Tue Apr 27 10:35:20 2010

At 8 o'clock PM, Day of the Sun, 13th of the Month of the Dark Shades
on the Theran calendar Unaletaet perished, never to return.

Still don't understand the RP of Wardens going after Fortress Conjurers when there may have been other targets around...

That was really my only interraction with you, left a bad taste in my mouth. I got a little pissy afterwards, sorry for that.

In the eyes of this character your acts were vile, evil, and downright awful for the sake of the world. So for the sake of the world your death, though you "walk in the light" serves the greater good? It would be the same with an elf rager going after you. IMO.

Outlander has lots of foes they will and are expected to go for, even if the outlanders are wardens. They hunt dwarves and paladins for example, because those are more civilized types. Pretty much classes that are forbidden to join outlander are foes of outlander, and so can be hunted without as much consideration for alignment.

I believe for goodies Cabal designated foes/enemies trump any alignment restrictions and are permissably killed. This is really only applicable to outlander, village and tribunal, as fort mages should not be hunting goodie ragers (sucks I know). But even in cabal driven situations keep in mind this must be done within reason, and it is not acceptable to kill 40 goodie mobs to get to a goodie player usually- and Imms may expect a degree of RP afterwards (be it expressing remorse, explanation, preaching...).

And in fairness there are no real preferred enemies. I mean a warden may want to kill an imperial over a fort guy, but just because both are in game does not mean he should actively hunt one over the other, or that he should ignore you if he happens across you.

To answer both points, I guess if I looked at this as a real life Good person, a really good one, I would think there would be at least a bit of conversation prior to such a battle.... "Give up your evil ways" etc. But let's be realistic, RP isn't as fun for these types of people as PVP.... That's what gets me I guess.

This was a mess about chracter to begin with and one that needed to have very little practice requirement and a good way for avoiding ppl if the babies started crying or the wife needed me. I had a role idea and put it in much later than normal, about rank 33ish I think.

Anyway, I saw you loads of times when I was in the air and chose not to attack you because there were greater and more nasty enemies of Ther-Eris but on this 'ONE' instance I swooped down and took you down. I showed remorse at your death but I think you were too angry (perhaps from an OOC perspective) to listen to it and started judging me a step closer to darkness for striking you so I replied with something along the lines of you making grave assumptions about the purity of your soul from your actions to think that this would darknen mine so badly.

The way I saw goodie conjurers was like this - The world is a massive living being. Everytime a conjuration is pulled through into it, it pains the world like having a hot poker stabbed into it. 'Good' Conjurers hide themselves behind this ignorance at best and think that the pain caused to the lands is the lesser of two evils compared with the battles they fight with conjurations against empire etc. So what you were doing was willful harm to the world in my eyes.

Anyway, I stayed at your corpse for ages to speak with you but had to fly off and help another outlander out.

I may not have been the best goodie outlander going but that is partly because it was my first and this is shown by the Imms not making me sunwarden, despite role entries and IC notes about the undue pressure on the harbinger to try and maintain three branches of the refuge. No complaints here though.

I wasn't going to bother with a goodbye note but the comment about RP < PVP for me is untrue and so I felt I should address it.

-----Abernyte the part-time.

Agreed that you were on a bunch and didn't attack me before this. And yes, I probably had some color to my opinion after just having you destroy me so utterly there. As for the corpse part, I had teleported there, and had no idea how to get back. As for your remorseful RP after the fact, I don't really buy it. I don't remember the exact words, but I do remember the feeling I got from them was a, oh well, you are a conjurer and it doesn't matter if you are good or not... And then the retort about my elemental striking the giants there afterwards just left an Oh well kind of taste in my mouth.

I guess I just expect more of a pre-fight banter with a Good align char attacking another good align char or even a neutral char. Something along the lines of, "I find what you do repulsive. Give it up, or I will take action...." I find it too prevelent here, that people take any excuse to attack. No cabal is out of bounds on this one, shoot, I can remember at least one instance where I did it as another char. There are a very few people on this game that I would consider real RP heavy players. And I think more than a handful that just want to log on and kill something. I like the former, the latter, well I just try to avoid them if I can.

>I guess I just expect more of a pre-fight banter with a Good
>align char attacking another good align char or even a neutral
>char. Something along the lines of, "I find what you do
>repulsive. Give it up, or I will take action...."

While this might be preferred from some angles, in a game where timing and surprise often are the deciding factors in an PvP encounter it doesn't make sense to give someone warning right before you want to attack. Unless the attacker purposefully doesn't want to land a kill that is. IMO after death RP is about as much as you can expect.

dwarves/duergar are hunted because they burrow into the planet hurting it

paladins are slaves to their code, and often lawful.

Generally speaking, both of those kinds of characters are walking a thin line in terms of retaining a good alignment.

For the obvious reason of people raging and deleting.

