This is only food for thought and at best speculation on my part since I'm just starting to play again (albeit unsuccessfully since i have no time) after an 8 year layoff.

The tendency from what i've seen and my experience is that good aligns tend to automatically pick on evils. Well, ok. It all makes sense until you start thinking, Well are all goods aligned characters "knights in shining armor"? Just because you're good aligned doesn't necessarily mean that you CAN'T attack other goodys.

For some odd reason, most goods choose the above route. This essentially means that all goods stick together. Which then leads to the gang bang goods vs evil gripes we all hear about. How about this avenue: If a good aligned Sylvan, sees a Fortress killing of trees, you'd think THAT if anything would be grounds to kick his ass, whatever his alignment. I think you know what I'm trying to get at. I just tend to ramble.

Could it be possible that the evil's are being slaughtered to extinction partially because of a lack of imagination rp'ing wise on the good aligned part? If evil's tend to be "scheming, selfish, manipulative, and having their own agenda", what makes people think a good aligned character can't be that way? Sure this blurs the difference between good and evil, but aren't most people in real life that way to begin with? And please don't say, if ur both good and evil, then ur neutral.

The way I see it, having a good aligned leader with a refreshing new perspective might even things out a bit. So to those people griping about evils being wiped off the face of this planet, why don't you (with all that time) lead a cabal and point it in a different direction. THEN you can play your evil character.

cheers

When you roll up a character, you decide what it's morality is. Either you will be a "good" character, you will be an "evil" character, or you will be a "neutral" character.

To say a paladin who devotes his life to stamping out evil in all it's forms shouldn't kill you just because you have a red aura is stupid. You ARE evil. If you aren't acting evil, then you aren't RPing properly. That's your fault, not his.
Similarly, if you've chosen a good alignment, then you ARE good. So act like it. If you don't want to act good or evil, then choose neutral. It isn't that complicated of an issue.

Now, think in practicality. You have to have a reason a "good" person would kill another "good" person.
They're destroying the forest, and you like the forest? Fine. But Warders already do that.
They're using magic, and you hate magic? Fine. But Villagers already do that.

Can you think of a reason a goodie sylvan would kill a goodie maran paladin? No. Well, neither can that sylvan. So he doesn't do it.

By definition, a "good" character will not go around murdering people without good cause. If they did murder people just for the hell of it, well.. that wouldn't be very good, would it?

After just playing a evil I can truly say it sucks.

why did you attack me
you have a taint

it's really pathetic. No RP goes into it AT ALL

I think a few things could solve this problem. One is to fix auras. I'm not saying to take them out completely, but fix them. Inherently good and evil races will always have auras. But, just because I'm evil, must I have an evil aura radiating from me?

Example: my assassin was evil because I wanted to learn the black magics. I didn't know any, and until later on in his life no one knew. I didn't do anything especially "evil" and didn't care where I ranked, zombies or paladin. Regardless though, I had this "taint" and "red aura" shining so brightly

I think auras should be given out in game to those that deserve it. Just because you're a sylvan human that picked good doesn't make you have a golden aura. Just like you shouldn't have a red aura just because your felar tribunal picked evil.

In my eyes, it would promote people to actually RP being good instead of just killing "evil people" and saying "yea, I'm good". Also, you could separate the evils from the EVILS. Maybe you would have to have a golden aura to become maran or a red aura to join Scion. I could just be crazy and sleepy, but I'd love to see this.

--SIG
Two wrongs dont make a right, but three rights make a left

Example: my assassin was evil because I wanted to learn the black magics. I didn't know any, and until later on in his life no one knew. I didn't do anything especially "evil" and didn't care where I ranked, zombies or paladin. Regardless though, I had this "taint" and "red aura" shining so brightly

Sorry, but in these situations you should have chosen 'neutral' as the moral component of your alignment. By choosing 'evil', you're claiming that your roleplay will back that choice up. I think you have your causality reversed.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

that's a damn good point. Would have made my life a whole lot easier, especially with the decsion I made at the end. damn, Damn, DAMN

--SIG
Two wrongs dont make a right, but three rights make a left

>In my eyes, it would promote people to actually RP being good
>instead of just killing "evil people" and saying "yea, I'm
>good". Also, you could separate the evils from the EVILS.
>Maybe you would have to have a golden aura to become maran or
>a red aura to join Scion. I could just be crazy and sleepy,
>but I'd love to see this.


