Illarion.org

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:27 pm**

I totaly agree to Ark's point.

When a character gets banned from town, the "fun", playing the char fades away.

Characters who are banned from town have not a very great chance to sneak inside again. The townguards are played good, but maybe we have "too much" realism. I mean:

If you are banned, and go into town again, you are getting killed and jailed. Okay.

If you sneak into town, and someone meets you on the northwestern part of the island: They want you to leave the northwestern part (not part of TB), and if you don't leave you get killed and maybe jailed.

If you are banned from town, you have no big chance to access a depot and can't do any work (like smithing, mining, woodchopping, etc.) because you can't put it somewhere.

And also: There are those "invisible guards" who guard night and day, so you don't have even ANY chance to sneak into town. "Swimming" is not tolerated IC, too.

So, playing banned chars is often no fun, and boring. When a char from me was banned permanently from town, i never played him again, because suddenly the char was kind of "garbage"

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:32 pm**

Just rp killing the invisible guards, I mean they don't care enough to list them in the roster in their guild. It still amazes me why those guards are in the business and they get no recognition,

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:52 pm**

#me scales the wall silently and wraps an arm around the guard's torso, suddenly slitting his throat

If I was the boss of the town guard, and I saw an invisible guard let that happen to him, I'd kick him straight out of the guard. But maybe because that happens to them now and then, that's why you never hear of the poor saps.

But to return to the off-topic issue here: being banned from town is still a technical problem. Not too many solutions or considerations have been given. Maybe we should start a thread in the off-topic section about it? On the other hand; I have this impression that discussion would only go in circles. This would be worthy of a poll, imho.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:38 pm**

Two shields tactic makes sense. It can be used in real life. It requires heavy armor and will make you slow, but surely unpenetrable.

I'm sure someone who wielded only one sword, constanlty bashing your shields with his sword would wear you out quicker than they would be work out, and when you collapse, then you would be easy prey.

The technicalities of the game don't yet allow for stamina, so the current shield situation would help remove any abuse of it.

Plus, a point someone made a long time ago .. If your carrying a large shield that is strapped to you, and another person smacks the shield with a mace hard, you're going to have bruises and some damage to your arm. If you've ever done pad kicking, and you've held the pad, and the other person can kick hard then you'd probably know that it's so easy to just deflect an attack. Now pads are cusioned, where as shields are plates of wood, or more often metal (in game at least), with probably some leather strap to hold on to. I think it would do some damage to take a blow even while holding a shield.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 7:56 pm**

Im not going to argue its pointless any argument you make in this game just run in circles. Im just going to say what I think.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:24 pm**

Completely agreed Nartak.

It seems like, it's impossible for notable bad guys to be any fun. I remember the seige of Northerot, when my char tried to sneak back in, the locks were "reversed" or something, making his key useless. And the only way to take the place back was to kill everybody in sight, no other tactic seemed possible, because it seemed like guarding characters (not really town guards) lived up there. But didn't Northerot lack any resources for making it livable anyway...?

And then before that, he was living in a cave for an entire year trying to make plots that would be impossible to work out, because there were no other conflicts.

Edit: More typing.

The lack of being able to pull off stealth tactics is a shame too. As soon as a character sees your bad character on screen, he/she turns around and knows you're there, even if you were completely behind him/her. Gotta love that magical F12 key huh?

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:26 pm**

It's your choice to play an evil character.

If you don't find fun in it. Then don't role play being evil or "bad." That's your problem. Not everyone elses.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:28 pm**

The almighty Kasume spoke

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:32 pm**

Well it's the truth.

If you don't find fun in playing the role of being banned. Then don't play it.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:34 pm**

Please. Of course it's everybodys' problem. It ruins the fun for players, who have that option, of playing bad guys.

Problem for bad guys: Impossible to win.

Problem for good guys: No conflicts to worry about. Constant peace. Boring.

So, yes, it's a problem for everybody.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:37 pm**

The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly. And did it in a fun fashion. He proved that being "bad" can be fun. Unfortunatly, you're just not trying hard enough to make it fun. You think that conversing and killing each other is fun... apparently.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 8:43 pm**

Bloodhearte is one of the better played evil characters. Please Kasume, stop typing before you make yourself look stupid.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:30 pm**

Kasume wrote:The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly. And did it in a fun fashion. He proved that being "bad" can be fun. Unfortunatly, you're just not trying hard enough to make it fun. You think that conversing and killing each other is fun... apparently.

Darlok wasn't an evil character though, as far as I'm concerned. He was just a fella who got what he wanted at any cost, including life. That was more of a greed/power hungry trait then "worshipping Moshran/Cherga" evil that my character had going.

