1) I'm not old! Wait... I'm 29 ;_;
2) The only issue I had with my ATI card was the 12.x drivers. Went back to 11.x and no issues
3) Stupid kids, also older players have this selfish mentality
4) I agree! More puzzles and challenges!
5) What's that? You say you want the drow to raid the surface more? We can arrange that.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

From an online RP perspective, there is no better game than Nwn. And hack'n'slash point - I have been playing Warhammer online for some time, but without proper rp every game turns dull sooner or later. That's why Nwn is still alive and kicking. And there are new servers, with population maxed to 96 players and they are full (!!).

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

This. This is why I won't leave Amia, for the spectacular RP I get involved in!

But, seriously, I ws really going to say this: Prime example why I do not play any MMOs. There's hardly any RP. It's just idots going 'hurf durf, let's raid brah'. Fuck that, I don't want to listen to annoying, whiny little bitches talking about gear and shit. I never understood how people can stand it (though WoW is loosing a lot of people apparently). Same thing with SWTOR: I realized there was no RP value so I canceled my preorder. And I'm glad I did, since it's soon to be F2P lol

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I'm going to throw out a thought on the death issue.

How much of a good idea would a random chance of your character being unable to be raised (as in, permadead) every time you die? There's no other penalties (save for the ones we have now, which are fairly minor even if you respawn), but every time you fight there's that chance you aren't going to come back.

The % chance itself could depend on the level of the character, and would increase with the amount of Class Levels a character has. In effect, a higher level character would have a higher risk of getting auto-permadeaded. Why? Because this not only improve the dynamic of the server (eg. veteran characters making way for new ones to rise), but it also would force these highly powerful (and in some cases absurdly powerful) characters to pick their fights strategically. If two groups of PC's declare war on each other (such as was the case with the Orcus Careigh plot, for example), it really boils down to killing each other over and over again and force your opponents (or rather, their players) to abandon the war out of sheer frustration. This isn't fun, let alone constructive, and adds to the "no consequence to anything" feeling. But add a risk of permanent loss to it, and it becomes another matter entirely.

Does this favor powerbuiltwtfpwn characters? Of course! These things are tweaked to do murder and nothing but. But theyre prone to just the same chance, and there's always that chance your powerbuiltwtfpwn character suffers bad luck (eg. lag). Also, with all-out repetitive killing sprees notably more risky, characters that are focused on other qualities have a greater chance to shine.

PS. You could even expand it by allowing Assassins to use some sort of combat mode which improves this chance further.
PPS. If it would be possible to script such, perhaps DMs could temporarily set a higher/lower chance on PC's in their events, as appropriate. I'd say that death in the Abyss is quite a bit more dangerous for your soul than death Kohlingen.

_________________
Aernoud Van Brabant: Heir of the House. Proprietor of the Beer Wagon.
"Go to the Mayfields, have a pint, and wait for this to blow over."
Aurelius: Sunmaster of Amaunator. Contemplative. Aspirant to Transcendance.
"Sol Invictus"

I do not like the idea of forced permadeath. You mentioned why - the chance to die due to lag, for example, is making the permadeath too strick (saying as a hardcore player).

I like the idea of permadeath whilst dying in a hostile city during the war, for example. Or to an assassin. Or during a ritual of some kind. Permadeath should be something that the player is warned about in advance (mostly, not in all cases). A.k.a - Do not enter the city. If you got caught, you'll be executed = Permadeath.

I do believe that the harsh death penalties (not perma.) will eliminate builders / loot hunters / nonrpers. When you have a character for many years and you loose something, you do not mind it much (personal experience from previous server - on death, whole inventory dropped). You just suck it up and continue - because you like your character, you work with it, plotting with it, you took your time to create it, put an ideas to it... you are rping with it. But treasure hunters, who created a character only to hunt, loot and such quickly abandoned the character as soon as they died and lost ph4t l3wt. Because they had no real relation to it, it was just a "Diablo" thing that prooved ineffective. So they either start over or quit. Either way, no real loss to the community.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

No permadeath. Death by RNG, lag, etc is way too possible for a chance to permadie.
I almost left the server during the Great Exodus.
Permadeath will cause me to leave faster than anything else.