The way I see it, the only things that should REQUIRE immteraction to make a character viable are things that absolutely HAVE to be that way.....like Empowerment.

speaking as a player who has had 4 of the last 6 empowerment attempts end in the imm deleting or going on indefinate hiatus...I am a big fan of keeping mandatory immteraction to a bare minimum.

(I'm not bashing immteraction, it's great when it happens....but you can go from one character who get's it every 30 seconds for his whole life....then go 5-7 chars attempting to get immteraction getting absolutely ZERO loving)


"Death awaits ya all, wit nasteh big pointeh teeth!"

About that aura idea.

Maybe instead of someone good or evil being able to have no visible aura, the aura of a true hero/villain could be enhanced. I'm not sure what color they'd be, maybe just an extra word to say they're particularly bright, or make it apparent to those who can't normally detect auras.

I think it would have to be entirely an RP bonus thing, but I'd personally rather have a permanently extra shiny/dark aura than an extra handful of xp. For the player it could be a badge of honor to be one of the rare few to receive it, and it would bring an obligation to keep RPing well or lose the aura boost. And it doesn't even have to do anything special.

>Could it be possible that the evil's are being slaughtered to
>extinction partially because of a lack of imagination rp'ing
>wise on the good aligned part? If evil's tend to be "scheming,
>selfish, manipulative, and having their own agenda", what makes
>people think a good aligned character can't be that way?
>
>The way I see it, having a good aligned leader with a
>refreshing new perspective might even things out a bit.

A refreshing old perspective might do something also, even if that something is just bringing up the par of current RP. As an example, how I imagine a few cabal interviews, with the obviously good paladin applying for membership.

-Knights-
Cador: Ok, so you're a paladin and want to kill evil, but can you do it honorably?

-Early Maran-
Shokai: Ok, so you're a paladin, but can you handle constant warfare against all the evils of the land?

-Pre-Fortress Dawn-
Cabal Leader-X: Ok, so you're a paladin, but will you go out of your way to help others even if it means letting someone evil go unpunished?

Three familiar views on how to be good, all three of which improve RP.

First off, your example with the sylvan/maran is actually true. From playing a warder to interacting with one, they don't care who is doing the damage, just that it is being done, and that person needs to be properly edjucated. The good vs evil isn't as cut and dry as it appears either. Fine, the fortress pretty much concentrates on the evils, empire and scion. The warders, a mix of good and neutral, although I would say the majority is neutral, concentrates on the evils, and on the warlocks, which are goods. The warlocks, which are good, deal with the two evils, the mixed warders, and the village, which occasionally has good and evil in it but tends a bit more towards neutral in my opinion. I would say people outside of a cabal tend more towards the good fights evil, neutral and evil fight everyone mentality. Whereas those in the cabals have a certain set of beliefs which goes beyond the simple good/evil. The reason you hear all the gripes now is just because now is one of those times were the balance is in more of an extreme shift. Sometime in the future, when the empire is going strong, no one will talk about the bandwagon goodies, the evils will say it is ok they are in power, and the goods will gripe there are too many bandwagon evils. Ebb and flow.

"Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens." - Jimi Hendrix

The general concensus of Good Roles has been a "we stick together" and "strength in numbers" kind of thing. I can't think of any specific names at the moment, but I can recall some Goodies that acted with alterior motives not normally associated with being 'Good.'

Therein lies the cause/problem... "Normally associated."

Yes, an Evil character can lean toward the Goodie side, and a Good character can lean toward the Evil side, although this is tricky.

It is also a personal belief of mine that more newbies choose GOOD than they do EVIL, so that has steadily worked itself into that particular alignment. It is also my experience that more GOODIES vs. EVILS would have no clue what to do with themselves if left to their own devices.

Makes sense. You know that old saying... Give a man a suit of platemail and he'll be dressed until he's PK'd. Teach a man how to make platemail and he'll be able to redress himself over, and over.

Well, something like that, at least. I believe more CHARACTERS and PLAYERS alike are dependant in the GOOD alignment than in the EVIL alignment. Just my perception, at least, with quite a few years of backing behind it.

I do think that players on all the alignments tend to put nifty little twists on them, and I will agree that I see less of that coming from the Goodies... probably because of the newbie aspect I mentioned, amongst other things.

It may also be that the 'Good' alignment in and of itself is more elusive in opportunities and attitudes.

Zepachu

Added this thought in after posting, hence the EDIT notice up top:

I realized I missed a portion of what you said. I think also that the EVIL alignment is more condusive to killing someone of ANY alignment, whereas the GOOD alignment is more condusive to killing evils and NOT killing 'their own'... so that is definitely part of it.