the battle flanking, and we all have ranks in heal after a few levels. The game and the story is improved because it feels like a real world where these events are occurring, not a backdrop for them.

Rutee
2008-02-28, 05:23 PM
...You don't take risks? *Headtilt* Yeahno, I'm done listening to simulationists now.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-28, 05:27 PM
Your daily life involves taking a 3,000 lb humk of steel and aluminum at 65 MPH down a strip of concrete surrounded by people who do the same. You minimize risks in that situation. An adventurer's daily life involves climbing into a hole filled with things 3x his size who want to eat him, traps involving spikes and poison, and at least one spellcaster who wants him turned into an enchanted slave for the rest of his life. You try to say he wouldn't minimize risks.

Titanium Dragon
2008-02-28, 05:35 PM
Wrong! See, your problem is that you don't understand. You don't get that people can play in such an environment and have more fun than in the environment you enjoy.

You lose because you didn't read my post and because you don't understand roleplaying. The entire POINT of roleplaying is to roleplay. If someone isn't roleplaying, then if the server is serious about it being a roleplaying server, they will get banned. If, on the other hand, they're an evil elven necromancer who takes you out, kills you with negative energy spells, then dissects your corpse while taking meticulous notes in his journal, that's fine. Or a gang of thugs which tricks erstwhile travellers into a trap, then kills them and steals their stuff. That's roleplaying.

You, obviously, don't like that stuff, but many people DO enjoy dealing with such things. It is fun to them. Your problem is that you are simply unable to understand them and thus reject them and say THEY must play by YOUR rules. That's stupid. It is their server, their game, and if you want to join it, you need to play by theirs, not vice-versa. They're having fun playing the way they are, and they CHOSE to play the way they do because it is more fun than your way to them.

Complaining about their playstyle simply shows you didn't read or understand my post. Different players like different things. Clearly, you don't have enough segregation between character and player OR you think people are inherently evil and that such a thing could never work (or, quite possibly, both), and thus such servers aren't for you. But they are for other people.


I like evil and all, but not when it's used as an excuse to be a jerk. NPCs should be the victims. The difference here is that you're only playing a jerk. Evil Campaigns can work, but it's a bad idea online. If it's not a roleplaying server though, it's not such a big deal.

Its actually a lot of fun to make PCs the victims of other PCs. If you're roleplaying well, it leads to VERY interesting and dynamic character interactions and conflicts in the context of a greater world. It is TONS of fun. I've played an evil elven necromancer who aided a demon in stealing the souls of hundreds of NPCs; our actions killed at least a dozen PCs, both on my side and on other sides, and my character had assassins after him quite often (which made him all the more paranoid; at times he'd randomly blast narrow areas behind him, and on at least one occaision he actually hit someone who was following him). It was awesome and tons of fun for all involved, and everyone on both sides loved him. I've had another character who was an evil bandit, who, while incredibly disreputable and evil, was liked by a lot of people, both IC and OOC. (oddly, the elven necromancer had a number of neutral and even good "friends" who didn't really know too much about his darker side and respected him for being a skilled alchemist).

In the end, it is a lot of fun to play in such a way, but you have to be playing with the right people. Its not about winning or losing - in the end, the demon was forever banished back to the abyss and the Ebony Order which were my necromancers allies (and all PCs) all were banned (IC ban, not OOC ban - we could still enter the area but the elven army was hostile) from an entire country. That was enjoyable and we all loved it, even though we didn't win out in the end.


I fail to see anything climatic or any potential for rivalry in someone killing a guy several levels underneath him (because such people practically never prey on equals when it comes to power) and taking his stuff, or abusing pickpocketing to steal everything he had. It's just frustrating for the victim and nothing more.

Then clearly you don't understand such servers and shouldn't play on them. Seems to me that you don't segregate between IC and OOC enough and don't understand how that can be fun, how fun it can be to be the underdog, how fun it can be to make friends and plot revenge. I spent more time talking, plotting, planning, dissecting, and various other things IC than I ever spent killing stuff. Such is the essence of a roleplaying server to me - your character is "alive" in some sense. Its a lot of fun to play in such a world, and rivalries with other PCs have tons of advantages over with NPCs, especially if OOC both players are enjoying it.