_________________

Permanent death via mechanics or scripting is almost certainly never going to happen.

_________________
Andrew Fryar: Cordor's Folk Hero
Bobrin: Eccentric Avenging Executioner
Lyle Torrowfire: Retired badass
Marigold Cobcruncher: Perceptive Priestess

This.

(With the addendum that I agree insofar as we're speaking of meaningless, randomly mandatory permadeath, with no real RP around it.)

_________________
Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026

Character Portraits!

As for permadeath and related death solutions; I saw a creative one when I tested out Border Kingdoms while Amia was down: On death from critters/NPC's you drop all gold and items except your armour, but can re-spawn for no other cost. And if you are lucky, you might crawl back and nick your stuff back. When killed by a PC, the same happens and you are knocked out cold, unless the player has entered lethal mode in which case your char is dead. Permanently. Screenies and a damn good reason is required for the latter to be valid however, so it can be made difficult to abuse, and griefing would not happen.

Such a solution would perhaps not fit with Amia's light mood, but would certainly make people more careful, and death more meaningful. Personally I like the item and gold loss on death more than the permadeath solution.

_________________
"Edwin do this, Edwin do that. Somebody get this jerk a banana!" - Edwin, BG II

Valygar 'Stonesnake' Stark -Human Ranger
Garret Smith - Archer and peddler of deity-statuettes
Dáin Saltbeard - Dwarven sailor and fencer. No, I'm not joking.

What's the IC justification there for Raise and Rez not being able to function?

_________________
Winner of Amia's "Most Ethical Time Traveler" award 2026

Character Portraits!

Yeah, the RNG is notoriously finicky, from what I have read, so using it would be terrible for something like this.

If something like that was enforced, I would probably never hunt again, or rarely if ever, which would eliminate ever creating a new character. New players likely would feel the same way.

Now, DM-enforced permadeath is different and I wouldn't mind seeing it used more under certain circumstances (like what Guardian mentioned about bans and vast crimes and such).

I am still liking the idea of the chance to loose good/items on death, though. Interesting idea: If you are in a party that is on the map with you, the chance is lower since people will watch your stuff (typically). If you are soloing the chance is far higher.


PS what was 'the Great Exodus'?

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

As I said, I am more in favour of the gold/item drop option than permadeath, which I don't think fits Amia. It was more as food for thought. Though it could be justified quite easily: The gods are tired of giving every joe adventurer an almost free raise every other second.

_________________
"Edwin do this, Edwin do that. Somebody get this jerk a banana!" - Edwin, BG II

Valygar 'Stonesnake' Stark -Human Ranger
Garret Smith - Archer and peddler of deity-statuettes
Dáin Saltbeard - Dwarven sailor and fencer. No, I'm not joking.

One of the things I liked about EfU:A was their policy on PvP death: no respawns. If you get killed in PvP and there's nobody to raise you, tough luck. DMs could always make exceptions, figure something out, let your buddies look for you etc.

I don't think that's going to make Amia more active and fix our bigger problems, though. It might be part of the solution. We need to figure out something to do, and then we can think about consequences for failure. A permadeath possibility (or it could just be something like temporary archival with the possibility of getting looted) would certainly make RP interesting, but won't generate it spontaneously.

I think PvP consequences should be kept strictly seperate from PvM death, though.

_________________

Gold Inflation Reduction Exchange (GIRE) is put in place - a code runs when you login and click on the entry mirror, it reads your gp in inventory, changes it to 0 and remunerates you with the number in your inventory divided by 1000 (thus the GIRE is at a rate of 1000 to 1 - 'old' money to 'new'), with a number of items set to be saleable around the right marks (silver coin = 1 gp, gold = 10 gp, gold bar = 100 gp) ~ These can either be fixed via hak or they can be allowed to appreciate and depreciate in value and create RP trying to find brokers to exchange your money-items for mechanically usable (ie GP) cash more easily. Once you've had your inventory filled with these once, the game sets a flag for your UserID and you don't get it happening every time you login.

