Illarion.org

Personally, and I promised myself I wouldn't get into this, but "Bumbol" is being irritating again. First of all, how should you know what is going on ig when you are never (and can never) get on. Second of all, there are characters who are worrying over Darlok and there are many who do care, but can not do anything about it because others do not care. The reason why Stephen was so famous, and HATED was because of all the things he did. People can still have very good rp without having a famous character, and sometimes, people will famous players have very poor rp.

And no one gives a shit about who Nitram plays except the person who decided to speak to him about it, was repremanded for it, made fun of the GM doing the repremanding, and then got perma banned. Sound fimiliar? I don't mind your antics, nor do I hate you, "Bumbol," but thinking before acting and making a scene is nessicary.

Now, being as I have spend many nights pondering this problem while working, I've figured someting out. We are missing quite a bit of respect between players, between gms, and in gm/player relationships. Players aren't respecting the fact that GMs have lives too, and some enjoy rping, even if it is a character, and would rather have that character remain unknown. Players have problems respecting other players, and Avaloner bring up a good point, people are rping only with their group and no others.

You can not get better in rp, have a pleasant rping experiance, or do anything else if you don't respect others and their rp and rp with them as well. That and players attacking GMs for what they do in their personal time or even mocking them *Cough, PO Stephen, Cough*, is not only disrespectful to the GMs who spend their free time working on this game and trying to keep order. So not only are you disrespecting the GMs, but you are disrespecting the game in and of itself.

With that, I end my argument/rant and will go and get on with my life and Illa.

good statement, dantagon!

No one cares about Darlok because there is no struggle. Will anyone run up into land that isn't theirs and start stirring things up? No way. But if he did something to Varshikar, or if Varshikar loudly made the point they didnt want him there, I think people would take notice a lot more, but that isnt the case, it doesn't really have to do with some sort of RP decline.

Think of it this way:

Retlak is causing trouble in town, people only hunt him slightly (or infact.. never.)

Darlok comes and takes a random castle. End of story. I don't think anyone will be any more interested with him that what they are with Ret (little it seems)

Why are people discussing Darlok OOC again?...Sounds like an in game matter.

Retlak is causing trouble in town, people only hunt him slightly (or infact.. never.)

Darlok comes and takes a random castle. End of story. I don't think anyone will be any more interested with him that what they are with Ret (little it seems)

you know why? because it wouldnt change anything. what would happen if we hunt retlak? you got to cross, and than? nothing would change. what would happen if we jail you? you would be freed again somehow. nothing would change.

What would happen if we go and slain darlok?`nothing. that already happened, he was back the next day and claimed the castle his new northerot. what would happen if we make a force and go invade? probably monster hoards would beat us up, or he simply returns the next day. since i got told he is a player char and we are not allowed to kill him permamently.

The reason noone does anything anymore is simply, it wouldnt mean anything. Even if we go hunt retlak, he will return another time. and it would have changed nothing. The same with Darlok.

That became simply a farce. and this way it was already under nalzaxx and his temple. now it will happen again. peoples will lose interest because everything they do and try will change not a bit. we simply have no fun anymore in it.
Samantha is trying to organize something against darlok and castle. she got a fw who would help. but most say "they havent done anything yet". ignoring who they are and what they done in the past. and the others...well...what would it change? we would beat them up, and than? any gm will surely hinder us from keeping the castle or the temple town. since its a quest and should not be like that. since evil needs help and backup by gms so that evil can stay alive.


Most players are simply not anymore interested in it. And not just because it wouldnt change anything. also because the story became boring. we have too many lichs, evil praising moshrans, and similar. that whole story is used up. "Darlok? again? bah...we had that already". "Temple? Again? bah.,..we had that already." "Evil lichs? again? bah, we had that already 12 times".

face it. the motivation for the non evil players is equal zero because of all that.


i miss quests and big storys which are NOT about revived evil praising to moshran and holding unholy powers. quests who not involve darkness, sacrifices, blood rituals and demons, lichs and other undead or unholy creatures. we had too much of them in the last year. It seems everyone playing the bad side this days tries to become an evil servant of moshran or similar. as if they have no better or more innovative ideas.