Yeah, I know that. Point is, players who can do a concept like that exist. Sadly, there must be only 2 or three who play NWN.

First off, tons play NWN; I played on several servers full of them. Second, it seems likely to me that he's just one of THOSE people; they never want anything bad to happen to their characters and they want to "win".

These people should never, ever play on servers with PvP.

These people are the same people, I might add, who play the aforementioned trolls of characters. They're cut from the same cloth, just different parts.


Yes - conflict between players and DM-run NPCs. DND mechanics are not balanced for PVP and NWN is a game that not only does little to fix that, but also has many abusable elements on its own. The only PVP elements I can understand are when both parties willingly engage in the battle, which is not the case in ganking.

Again, you don't understand, stay away from these servers. Seriously, did you even read my post?

As someone who enjoys playing on such servers, I will tell you exactly their perspective on you: you aren't mature enough to handle playing with them. Either you need to win or you can't seperate your character enough from yourself, but for whatever reason, you simply aren't capable of handling playing with them.

This doesn't mean they should change their playstyle to accommodate you; this means they should keep you away from their game, and that you should stay away from their game.

You don't understand their playstyle at all, but it doesn't mean it is bad; it just means YOU can't enjoy it. But you shouldn't expect other people to accommodate someone who doesn't understand that people have varying preferences; indeed, I wouldn't want you on the servers I played on, because you're exactly the wrong sort of player for them.

Roleplaying servers aren't about winning.


Because, if it's a battle at higher levels, the PC fighter wins with the NPC wizard only because the DM goes easy on the player and does not play the NPC's abilities to their fullest, while in the pvp battle everything goes completely objective and the wizard wins. Not to turn it into another "wizards are overpowered" debate, but that's just the way it is. If a system is to be designed for pvp, class balance is crucial.

It actually works out surprisingly well in NWN; I've killed many wizards as a fighter, and vice-versa. It is actually much more balanced than normal D&D, not less, if you play intelligently, especially given wizards lack some of their best spells (fly) and can't cast spells while knocked down at all (whereas in normal D&D they'd be able to use silent spells while grappled).

This isn't to say wizards aren't extraordinarily powerful in NWN, but it really depends on what equipment and gear is generally available and how certain spells are scripted to work (particularly the missle storm spells). Even then, though, a warrior can have massively more hit points than a wizard can ever hope to, and if the wizard lacks immunity to knockdown the fight can very easily end very badly for the wizard.

Rutee
2008-02-28, 05:44 PM
Wrong! See, your problem is that you don't understand. You don't get that people can play in such an environment and have more fun than in the environment you enjoy.

You lose because you didn't read my post and because you don't understand roleplaying. The entire POINT of roleplaying is to roleplay. If someone isn't roleplaying, then if the server is serious about it being a roleplaying server, they will get banned. If, on the other hand, they're an evil elven necromancer who takes you out, kills you with negative energy spells, then dissects your corpse while taking meticulous notes in his journal, that's fine. Or a gang of thugs which tricks erstwhile travellers into a trap, then kills them and steals their stuff. That's roleplaying.
This is why I hate nerds, what with the false dichotomy of "Understands how PvP works" and "Enjoys Roleplaying". Especially fellow roleplaying nerds, for their naivete. Do you really, really think everyone is making a sociopathic, murderous character on a server that restricts actions to only In-character ones, they're usually doing it for reasons /besides/ murderring players? OOC motives will tend to bleed into character-building, at the /very/ least initially; After all, you'll have a particular /reason/ to play that type of character, if only "Ooo, this is interesting and I think it'll be fun for me". Believing otherwise is senseless.


Its actually a lot of fun to make PCs the victims of other PCs. If you're roleplaying well, it leads to VERY interesting and dynamic character interactions and conflicts in the context of a greater world. It is TONS of fun. I've played an evil elven necromancer who aided a demon in stealing the souls of hundreds of NPCs; our actions killed at least a dozen PCs, both on my side and on other sides, and my character had assassins after him quite often (which made him all the more paranoid; at times he'd randomly blast narrow areas behind him, and on at least one occaision he actually hit someone who was following him).
Making a player your victim doesn't necessitate you killing them. Interesting roleplay opportunities are /more/ likely to happen when you have someone who can hold the event against you after the fact, not /less/.