This could be done in conjunction with gp drops on critters being stopped and thus new economy goes into full swing and you can cut the crazy prices at the lower end of the spectrum, making it easier for lowbies to get on whether it's in group or solo. It could also create an alternate higher end economy, with money-replacement items being exchanged in lieu of gp, especially if a banking system is put in place, or if the money-replacement items are excluded from death-drops, whilst gp reduction is increased.



Sinfar doesn't count, it's a shag server... Unless the DM's are going to stop hounding those who have no interest in fading to black...

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

What about this option (trying to be all-inclusive):

1) Killed during PvE with party members near you (same map, whatever)
.....a) Loose some gold/items
.....b) respawn/raise/etc work

2) Killed during PvE while solo
.....a) Loose more gold/items
.....b) respawn/raise/etc work

3) Killed during PvP (with death option enabled, not subdue): DM-guided raise only
.....a) Nothing lost (a bit more fair? Dunno, can go either way)
.....b) Can only be raised by a DM-controlled NPC

This would make people think twice about PvP without enforcing permadeath.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I don't see why you couldn't raise someone from PvP without DM insight, if you can find the body and get to them. The option to relocate the body after you murder your victim would have to be in place for this to be at all relevant, though.

_________________

Which is why I found it HILARIOUS that a bunch of old Amians went there during the before-summer slump XD


One issue I see there is it would eat up more inventory space. I'm not a hoarder, I use bags as little as possible, and inventory space is nice lol

I'm not an econ expert, so I can't say much. Plus, my brain is full of fuck and work right now, so I can't think about econ changes XD



True, I suppose. It's just an idea to limit the immediate return and kill issue that has been brought up.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Nai - Just grab a magic bag in advance of the switch
Though that said there is the current item storage system in place - it wouldn't be inconceivable simply to expand that to involve holding cash.

Heck, what I'd love is rather than some magic thing like the Morgan Bros. is a persistent locker/chest with only one access point (IE where the chest is) with a 9 digit option lock code of 6 numbers that you have to enter via conversation where if you get one wrong it kicks you out of the convo and you have to start again... That'd keep you coming back to Cordor if that's where you were banking, if nothing else! That and it'd be a pain to break whilst actually making Heist RP more realistic - there'd be a real bank to hit, with actual chances at loot in all those 'safe deposit' boxes.

Also nothing wrong with shag servers, just the scum that gum up the otherwise good RP really needs bleaching out hardcore most of the time. Also that place is designed horribly. It's just tooooo biiiig.

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

The Team wants to discourage cash-hoarding, though, and get it recycled through the system instead so as to remove the huge piles of wealth people sit on.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

That's why the exchange rate from old to new will reduce all funds by a factor of 1000. I explained this previously in my GIRE post.

Oh and yeah. Get rid of the carts. People have been saying this for ages. The cart system kills RP by letting people effectively teleport. We have roads for a reason. Let's use them again, and we'll get an upsurge of banditry RP, of clashing factions meeting on the road and the response of their members, of just actual adventures that don't begin 'So we took the cart to Bendir'.

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

Oh I know, I caught that. I was just referencing being able to horde the cash in a bank Even witht he lowered gold rate, people will still continue to amass piles of wealth after a time.
They have already said no to that idea (unless I'm remembering wrong, haha).

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Border Kingdoms has a max level of 8. It's a low magic world, that's how they justify no raises. Besides, the rare clerics that get accepted aren't able to cast Raise Dead anyway.

They also handle permadeath really well, because immediately after character creation, you're maximum level (Level 8.) Gear is easy to acquire, so the only thing you lose during Permadeath is your character's story, any land claims, items, Rp power, etc. Admittedly, this can feel pretty bad, but my experience so far has only been amiable. And those who have lost characters are actually really understanding, and many happily bounce right back into the game with a new character concept.