---edit---

The sad is, that is everywhere so.
yesterday samantha met an elf who treated her respectless. she pushed him with a windblow through the air and told him he should let it be. he standed up, and did it again. she pushed him again through the air and warned him another time! he stands up, and does the same again! ignoring the warning. this time she casted a strong damage spell on him and told him should he continue he will die. and you know what? he hasnt cared and did again! he than died. 10 seconds later he came back from cross. and continued with the same damn behaviour again! samantha just killed him with flames for that. doies it care? NO!. such stuff simply demnotivates me., and it is bad roleplay. would i play the elf, i would have shut up at least after the first damage spell! since MY char would be afraid and smart enough to know when his life is in risk.
but no...99 % of players ignore such stuff. and that takes someone every motivation. why doing something when it means nothing and gets ignored?

You really don't like it when samantha isn't the best arround.. do you? Well, get used to it and learn how to lose.

P.S: no one forces you to play this game, you know...

I agree with samantha, its simply redudant. The only way to beat this sort of thing is to pk these people until they quit playing the game or quit yourself. Its sad and sorry way to settle a feud by frustrating the PO until he/she no longer wants to play the game in order to "win" so to speak.

How about you all stop bitching on the forum about IG matters and go play the game, as a game.. not a life style

Avalyon el'Hattarr wrote:How about you all stop bitching on the forum about IG matters and go play the game, as a game.. not a life style

Reskilling is against the rules unfortunately theres nothing more to be done to eliminate a character. I don't really care to login just to be banned, just me I guess.

sorry Avaylon, actually i'm going to agree with Patric. after coming back, i was welcomed with the new Darlok plot line and i instantly felt like leaving again. Why, because it was a pointless battle. he's been killed several times already and keeps coming back. meaning we have to find some cliche source of evil power that keep ressurecting him over and over. and there will be some huge battle blah blah blah, and then finally after it's all over a few years later someone revives him again.

Same reason i didn't even bother fighting with the temple members in town. though i will say that the temple which is mostly player run is alot less frustrating then fathoming another fight against Darlok. he's kind of a run down villian in my book. and he won't be allowed to die no matter how long he's technically killed, until the GM player decides it for us. thusly no point in bothering right now.

as to it being just a game, most people play a game that gives them some sense of accomplishment, when you play an MMORPG you especially like to feel that your capable of progressing and effecting elements of the game even if it's in a limited sense. characters like Darlok (no offense mind you in any of this) can completely stifle this feeling. thusly people stop interacting when things happen in the game, which is the main reason you get standers (those people who stand around watching or completely ignore all the things that don't have to do with them directly)


@Fooser: Varshikar is so weak right now i'm pretty sure four moderatly trained fighters could take it over, its alot worse of then it ever was

Perhaps your problems stem from the fact that you think you are supposed to beat the evil side.

This is not some single player RPG where you play the hero who goes on the quest to destroy the evil lich.

It is infact a multiplayer game. The evil players arn't there for YOUR entertainment and to feed your ego by being defeated. They are there to play the game.

Its not about defeating them, its about interacting with them. If anyone had bothered to interact with Nalzaxx beyond "OMG Lich L3ts pwnzor" they would have realised he WAS a different kind of evil.

Instead you decide to bring it here because the evil players are not conforming to what you think they should do. They are not there to be destroyed by you. They keep coming back when you kill them just as you keep coming back when we kill you.

Why is it when an evil player kills a good player he can come back after awhile and continue without incident. But if a good player kills an evil one it is expected to be a perma kill and is "bad rp" if the evil player comes back just as the good player did?