I tried my best to make it fun, but to be honest, there wasn't much he can do unless he had a lot of money or power. Not even influence would help, as recuits would get their throats slashed within a few weeks. I sent countless RP requests, but they were rejected for one reason or another. Now I'm complaining too much.

Just so you know, Darlok probably killed many more characters than my character. And he had the opportunity to "converse" many more times, as you put it.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:11 pm**

It seems the only bad you can do is go to a field where no one is around and hit the flowers and yank their peddles off laughing at them. I always considered Ark evil....and I hate going around and killing....gets old and dumb...no depth to the situation. Ark knocked over a mute girl ad kicked her and threw ash on her all because the silly girl got her wet....and she was almost banned permanently again for it...and Im having the hardest time keeping Ark on a leash.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:27 pm**

Kasume wrote:The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly. And did it in a fun fashion. He proved that being "bad" can be fun. Unfortunatly, you're just not trying hard enough to make it fun. You think that conversing and killing each other is fun... apparently.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:38 pm**

Kasume wrote:

The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:45 pm**

Need more than yourself to finish quotes now Kasume?

It's very hard, if not impossible, to play bad/evil/Paganish characters these days without losing 95% of the conflicts in my experience.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:48 pm**

Well then it seems the game is working correctly then.

Bad characters shouldn't be winning anything. Especially when there are a small fraction of them compared to the amount of people that actually play. And considering that's rather small, you get the point.

And Hermie, there was three sentances that you forgot to add there. If anything in this world bugs me the most, is when people edit your post into a quote in which it makes you sound like you're saying something that you didn't mean.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:54 pm**

@Hermie:

Yes, agreed. But if you are heavy and strong enough to be clad in armor and hold two shields - you would be like a tower against someone lightweight. Surely shields would hurt, but not as bad as a direct wound from a sword.

On ban issues:

I totally agree with Nartak and Bloodhearte on this one.
My char was trying to beg his way back to town, promising to retire from his evil plots. That would have been done, but the leader of town guard told me precisely: To make your way into this town, you will have to kill me. And then it's jail or death anyway. So yes, basically, the only way to play a SOMEWHAT bad guy - is to PK them faster than they PK you.
This is sad RP, because all of this good/evil thing can be played without character PK totally. No one has to lose skills and items if players just respect each other's characters and their traits.

Kasume wrote:Well it's the truth.

If you don't find fun in playing the role of being banned. Then don't play it.

Kasume, if I wanted to have FUN in being banned, I would PK everything in sight. And in fact that's what I am close to doing. Otherwise, no one takes a dark char seriously. But that would take the fun out of other players' game. Didn't you feel bad when one of the banned killed you?

But it's better to be known as an eviloder than to be known as a wanna-be evildoer who can't do anything and just babbles threatening nonsense.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:55 pm**

@Kasume - Either that or you just didn't write it properly.

'The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly. Darlok proved that being "bad" can be fun.'

Would have made sense. Whereas ..

The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly.

.. reads that you are saying people dont play evil chars properly, but darlok did play an evil char correctly. If you were refering to him playing a bad character (and not an evil one) then you should have mentioned you were only refering to him as being bad before the second sentence, not in the second sentence after. Like I said, that would make no sense.

I was merely pointing out why Bloodhearte presumed you refered to Darlok as evil when he wrote:

Darlok wasn't an evil character though

@Konstantin

Surely shields would hurt, but not as bad as a direct wound from a sword

As far as my own experiences in game go, the shield does deflect more of an injury than a direct wound. The only thing that changes is that with more powerful enemies, the shield would also increases.

Concerning evil rp:

If someone had joined a band that fought the town guards in an attepmt to overthrow the city/government (or basically Lyrenzia) then once this band has dissolved it would seem that the enemies of the guard were only returning to town for their own advantage and any promises from an 'evil' person would be empty and they could easily turn their back on promises of peace again.

I don't know each individual case of why people are banned, but it would seem logical for the town guard to ban people from town, IMO.

Though, I do agree that it is very harsh to be banned from town.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:55 pm**

Consider yourself bugged.

Ka-zoom wrote:Bad characters shouldn't be winning anything.

1.) Illarion isn't a fairy tale where good always triumphs over everything.

2.) I suppose Darlok's kingdom was just a structure made from styrofoam and toothpicks, right?

3.) There are more "baddies" than you think. The trouble is, many "baddie" characters don't take the role seriously enough.

Players who want to have baddies should have every bit of chance to succeed as the goody-goods. Ever been told by your mom "play fair or don't play at all?"