Then clearly you don't understand such servers and shouldn't play on them. Seems to me that you don't segregate between IC and OOC enough and don't understand how that can be fun, how fun it can be to be the underdog, how fun it can be to make friends and plot revenge. I spent more time talking, plotting, planning, dissecting, and various other things IC than I ever spent killing stuff. Such is the essence of a roleplaying server to me - your character is "alive" in some sense. Its a lot of fun to play in such a world, and rivalries with other PCs have tons of advantages over with NPCs, especially if OOC both players are enjoying it.
Tengu segregates them just fine, from what I have observed of him. You seem to segregate them far too much.


Roleplaying servers aren't about winning.
Unless it's the character's goal.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-29, 10:51 AM
Online worlds are much more realistic and dynamic because you can actually end up as a corpse in the alley instead of saving the princess from the dragon, the goal of all characters is to "win" in their own way, that doesn't means they should manage to accomplish that goal - in a world where slaying a dragon is actually difficult and near-suicidal accomplishing this legendary feat actually means something more then artificial fame for following your DM's carefully set railroad.

Rutee: The thought process is usually "I'd love to roleplay such a character" rather then "I'd love to play such a character"

You dislike this style of play, and that is fine, but you must understand that some people actually like the possibility of defeat, our kin feels that playing a game you can't lose is just not fun, and roleplaying in such a world will reduce characters to superheros.

One of the biggest things that motivate the behavior of the human kind is fear, and a world ran in the style described by me actually has it as a factor.


As to balance: With the average number of encounters per a day of adventuring it actualy balances out fairly well, wizards dominate in short bursts but are helpless when suprised, and warrior types can go on for as long as they have a source of healing.

Clerical characters are a hybrid of wizards and warriors in their gameplay style.

Rogues have two modes: Win or Off, they are the Batman of NWN and can defeat foes much more powerful then themselves with proper preparetions- the only limit to their power is gold and such a limit is serious in a world with a living economy.

JadedDM
2008-02-29, 10:55 AM
...Sucks to be melee in your campaigns, I guess. Tengu is, perhaps remarkably to you, correct on SOP for NPCs, even if it's not /your/ SOP. Most people don't even know HOW to optimize a Wizard, so a DM doing it is still unlikely in practice.

Wait, optimize? Okay, nevermind. I see where I got confused now. Evidently the mechanics in 3E are more different than I thought. I was talking about 2E, and there is no balance problem there between wizards and fighters. (And I just said 'wizard' and 'fighter' as examples, the first popping into my head, anyway. I could have said a fighter vs. a fighter, or a thief vs. a cleric, or whatever.)

Aron Times
2008-02-29, 04:26 PM
Guys, let's agree to disagree. As for me, I've decided never to venture into the world of NWN1 and NWN2 roleplaying servers again. I've been burned way too much already.

About that Underdark IRC roleplaying server, I'm still waiting to be approved... How long does it usually take to approve an application?

Rutee
2008-02-29, 04:42 PM
Rutee: The thought process is usually "I'd love to roleplay such a character" rather then "I'd love to play such a character"

You dislike this style of play, and that is fine, but you must understand that some people actually like the possibility of defeat, our kin feels that playing a game you can't lose is just not fun, and roleplaying in such a world will reduce characters to superheros.
If you're going to split hairs, do it right. That does not impact my point that no matter what kind of player you are, you had an OOC motivation at character creation. And what the hell? Failure is generally a fairly interesting thing to happen, narratively, for at least some time. NOBODY likes never losing. I don't even know where the hell you get this stuff about "Never losing is awesome" from my posts.