There is the false impression in many of the players that evil only exists to be defeated. This attitude needs to change. They are not here to be defeated, this is a multiplayer game, they are here to be interacted with.

Haha

Actually the evil is there to defeat the good, or give it a good go. and then get defeated in the long way.

Its part of playing an evil character, you expect to die in the end, if you cant live with this. dont play one.

You expect to die in the end? I know it is just your opinion, but it is a really flawed one. Why can't there be longlasting evil? In many tales and books there is longlasting evil, living at one place or the other for their entire lives, or pestering the "good" chars on and off, without dying. Why is this not a valid option?

Sure, it is a different kind of evil from "oh goody lotsa skeletons in town me gonna wins. OH NOES, good guys attack me. I die now"-evil. But there are other evils too. Solitary evil witches, necromancers whom are just here to observe live, torture life and then observe the consequences, and our own minor evil, lizards whom tie people to millstones.

not quite bro. being that ive played just about as many evil characters as you Nalzaxx (though not for quite as long) i can understand your opinion, but evil is just the perspective. theres also the level of playablity when it comes to any pvp conflict. good or evil.

PvP is far far different from PvGM. good or evil that fact remains true. imagine if all the players took over Darloks castle and kicked him out of it. the likily thing that would happen is that by some divine and unseen power the players would be forced to surrender that control or all be killed. Evil character are wonderful and rather fun. but when it comes to regular evil players there is no script to be followed. when it comes to Quest evil characters (and i should know as ive played a few) people follow the questers storyline with no chance of changing anything.

so in that respect i have nothing against evil characters that behave in the exact same manner as other players, but when it comes to evil quest characters the case and point is that THEY ARE there to be defeated or resolved in some manner. if the temple were full of quest characters i would expect some sort of resolution to come eventually, however since there player characters that doesn't really apply to them.

I fully agree on the matter of Darlok. He's a player character now, with all the assets he gained as a quest character (which, I might note, had since been in the posession of another group). Which means there is a single player character in command of a castle that dwarfs all other guild structures, let alone privately owned ones, and there is effectively nothing we can do about it, because he is a player character and thus cannot be forced to permanently die; only if the player decides to kill him off.

So where is the enjoyment in pretending to do anything about it? When all is said and done, we can't do a blessed thing about it. So why beat our heads against the wall? Nevertheless, some characters are still tyring to organize a force against him. They just aren't blasting it from the rooftops.

But honestly... such things really take some of the enjoyment from the game. And that's just one such example.

NirAntae wrote:fully agree on the matter of Darlok. He's a player character now, with all the assets he gained as a quest character (which, I might note, had since been in the posession of another group).

thank you for clearing that up. so Darlok is just a player character who built his own kingdom, and said to hell with anything else. may i build my own kingdom then? or is there a form to fill out?

Playing a villain and playing it on forever is just very bad RP style. And frustrates other players, of course. Usually, if a char gets defeated, he should think of a way not to get into such a situation next time. Players forget that getting "killed" should be a very bad thing to happen to a character.

You know that this needs to apply to 'good' char also, not only evil..

Playing a villain and playing it on forever is just very bad RP style. And frustrates other players, of course. Usually, if a char gets defeated, he should think of a way not to get into such a situation next time. Players forget that getting "killed" should be a very bad thing to happen to a character.
Another onloine RPG i know and play lately has a time based death solution. No loss or something, which frustrates, but when your char gets "unconscious" he lies around fpr two minutes. If he gets beaten again after some time he has to wait the double time. And if again, even longer etc.
We could use such a handling over here too.

Villain characters should simply get a limited amount they can use the cross, and if thats through, that's it. Just my opinion.

Ive played more evil characters than Athian has daughters, and i must say the main thing you have to expect is to die. I made all my evil characters in the knowledge they would not be as socially active as my others. hence why i would never recomend an evil character as a primary character.