For me, I've never enjoyed grinding. I know it can be done quickly /enough/ on Amia, I just can't stand it. I've spent almost every single DC on character leveling. Any character ideas I had are lost (Example: Amia Goes East) because I just don't grind, and I fall behind. And it's hard to play a character with any concept of strength or power unless you grind him for all those hours. I'd MUCH rather spend it Rping with folks. And I also heard this from a bunch of my friends in RL, that I tried to get playing Amia. To them, it was just too hard to get on the same level as everyone else. Too much going on, and they couldn't cut it.

It's a bit radical, sure. But being able to have a character at immediately max level opens up -all- the room for Rp, rather than grinding. People can still choose to "Grind" for treasure, money, adventure. And those that simply wish to drive plots can do so. When players lose a character, they don't see it as an end or a waste to every minute spent simply -grinding- to where the character could even Rp the strength that he would have liked to have.

Numbers, you are making the faux pas of rehashing old ideas we have been through and discarded with good reason. Careful not to let a wagging tongues overload a good thing here.

Sorry, been out of the loop for awhile. My MSN is publically known, or you can toss me a PM so I can save mah breath perhaps?

Also, interesting perspective Hackums. Something I agree with, having never fancied or enjoyed grinding much. We're not all korean.

Anyway, just giving various thoughts that could shake it up a bit on here. Heck, you could cut the persistant part entirely and just kick everyone down to lower cash levels. At the end of the day, some people are hoarders.

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

That's why I would usually get to a certain level, stop grinding at all, RP around for a while without hunting, and then go on again, using in shorter spurts. Low levels irritate me on some builds (read: any casters), so it was a fine compromise for me.


Why not the option to start at varying levels? Some people might not want to start at 30, some might, some at level 10 or 15 or 19 or something.

Definitely a strange idea. I think it works better on a lower-level server, though. Because you should be RPing constantly, even when hunting. I do that all the time, rarely is hunting a non-RP experience for me. When it's not, I get bored easily.



The DMs have mentioned something like that before. Heck, I'm all for wiping everyone's gold and inventory but I think that would push even more people away (even though they would be the whiny baby types ;p).

edit: Oh, and yes, I couple of my characters have epic items, so they would loose them as well. And two of them have just over 1 mil gold.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

What if DC's gave you anywhere from 4-6 levels (and scaled) per use?

I mean, it doesn't take a terribly long time to level, and I think currently using DC's one by one to gain XP is a crapshoot as to the RP:Grinding ratio.

Yes, it might take away from the grinding, but it allows people who do not wish to grind, for example, Hackums, to build a character concept without being forced to make the grind.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

Regarding the levels :

Put a cap on lvl 20 - up from lvl 20 the xp could be obtained only by DM's (either via. DC's or DM themselves). Mr. Hackums wrote it precisely in his post. And the best way to eliminate epic "nobody" is to block them before they hit epic levels. I mean, Epic is a status not everyone should have.

But it is a radical cut, even more than drop on death one, and yet again something I already saw on other server(s).

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

I don't know how I feel about that. Personally, I'd like to see players able to acquire those levels without the help of a DM. More emphasis on non-dependence.

With DC's, you have to earn them in the first place. And you could have earned them on an Epic character, then spent them all on a new character, and voila-- You have another level 30. Whereas the new player doesn't have that experience, or the DC stock, and still struggles to grasp DM attention to receive DC's.

And DM experience post 20 would lead to the same situation. Folks who can't receive DM attention, for whatever reason, won't be on the same level as everyone else.

I experienced this, however, I found out it wasn't actually the graphics drivers at all, it was sound related (except for shiny water)

What I had to do is turn off shiny water, and set the sound to one of the "dolby" variants isntead of the default. I went from 3-5 FPS in combat to smooth gameplay.




This is a self perpetuating problem. People don't play because there is no one to play with. Unless -someone- is willing to sit around and wait for others, this only feeds itself and makes itself worse. I'm guilty of this too.