As to balance: With the average number of encounters per a day of adventuring it actualy balances out fairly well, wizards dominate in short bursts but are helpless when suprised, and warrior types can go on for as long as they have a source of healing.
1. Rope Trick. Not that a GM finds it impossible to break this, what with the fact that a creature with the ability to move through planes should be able to bust in on the rope trick, but for PCs, that's restricted to /casters/..



Rogues have two modes: Win or Off, they are the Batman of NWN and can defeat foes much more powerful then themselves with proper preparetions- the only limit to their power is gold and such a limit is serious in a world with a living economy.

I somehow doubt a 'living economy' is immune to a good merchant. Though it does restrict the group of rogues that can pull it off.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-29, 05:03 PM
Rutee:

Characters cannot be created In-Character, unless, y'know, your character is playing a roleplaying game.

What your post seemed to suggest, at least to me, is that the possibility of ultimate defeat, a condition within which you don't just lose but end up incapable of achieving your ultimate goals permanently, is wrong and shouldn't ever occur. This is the common attitude of modern game design, and likely 3E: most monsters are ridiculously easy to dispose off and dieing means close to nothing.

Rope Trick keeps you safe for a time and provides a safe area to rest, but most good roleplaying servers have introduced a time limit to resting so you can only rest once in 8 IC hours, of course, given the pace of NWN, any character can just wait for a ridiculous amount of time between each combat, but honestly, is that fun? its the equivalent of waiting 8 hours in D&D between each fight.

As to the economy, it is not immune - which lead to a large amount of interesting plot arcs focused on the struggle of legally facing someone rich enough to buy the town(thanks to conning some characters and bribing some others) while he is protected by its laws, walls, and guards.

Rutee
2008-02-29, 05:50 PM
I recognize characters aren't created in character. That's my point. That's why you can't say "Well everything this character wants to do is an in-character motivation, so it's sacrosanct." At the very least, at one point in the process the player, not hte character, held absolute control in what happened, and the player can craft the character to carry out their own goals. Indeed, I have seen, with enough regularity, players in other, similar, communities repeatedly make characters that seemed little more then a vehicle with which to PK with; After all, if you're the type who gets their jollies off making people miserable, I can think of few coups quite so tempting as not only killing off someone's character in a very permanent way, but being /lauded/ for doing so, because "That's what your character would do". And that's really not the only sort of damage one can inflict, either. To prevent this from further becoming a rant, I'll simply point out that any negative human motivation that a player may possess can manifest as a character's defining motivation. This isn't meant to castigate a player or character for the character's being based on nega tive motivations, merely to caution against what Titanium Dragon was doing; Applying an equally generalized blanket pardon over all IC characters. Player and Character need to be taken together, not seperately, when discussing a character that /could/ endanger the community's fun.

And honestly, the view that a character is a 'living, breathing thing' is completely incorrect. The character is always subservient to the player's desires. Period, end of discussion. The character can only do what you want them to do. That you want them to behave like a living, breathing person is perfectly fine, of course. I'm not going to debate motive directly. However, the simple fact is that if, for whatever reason, the player's motives changed, the character could not stop them from completely changing how the character behaves, *because the character does not exist in any meaningful sense*.

As far as I'm concerned, Ultimate defeat doesn't happen unless the player agrees to it as a risk to a particular undertaking; If in practice that meant it never happened, I couldn't care less. The ending of a story should never be done lightly, be that ending happy or sorrowful, and it shouldn't be something that can be inflicted casually (As is the case of most RP servers and muds).

If 3e monsters are easy to kill, I suspect it's because WotC genuinely doesn't know what it's doing, rather then some aspect of, and I quote, 'modern game design' (As I've never seen a game suggest that a bad ending should be impossible, merely that it's bad DMing to inflict it casually or arbitrarily). They didn't understand how to make single monster encounters (Which is definitely the way they've been going) that could overcome the action penalty.. except when they do, with SAve or Die TPK Wipe spells.

Grey Paladin
2008-02-29, 08:17 PM
1)I am not(enough of) a fool(or at least thats what I keep telling myself-the community seems to disagree :smalltongue: ) to argue that such a character wouldn't be possible, or indeed, even uncommon- every online community that is not hardcoded to operate by itself (AKA not MMOs) needs maintenance, the amount of freedom and restrictions in a given environment depend directly on one another.