Where Illarion has gone to hell is the fact that evil is allowed to walk about and to what it pleases, and when said evil gets attacked or dies, they complain to the GM's about bad roleplay.

it applies to everyone, but mostly to those who are black and white style good/evil characters. the people who are selectively evil, sneaky, backstabbing, murderers etc have no reason to kill themselves off, but certainly shouldn't expect that they can act and play normally with the latter of the community. Varshikar used to be a place for those kind of people before it got all soft and fluffy, thusly no one can say that such characters arent given a chance to rp with others. there have been and are entire towns for that kind of thing.

The fundamental problem I see is: good kills evil, evil kills good.
What can you hope to accomplish with a goal like that? Theres much more to evil than worshiping demons, being undead, spreading disease, and weilding unholy magic or weapons. Maybe try temptations? Money, gold, stuff, position, power, drink?, housing, land, trade rights, mineral rightse. Seeding an addiction and enslaving people off it is a great evil in my opinion. Now you have people begging you to let them do stuff for you so they can get something from you, and your the center of all that is great in the world to them. Brilliant? I guess this is the essence of being a good drug dealer really.

Gotta have goals that benenfit everyone to play a char who lasts long, good or bad.

What would happen if we go and slain darlok?`nothing. that already happened, he was back the next day and claimed the castle his new northerot. what would happen if we make a force and go invade? probably monster hoards would beat us up, or he simply returns the next day. since i got told he is a player char and we are not allowed to kill him permamently.

Didn't bother reading the posts above me, sorry. But this is bullshit. He is a playercharacter correct, so then he 'can' be perma-killed as all of our player characters can be.

What kind of fucked up logic is that? you cant kill him because his name is Darlok basically.

I think the problem, is the steriotypes.

Ooh darlok is 'evil', lets all kill him because we are 'good'

Its a Rp game, and some things need to be Rped, why he's evil and the lyke, and why your character is 'good'. My lizard would love to kill every human on the island, but he doesn't seem himself as the cliche`d evil kind...

Even Stephen could have been described as evil, yet he was also good in a way.

We need more dynamic stuff, more opinions, more options, less cliche`s.

-

As for the 'knocking a person off the thone' there needs to be a method reinforced by the people. The people should be more active. If i kill a leader in public, it'd be soo humilating that he wouldn't show his face again.

I think there should be a max of 3 tries for each character. You can have 3 tries to take over a city , or to keep it. You fail them all, then you have to delete him (GM enforced); saying that he got killed or something during the final battle.

Don't want him to die? Then stay out of the highrollers area....

simple as that.

two things...

1. When a player creates an evil character, he must expect it that people will try to hunt him down, and would end up dead sooner or later

2. Still, we can't force that character to be perma killed, it's up to the player to decide

1) Define evil...

I hate the cliche` evil kind that we have...

2) Instead we pk him everytyme he breathes, until he ends up with very little skill and items, then we p*ss him off... and he leaves.

abcfantasy wrote:two things...

1. When a player creates an evil character, he must expect it that people will try to hunt him down, and would end up dead sooner or later

2. Still, we can't force that character to be perma killed, it's up to the player to decide

After you kill them off 3 or 4 times it gets ridiculous, no?

same for 'good' chars then..

Suggestion:

5 minutes of fame

Illarion is a RP game.

If a character is attacked/destroyed during a VERY important event (something that everyone will know about such as a siege, or a quest, or an ambush or something), that person MUST step down of his position OR kill his character, or at least RP as very badly weakened.

Personally, i'd just kill him, to give him a good ending, but thats just me.

Added: Example of how this works.

-

Char A is the leader of the town of BCD.
Char B decides he wants to take the town.

Player B notifies player A ooc, to prepare for a battle, and one day, an army of char A and char B, fight for the town.

During the battle, char A gets killed.

Now, char A should admit defeat, appriciate that Char B is stronger; step down and give the town to B.

He will not try another attack or anythign unless there is a big change, and the shame of the defeat stays on with him....

--------------------