_________________

An interesting idea I have, yet I know would never be implemented into Amia for obvious reasons, is limiting the Maximum obtainable level through means of grinding, thus limiting the majority of people at level 20, and have only rare and special cases as to why people would go above and beyond into epic levels, meaning you would effectively have a few 'boss' PC's, which, with careful supervision and the like, would provide more flavour when it came to conflict events. Say there is a Lvl 26 Cleric of some generic evil god, with a few of his level 20 cronies, you will need to use some tactical advantage and numbers to not only get past his level 20 guys, but to ultimately defeat the epic character.
I am probably explaining this in a terrible way, but I hope you can see the point I'm trying to make.

Apparently people are posting on here faster than I can click submit, and someone already had a similar idea. I care not.

_________________
Khaldun Menetnashte Khalfani
Victor Wilkinson

^totally not a lie or anything.

Oh, and to add. (Sorry for the numerous posts!)

If you don't have to grind, because you're already leveled up, you tend to see much more people in the cities. You tend to be able to find people, to do things with.

One potential negative is that people won't have the drive to do anything, now that they're max level. And that they'll just sit around Cordor and socialize. I personally think this can be countered by the ease with which evil can be created. If there's conflict, players take it upon themselves to become involved in it. Because it's fun! And if Evil can make characters with much greater ease, they can explore all kinds of options and ideas. Thus drawing a larger reaction from the Good guys.

Ironically, this was talked about in regards to a BF3 server I play on every now and then. It's seeding the server lol

Yeah, we all get guilty of it, but I'm trying to shake that off! I can always solo with a few of my characters to have something to do in the meantime, but if I'm aching for RP... I'll just have to wait!
But luckily I've found some RP lately with one char, and I know there's more out there.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I know what you mean. For a long time, for example, I thought that DC's are given to a character, not to player.

I do not know how to solve the grinding without using at least a similiar method to what I described, though.



I do. I cannot say I agree with it, though. A player who would reach lvl 26 would hardly turn to a cheap pvp. That's the charm.

I just think that Epics should be Epics. A fella who creates a build a grind himself to lvl 30 in a week does not deserve an epic status. And yet, should we use the situation you described, he can easily rape a bunch of RPers who just do not find grinding appealing in a pointless Pvp - in the end, he knows he mastered the big 30 with great build he saw somewhere.

So I would much rather see an epic evil villain who DESERVE the epic status than an epic nobody who just found it too dull to harvest NPC's all the time.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

I'm of the mind that 'epic boss characters' should never be in the hands of a PC. That role is best left to DM-controlled NPCs (typically seen in the form of level 30s that are more powerful than the norm or deity-like figures).

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

But it basically is. It is DM's who hand over the epic status.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

That's pretty much my point. Level 30 characters would likely not exist unless on an extreme and rare basis. DC's being used for these extra levels I don't find very appropriate, but having the epic levels moderated heavily by DM's and the like would be. They would of course be judge of who can be level 21+, and I would hope they not give it to people who would abuse it. It maybe also worth implementing permadeath for any epic level characters, so they'd have to be extremely careful too, meaning if they did go about killing everyone, eventually they would have effectively hunting parties and such going after them, and die. Or maybe not even permadeath, but the loss of all epic levels. So, on death, you automatically go back to level 20, and must start again. As far as lore goes, it probably makes no sense, other than maybe, losing parts of your soul upon death, and the gods replacing what they could, returning you to the apparent god-attention filled land of Amia.

_________________
Khaldun Menetnashte Khalfani
Victor Wilkinson

^totally not a lie or anything.

A level 1 evil PC works just as good as a level 30 evil PC because PvP is NOT the only way to be evil.

You dont need a level 30 PC to plot a world takeover, you can do the same thing with a level 1

Also "Epic boss type" characters are in the hands of DMs, they are level 40+

I hear this old chestnut wheeled out on a regular basis. It's amazing how little people take you seriously if they don't think you could potentially hurt them. Still that said, watch out...