I still think the whole idea of good not attacking good just because they have a golden aura is a poor interpertation of good since it just assumes team good. In virtually all fantasy literature there are different factions under the umbrella of what we would call the good align and they do not all get along or treat each other peacefully as they balance their own needs as individuals and cultures with the greater good.

In practice, good characters become neutral for this all the time. That doesn't mean that every good character who attacks another good character will or should become neutral; thus my comment that it's a thin line and not that it's impossible.

If we were discussing what a good alignment means in another context or even another RPG context I might agree with you, but in CF practice if goods attacking other goods and treating them as they would anyone else is commonplace, the distinction between good and neutral blurs in a bad way.

Can you tell us why Ceyraia (Sunwarden elf warrior) was not made neutral then? I remember she attacked my goodie conjie, so I'm curious to know more about that 'thin line'. Perhaps Tangni (Sunwarden elf shifter) attacked others goodies too.

Malthalia was my personal fav.

Here was a badass rager, but a piss-poor goodie. She will routinely attack several good characters just to kill a goodie mage, which, like I said, is awesome rager behaviour, but craptastic goodie behaviour.

And he was regretful about it being a mistake.

I just don't believe anyone that says he did save for perhaps one example.

She said she would only attack me (elf trib) if I attacked the Refuge. I did, since they had the scales, and she struck me.

That's the only time she would attack me, and the only time I attacked her was if she was in a city, which was rare since she didn't want to really start a fight between goodies.

I was a magistrate. I was attempting to retrieve the scales from outlander.

A few times, tangi drove me off....but I would come back.

Finally, tangni followed me when I fled to rest, and killed me .

I personally felt kindof bad about what followed....but my elf character was a little bit of a bitch personality wise....and he whined incessantly about it. Heh.


Didn't realize what tangni did until later, what with leaving outlander and joining the fort. ooc blew me away. I was ...REALY....impressed.

In the eyes of this character your acts were vile, evil, and downright awful for the sake of the world. So for the sake of the world your death, though you "walk in the light" serves the greater good? It would be the same with an elf rager going after you. IMO.

Functionally, how does this character differ from a Neutral Battle/Outlander member?

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

THey believe in the light and believe that basically folks like conjurers are corrupting the light. SO they are weeding out the bad to help the good. Like Daevryn said, it is a thin line. Should that conjurer always be there first target if say an anti-paladin or orc is around...nope. However, perhaps they shouldn't always just fly by when they see them.

I would agree that there are definitly situations where a good aligned char can and should PK a non-evil char...

So here is where I disagree on the RP side of things. And it's probably just my take on what I think a good aligned char is, but I would expect some type of interraction prior attacking. To me, being good, means that when I see someone that is not inherently evil(Read (Red Aura)) doing something that might be considered evil(Killing good mobs, etc) I would try to talk to them first. The exception to this is when they are grouped with Evil chars, and out PK'ing 'innocents'. Then they are no better than the ones they're running with. Just like if I see them ranking, I'm not going to run in and target the non-evil first, no matter what the tactical advantage. The thing I see here more often than not with these type of goodies that I find lacking, is they want to RP after the PK, when the situation really calls for RP before the PK.

Now if I had multiple interractions with this char prior, with her telling me that she didn't like what I was doing and it was corrupting the veil, I would OOC feel less of a problem. IC I would probably say the same things I did, hopefully with less OOC bleed. But one line of "Your magic harms the lands"(Paraphrased) after killing me, to me is not representative of what goodie RP should be... And having problems with the retort saying that the person was falling closer to the darkness.... tells me that the person isn't in grips with what a goodie response to being PK'd by another goodie.

In situations like this, attacking the bound servitors is probably a better RP choice. Mind you, I didn't see these players, just speaking in general terms.

I guess it's a commentary on Goodie RP as a whole. I even see it in the Fort, though to a lesser exent, when people talk about Nexus and the like.

To the person who spoke about the point on the element of Surprise vs talking to the person first, that's exactly my point. These types of players are more interested in "winning", than a true RP experience. I see it in the Village as often as other places. Where someone roles a Storm or Elf villager, and then proceeds to use the magic is evil in my eyes so it doesn't matter if you are good or not rule. Now from an role perspective I can totally understand it. Execution is what matters to me.

Now that said, I have also had some very good interractions with villagers and the like that are good aligned. So it's not all encompassing. I think it's hard to view this game in terms other than "winning" and to many players out there, "winning" seems to be racking up a good PK Ratio. Me... I suck at PK(Getting better I think) but I also really enjoy the interractions. My anectdotal experience tells me that I am not in the majority when it comes to what I consider "winning" here, but I continue to play becuase I enjoy the game.

I disagree that attacking the servitors is the right idea. Maybe attacking the elemental would be fine, but I think for a good rp, attacking the angel/archon is a bad idea. Those beings are purely good and are called, against their will, to this plane of existence. The act is what is considered evil and therefore the person who perpetuated the evil act should be punished, not the object of the act.

That is my thinking. I'll probably never play a goodie outlander, but this would be my philosophy if I did.