In essence what such a community attempts to achieve is the utter avoidance of collective punishment by a hardcoded system because some users may exploit it.

Much like in P&P, DMs are required, though for highly different reasons.


2)You are correct, as a Player you have utter control over your character, that doesn't means you cannot act out of character.

Characters are constructs that transcend their creators the moment they move them from their mind into the collective reality - once you have written a character that character, at any given point, has certain qualities, and while you can remove their physical representation (text ect) a countless number of (slightly different due to development, and between the perception of different observers) copies you hold no control over already exist in all who perceived them.


3) The story never ends, one minor part of the cast has simply died for naught- common enough in Song of Ice and Fire and other "Anyone Can Die" meta-settings.

Rutee
2008-02-29, 09:32 PM
Except that the communities I've observed don't avoid hard coded rules, because they concern themselves with bias inherent in the system. It /is/ ideal to avoid that. I sincerely doubt that most do. Sturgeon's Law, in all reality, applies just as much to these servers as it does to real games.

Oh for gods sakes, I'm listening to Fauxlosophy. No. If you say the character's changed, it's changed. Perceptions don't create copies; Perceptions are nothing more then themselves. Even within your own fauxlosophic argument, there will be concepts of you as a player (Albeit more limited ones in some contexts) that will also be established in the other players' minds, and even then, I never once claimed that you as a player can control other players perceptions. Only that you control your character.

And yeah, that character's story ends. I'm sorry, you're wrong again. Hence, "A" story, not "The" story. Those stories should not end lightly. Not when they're players. Why? Because by virtue of being a PC, you're important enough to get your chance to crawl away from a humiliating defeat by bandits, bloodied but unbowed, and swear revenge. An ignomious, in-character, ending can be a fitting one, but the player who controls that character should generally be the one to make that decision, not the one who's story is only slightly enhanced by killing the victim. No, not everything is something you risk your character's life on, in a narrative sense. Anyone can die metasettings are frankly awful as a basis for storytelling with a large group of people you don't know (AKA MUDs), because the odds of accomplishing something meaningful are hilariously bad. Especially when you have examples like Titanium Dragon's conveniently provided one, where a dozen PCs get killed without involving themselves in his story (Seemingly).

Honestly, don't try to sell me on simulationism by justifying it through narrativism. It just makes you look like you don't understand what's going on. I recognize there's a different goal at the heart of this, really, but Titanium's diction was very, very condescending about the whole affair, what with the claims of another poster 'not getting it'. I'm not going to stand this look-down-your-nose crap at people 'not understanding that style of play'.


Your daily life involves taking a 3,000 lb humk of steel and aluminum at 65 MPH down a strip of concrete surrounded by people who do the same. You minimize risks in that situation. An adventurer's daily life involves climbing into a hole filled with things 3x his size who want to eat him, traps involving spikes and poison, and at least one spellcaster who wants him turned into an enchanted slave for the rest of his life. You try to say he wouldn't minimize risks.
Missed this; You try to tell me it's in genre to waste screen time on risk minimization.

..Heck, try to tell me it's in genre to minimize risk. Only the cowardly thieves pull that crap in most high fantasy.

Grey Paladin
2008-03-01, 07:11 AM
1) My expertise in the area is more vast, but I'll take your word for it- finding a proper community is difficult and many do not know how to seek.

2) You do 'not' "control" your character, you keep creating new copies based on the character's previous traits, the character is independent from you even if you have created it originally- a character is a static idea with certain traits.

3) Please stop returning to TD's points, they are not my own.

The lower the chance for victory is, the more spectacular that victory becomes when(or indeed, unlike in other settings, IF!) you achieve it.

Despite D&D being originally crafted for High Fantasy style play, I have seen few servers in NWN that haven't modified it at least a bit.

4) Your hostility against the previously mentioned user seems to effect your perception of my argument, I'd like to ask you to minimize the impact upon your judgment.