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

The best villians never lift a finger, they get other people to do it for them

And that takes time. You give the impression I could roll up a villainously minded kobold and have Cordor burnt to the ground by supper.

_________________

Jys'zyne Do'larn

Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?

But if no one ever tries or attempts to, it never gets done

Everyone always resorts to the easy route which is "I can kill you with my sword so respect me" when they could persue the path of "I can kill your familiy, burn down your village, and make your life miserable if you lay a finger on me"

The first one requires level grinding, the second one requires a RP comitment that is not based on level

Fearing someone based on a mechanical advantage does not make a long lasting conflict or make a memorable character. The ones people truely fear and remember are those who hold positions of power, such as a high ranking official in a government who seeks to corrupt a city from the inside, or a high ranking church official who seeks to remove all opposition to his faith.

Such things also provide a plot for people to work against, a level 30 can solve a plot just as well as a level 1. It elevates it from opposing a single person to opposing a idea or group.

Evil, like good, comes in many shapes and sizes with different goals and dreams. Sometimes it comes in the form of a normal person who became a vengeful and wrathful person. And then sometimes it comes in the form of a raider or killer, who is insane and simply wishes to spread strife and bloodshed or even a Necromancer whose goal is to further their knowledge by any means necessary. There is no 'best villain' because of this.

Yes, but you dont need to be a level 30 power build to accomplish a evil goal, the only thing level matters for is if you want to kill other PCs yourself.

A story of vengeance leaves little lasting impact and people forget about it. People still will remember kampos burning down, people remember Wymhold falling, people remember Nes'ek being destroyed, people remember the assisination attempts on cordor council members, and people will remember the recent plague.

That's right. But it doesn't make it wrong to be that level or to have a build that you made to actually defend your goals and dreams.


Quick edit: Don't confuse that with having a build you made with classes you'll never RP. That I find to be a bit crazy(And I'm guilty of doing that a few times). Haha

The second also requires someone who is in a physically suitable position to carry out the murdering, burning, etc.
Read: level grinding. Both are acceptable, and you do need a mix of it. You need your thugs to do the brute work and attact attention / give the guard PC's something to do in short term bursts. You need the "smart evil" types to handle the long term oppositions.

Also for amusement sake on the dream coins bit from earlier, assuming you got to level 3 via the speedy's quest, it takes a whopping 101 dreamcoins to go from 3 to 30, unless the xp/level on dreamcoins has changed. It's really not worth it.

Here's the results of 5 min. of fun with DC numbers: http://images.cybersomnia.com/Amia/DCinfo.html
Note: xp to level is assuming you've DC'd from the previous level, so it takes into account the xp overflow.

_________________

Halecta, have you actually tried putting that into practice on Amia? Your example on its own would pretty much never work: most PCs don't have things to threaten. You can't threaten gear, or property. You can't threaten loved ones because half the time they don't really have any, and when they do you can't reach them or they're equally impossible to kill, and when you make the threat the characters do the rational thing and protect them (which is a trivial matter of making sure they're always in safe zones). Sometimes you can, sure... but only in a few situations. Your other example of acquiring political power... that's not easy, and your opponents have the same chance of gaining that power as you do. To acquire political influence, you must give something up. Personal freedom, time. You need talent, you need to be able to overcome resistance. You can do all of this without being good at PvP... but you can do it while still being good at PvP, too.

Persuasion is complicated. You need to convince someone that they -want- to behave in a certain way. There are many ways to do this, and many tools you can acquire to that end. Some tools only work in certain situations, requiring that you carefully set up the situation or that you're lucky that they behave in a certain way. You can try to predict their behaviour and strategise but it's not hard for them to do the same, so more often than not they have the same access to tools as you. "Evil doesn't need to be good at PvP" (to paraphrase), yes. That's true. I've never really been involved in PvP on my main that wasn't simply incidental. But it -helps-... it gives you another tool, which you don't need to pay anything meaningful for. One more tool means you can act in situations where your other tools won't work - and don't tell me you'll always have another tool, because that's simply not true. You'll be up against people who are probably *do* have the PvP tool, or have the numbers to cover the difference. That's more options they have compared to you, and since the enemies of Evil are entrenched you're already at kind of a disadvantage. Edit: I should add, numbers definitely matter more than powerbuilds, but the acquisition of numbers is less reliable than being able to put a good build together, and pursuing the latter costs very, very little while pursuing the former is a matter of luck (and as much time, effort, etc).