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:57 pm**

Just look at a real life situation.

Do you really think a real life criminal has it fair? Not really.

And number 2... Uhm... What are you talking about?

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:58 pm**

Do you think criminals in real life at least have a snowballs chance in doing what they're trying to do?

Of course, otherwise crime would be nonexistant.

Do you think Illarion is real life?

...me neither.

Kasume wrote:And number 2... Uhm... What are you talking about?

You said bad guys shouldn't be winning anything. But Darlok won a whole kingdom. Sorry bud.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:59 pm**

Kasume wrote:The problem is. People don't play the evil character correctly.

Darlok did it correctly. And did it in a fun fashion. He proved that being "bad" can be fun. Unfortunatly, you're just not trying hard enough to make it fun. You think that conversing and killing each other is fun... apparently.

Kasume, Darlok had GM abilities. As in, abilities beyond average player.
It leads to only one thing: Darlok was impossible to PK most of the time, unless it was planned on. If every evil char will have the confidence of not dying - everyone would open up their potential and make it fun.
But now, since guards are uber-strong, all evil guys have to do is hide and run out of town. Nobody can go ahead and throw an unltimatum to the Town of Troll's Bane. If you do, you get something like "Haha, keep dreaming your fantasy, crazy man!" And then you're banned or PKed.

How come there are invisible guards, but there is like no invisible army of evil goblins, that I can gather and bring and use to seize the town?

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:02 pm**

Kasume wrote:Well then it seems the game is working correctly then.

Bad characters shouldn't be winning anything.

Ooooh, buddy! We're walking on some real thin ice here!! This isn't some fairy tale you know.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:05 pm**

@ K

I'm not really sure that Darlok had GM abilities, but if he did, no wonder. He would've lost in a heartbeat with the world against him.

People that fought against him complained that they couldn't keep their characters from dying. But at the same time, they were babies about building Northerot, that could prevent their characters from dying anyway.

I remember when our chars summoned Ashkatuul and Drahken into Trollsbane. The goodies died, went to the cross, came back, went to the cross, came back...I was thinking that at least a temporary occupation of Trollsbane would've been interesting. Finally, Ashkatuul was defeated, although he should've won in a matter of seconds if it weren't for constant trips to the cross and back.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:07 pm**

But hey, at least he could cover the land in rotworms and really unleash terror...

With the old fighting system, a character with maxed stats could not beat Darlok... so I dunno...

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:08 pm**

How come there are invisible guards, but there is like no invisible army of evil goblins, that I can gather and bring and use to seize the town?

Because you're one person.
If you had a group of people supporting it, you might have a *slight* chance of that happening.

Kasume, Darlok had GM abilities. As in, abilities beyond average player.

That was obvious.

Also, who said killing was the only way to role play being evil? I fail to see how it's the only way to play the part.

Do you think Illarion is real life?

...me neither.

Well people have complained before about the buildings being built of brick.

But now, since guards are uber-strong, all evil guys have to do is hide and run out of town.

Ok Mr. GM item boy. I sugged shutting your trap right about now.

You said bad guys shouldn't be winning anything. But Darlok won a whole kingdom. Sorry bud.

Unfortunatly, that's true. And unfortunatly, he's the only "criminal" that has ever gotten anything out of his crimes for the better. Which might show something. If you have some sort of support, a group of people. You can do criminal acts. Although, the Movement confused me on what the hell they stood for. Half of them only wanted Darlok dead and the other half wanted to burn Lyrenzia. Which I was completely confused about. So I calmly got my character outa that whole clash.

Darlok, obviously had support in what he was doing. And it's what most criminals lack anymore.

Edit:

With the old fighting system, a character with maxed stats could not beat Darlok... so I dunno...

I wonder how you know.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:12 pm**

Kasume wrote:I wonder how you know.

Fighting experiences?
I fought Darlok in the old fighting System, and i could not beat him, i was senior master in slashing though.

Posted: **Tue Aug 10, 2004 11:15 pm**

My character gathered support, but the good guys still gave us the boot.

As I said before, it seems like the only way to win anything in Illarion (at least when you're playing a bad guy) is if you go on a massive killing spree of your opponents.

But that relies on combat skills. So basically, any chance of success depends on what shade my "slashing weapons" skill is at.

I thought Illarion wasn't about skills?

By the way, Konstantin knows this because it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Darlok char wasn't maxed in the fighting area as he was also very skilled in magic.

Bricklaying is common sense Kasume, and an unimportant issue. People winning conflicts is a lot more important.

Illarion.org

Roleplay or Persona Play?