As I have mentioned before, you can best compare such a setting to a . . erm . . . for a lack of better term- PvP Troupe Roleplaying- the collective character is the world, and more often then not, you are just one of the many support characters, not the main ones.

Rutee
2008-03-01, 10:53 AM
1: 0/10. Try harder.

2. Fauxlosophic Horse Hockey. Try again, but this time, less bad philosophy, more actual points.

3. I'm not. I'm pointing out to you that justifying simulationism through the lens of narrativism is genuinely wasteful, as you were trying to do by invoking anybody can die settings in the context of storytelling. Not that that can't work in a small group, or in a book or movie, but those genuinely and completely fail at storytelling any overarching, non-GM-written plot within a large community.

And making everyone, or nearly everyone, a support character is just bad form in community building.

4. No, a bad argument, such as yours, is a bad argument.

Grey Paladin
2008-03-01, 03:11 PM
Saying "No they don't, you are stupid and wrong" isn't a valid form of an argument, nor discussion.

Rutee
2008-03-01, 03:50 PM
Nor is fauxlosophy, nor is near trolling by insulting someone while claiming ostensibly to be dropping a point.

And for that matter, aside from those two points, I did not handwave you off as being wrong. It's not /my/ fault that the lion's share of your post was dedicated to them.

Again, 0/10, try harder.

Grey Paladin
2008-03-01, 06:25 PM
I fail to spot a post where I have insulted someone, if anyone was offended by one of my posts you have my apologies.

As to "fauxlosophy", I find it amusing that whenever a person, no matter his qualification, presents a philosophical argument which does not simply repeats the words of another philosopher to the letter that argument is deemed invalid, as if there is some axiom that states that new ideas are inherently wrong.

What also amuses me is you blaming me for trolling.

To sum up this magnificent discussion: Creator complains about online worlds, in response I present what I perceive as the virtues of the system, and state that not everyone like that style and that's fine, you proceed to say I am Bad and Wrong (SupCoff)and that such a system couldn't possibly be fun for anyone.

VanBuren
2008-03-01, 08:02 PM
@Joseph; For NWN1 give the Isle of Thain a try. It may not be to your liking, but I personally enjoy it and I would suggest you take a look at least.


Most NWN roleplaying servers are crap where evil characters are free to do as they want, thieves will rob you of all your equipment for giggles, it's hard to do anything unless you lick the DMs' arses and most people are drama queens. The best NWN1 server I played on banned stealing and evil characters, and the best NWN2 one has no pvp.

Also, I second Solo. Especially point four three.

What server do you play on NWN2?

Also, the reason the fighter stands a better chance against a Wizard in NWN may have a lot to do with the real-time component.

Rutee
2008-03-01, 09:01 PM
I fail to spot a post where I have insulted someone, if anyone was offended by one of my posts you have my apologies.

As to "fauxlosophy", I find it amusing that whenever a person, no matter his qualification, presents a philosophical argument which does not simply repeats the words of another philosopher to the letter that argument is deemed invalid, as if there is some axiom that states that new ideas are inherently wrong.
You completely missed the part in your own post where you dismiss my argument because I obviously have nfc how to find good communities? How droll.

Actually, I've heard very nearly that exact argument.. within the Navel Contemplation moments of Neon Genesis Evangelion. This nonsense about there being as many copies of a particular entity as there are perceptions of that entity, however, is ludicrous on its face. Perhaps it would be, you know, accurate if perceptions, or beliefs, altered anything more then one's subjective take on reality, but the simple fact is, they don't. This is the sort of bad thinking a freshman philosophy major uses to pad out a term paper, not "New ideas". And I dearly hope you're a Phil. Major who's planning on pursuing it philosophy in earnest, if you're going to condescend on the subject to utter strangers.


What also amuses me is you blaming me for trolling.

To sum up this magnificent discussion: Creator complains about online worlds, in response I present what I perceive as the virtues of the system, and state that not everyone like that style and that's fine, you proceed to say I am Bad and Wrong (SupCoff)and that such a system couldn't possibly be fun for anyone.