Sure, you can get someone else to be your muscle... but there isn't really anything stopping you from being your own muscle, and it will give you more options. It's a nice thought, being able to escape the PvP mindset entirely, but it's just not reflective of the truth of the situation.

The thing about the great villains in the stories who rule the world from their thrones is that they only really show up in those stories. I've been playing villains long enough to recognise that the "great villains" are there because the author said so. There's one guy controlling the story, whose goal it is to create a good story, and he can set the variables to produce the desired result. In roleplay, there are countless desires being played out. You have to be really lucky and also quite talented to reach those lofty heights over everyone else. You just can't really compare roleplay to a straight narrative. It's more akin to real life... you have a lot of potential, and so does everyone else. A combination of luck, skill and initiative ensures your position, but the same goes for everyone else. If you lack one tool and the other guy doesn't, he's got the advantage. Sorry to reduce the conflict of this server to a big old "Team evil vs Team good", there is a lot more to it but on some levels that's what's at play. Ultimately yeah we just want to create a good story and getting too competitive and too PvP-focused is a bad way about it. But I want to dispel the illusion that "You can win without PvP, you guys just SUCK AT IT" (no one's said that but it's a little implied)... the reality is, "winning" is just hard, PvP helps. I assure you, we've been trying what you're saying. The fact that doing so makes it hard to be recognised unless we shout it out, well... that's just another problem with the approach you espouse.

The discussion's been kinda derailed, because the evil discussion has been done to death and it was decided last time that this is a problem that can only be fixed by everyone pulling together and getting out there. Not much has changed for the better - attempts were made and didn't work out... For my part because I'm a shy idiot who is wary of prodding DMs when that's what I should be doing. Some things did work out - the big old Shrine of Eilistraee battle ended in defeat for team evil, but it was such a big event that ultimately it was a good thing. So yeah, we just need to keep trying if we want to fix this. And the stuff that Yoss said. Pay attention, there'll be a test later.

Edit: I made a bunch of small edits to embellish/clarify. I hope it doesn't cause any confusion.

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

Frankly, good vs. evil is a paradigm doomed to failure in the first place. People naturally sympathize with the good guys. You have to make a conscious decision to play an "evil" character if you want to side with oppression, violence, lack of empathy and what-have-you. It takes a level of mental instability to embrace the "evil" things in the setting. I am as uninterested in playing a specifically evil character as I am in playing a character whose defining trait is "good".

Good conflict must have gray sides with advantages and traits that inspire sympathy, as well as serious drawbacks. People of all alignments have to be roughly as likely to choose either side based on their personality. Most PCs are "normal people" when it comes to morality, and normal people pretty much universally condemn evil. Look at The Witcher. Neither the Scoia'Tel or the Order of the Flaming Rose are very nice, but both have valid points. (Something in Amia's mood and setting should probably have a little more positives.) Stormcloaks vs. the Legion is another example, though I felt that was a bit poorly done as Ulfric is an obvious hypocrite and the whole conflict revolves around a single theme. But the point is, that could have been an awesome, vexing choice.

One city protects its citizens, maintains order, prospers in trade, and accepts foreign religions into its cosmopolitan culture. Unfortunately, it also exploits natural resources and has imperialistic tendencies to meddle into the affairs of its satellite settlements. Censorship and government control is a daily nuisance. It's opposed by a coalition of forces who demand local autonomy for every village, sustainable care for the environment (my phrasing may be a bit modern), and offer a sense of community focused around a strong cult of some popular deities like Chauntea, Tempus and Lathander. This means a fair deal of religious intolerance against churches deemed to support the enemy, such as Waukeen and Helm. Not every village is happy with these "freedom fighters" causing instability in the region and disrupting their livelyhood in the fields and woods.

That's not a suggestion for Amia. It's an example of two sides with their own interests, both of which have the ability to elicit sympathy but also strong opposition. They're not about "good" and "evil", not even about "law" and "chaos" (even if this specific example has that undercurrent), they just represent different interests in different social, geopolitical, economical etc. situations. Both sides have a lot of room for individuals and factions to make their contribution and steer the ship of state in a new direction, even if just one degree at a time.

Cordor is very good and exciting. I'm torn on whether my character should hate it or revel in the opportunities it offers. The problem is, Cordor is just one town, and it doesn't have an equally powerful counterpart. Hence the original suggestion of Cordor and Kohlingen starting a land-grab competition (a possibility which has been hinted at before), but Kohlingen seems way too sissy for that.

_________________

I don't think we really can get away from "good vs evil" entirely, though. Too much of the setting and even the mechanics are built into the paradigm. Unless there's a united effort to pretty much overthrow Forgotten Realms, this isn't going to change.

I disagree that "evil" must not be at all sympathetic like the shades-of-grey you describe. Or at least, for me, there is always a somewhat sane reasons for my character's involvement. And even if there isn't... well, this is about making a good story. Struggling uphill against what "normal people" are trying to do can be a part of that.

There's a level of mental instability in evil characters... but when ISN'T there a level of mental instability in everyone else?

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

It's not something you're going to involve the entire server in, though. Good vs. evil will always be fought by a marginal group of villains and a few heroes, with a lot of bystanders rooting for the good guys. You cannot sustain a server-wide dichotomy with such an inbalance.

I'm not sure why a realistic conflict between two predominantly neutral powers, driven by political, economical and religious interests, would "overthrow the Forgotten Realms." Just because D&D has evil demons and good silver dragons doesn't mean the mechanisms of history and human psychology are somehow different.

Evil has its place in the master narrative. Ideally, it would have its place on both sides: in fanatic raiding parties disrupting Cordor's trade routes, despotic constables violently suffocating any sign of rebellion, dark cabals trying to incite the two sides into open war for their own nefarious purposes. And of course, there's still Tarkuul, the drow, and other independent groups to consider. But this much is fact: you cannot create a master narrative and revive RP that involves everyone on the server by relying on a good vs. evil set-up. It's going to be an overwhelming and uninteresting inbalance. A DM-created evil menace is nowhere near as engaging or sustainable on the long run, though they still make epic shorter storylines like the Wyrmshadow Prophecy. Or they can be drawn-out and pointless, like the Horde. You want to pit players against eachother to keep things dynamic, and you want to do it on more levels than just "you're vile and I'm holy".

_________________

I just don't really see it happening. Too many people really would rather just play characters who happen to be evil, and thus they are drawn into that conflict. Every Dragon Disciple has a side. A good chunk of mage RP involves choosing a side. Druids/rangers end up being on a certain side. Almost every god has a side and almost everyone follows a god, and the deific grudge matches complicate that. Neutral powers tend to pick up an alignment along the way, usually by picking up those who -have- picked a side. If you avoid picking those people you lose out on numbers.

Evil has its place, but we do have a population crisis. If people who would otherwise play "evil" decided to go for building a neutral power, you just create another, smaller faction which can't build up the momentum to get anything going. The last major player-driven event was a big old good vs evil battle. The entire server was locked down in the battle and it really got onto everyone's mind. Evil lost, but I don't think "doomed to fail" means "not worth trying".

The thing you're after, yeah it does work sometimes - the recent Kozakuran thing does fit a lot of what you're saying. But it didn't last. I don't know if we can organise people into actually doing this without getting bored. I'd rather just keep trying to gain what ground can be gained in "good vs evil".

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293