Actually, I've said you were wrong. I saved "Bad" for the moment you insulted me personally. That said, I didn't say that system intent can't possibly be fun. I have, however, pointed out that "Anyone Can Die" settings don't particularly work for storytelling on a large community, especially one where there's little to no OOC presence. Character death is too common to properly weave people into a narrative, and a large community is going to be too chaotic to properly weave a tale through a large amount of turnover in the character base. It's doable in a small tabletop/PbP game, sure, but either way it'd need OOC talk.

And you still managed to miss the part where I'm telling you not to justify your aims through my own, more then "Your motives are badwrong". I know I've said that at least once, perhaps twice, so.

But by all means, continue to insist that I'm not raising any point whatsoever.

Lolth
2008-03-01, 09:13 PM
I just signed up, and I'm waiting to be approved. So, what can you tell me about your campaign setting?

What account name did you sign up under? It's usually best to pop in through the guest login to get approved, we tend to lose some accounts in spam bots.

As for the setting, it's Underdark, but not Forgotten Realms (home-grown, owing more to the original underdark than the Drizz't stuff), a drow trading city (which allows for a bit more lenience to other races than otherwise might be canon) and a lot of addying, or loafing around IC between DM run scenes.

Our forums have a lot of relevant information, particularly the Setting, Character Creation and House Rules sections.

Hope to see you there!

Roderick_BR
2008-03-01, 09:34 PM
That's a very real observation, but NWN isn't an MMO.
Actually, NWN can be considered a MMO by it's population of jerks that just want to level up, steal equipment, and PK all the time. I've seen once people discussing for hours if it was valid for players to use disarm to steal others player's weapons, and one player kept insulting the others in the open channel about it all the time. It happened for hours.

Not counting people abusing monk's stunning fist, or the Knock Down feat. Once this guy killed a whole group with similar level, somehow avoiding all abilities, spells, and attacks from said groups.

Other than that, NWN is, fortunately, devoid of most problems MMOs usually have.

Aron Times
2008-03-01, 10:33 PM
To Lolth:

I've signed up as Joseph Silver, and I didn't get any guest login information.

Lolth
2008-03-01, 10:50 PM
To Lolth:

I've signed up as Joseph Silver, and I didn't get any guest login information.

Out database shows no such user. Might have gotten caught by the spambot. Try the guest login ( http://www.deepest-dark.net/ front page, just put any name and click log in) and we'll get you sorted.

Grey Paladin
2008-03-02, 05:01 AM
I have never dismissed any of your arguments beside the lack of balance between classes and "badwrong!", you'll notice "I'll take your word for it" and "but that's fine as this is your opinion" all over my posts in this thread.

And you misunderstood what I claim with my 'fauxlosophy', I am claiming that every time the setting or another 'construct' interact with the 'character', another copy is created in the memory of these who perceive the event- a character(or rather, 'whole'), like any object has certain qualities at any given time and while the player can control the actions of the character at any given moment s/he cannot revise older copies- how one perceives the character as a whole depends on what copies one posses, such a character up to point A in time is independent from the player located at point B, although the actions the player takes at point B can and will effect the 'whole' of the character if perceived they cannot effect older 'wholes'. when one course of action is expected and would be the realistic outcome of all dots connected to this point, and the player takes another because of whatever OOC reason that player has caused the character to take an OOC action.

The one thing I have directed an insult at is attempting to argue with AngryZealot_01 style comments, if you feel I have insulted you elsewhere you have my sincere apologies.

Back to the discussion:
I have already observed that the larger the community is the less likely this is to work- but it has worked in the past with up to a player base of about 50, what I have argued against is your claim that an extremely high fatality rate doesn't works well for storytelling. It doesn't works well for heroic fantasy, that is (mostly, unless resurrection is as common as in core) true- in a setting where the majorty of the population stands in one spot, silent, about half of the time it falls to PCs to fill all roles in the cast, no matter how minor. some find it fun, some dont.

For the caught-all OOC talk and maintenance, NWN has a DM client.

Tengu
2008-03-02, 05:14 AM
What server do you play on NWN2?


It's a Polish server, so I'm afraid you wouldn't be able to play on it anyway. The NWN1 server I mentioned was Layonara.