|
|
|
Heroic Knight
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 13, 2008 12:30 AM
Posts: 169,
Visits: 961
|
|
Marios(4/13/2008)
I did redefine in more broad terms, but it was buried amid the verbiage take "win" as a shorthand for "achieve a contested IC goal".
Oh sorry if I missed it I am a terrible scan reader.
Marios(4/13/2008)
In that sense, the Apartans could be said to have won because the managed to hold up the Persians long enough for the Athenians to do their stuff. They weren't, I think, secretly hoping to get butchered too soon for it to affect anything.lol, no probably not, nor was I suggesting they would be that daft. Although as an aside, it is interesting to note that Spartans and their whacky culture did not end up dominant in ancient greece I think I was trying clumsily to illustrate that their death is perceived as 'cool'/'a good death' by many who are inspired by them (I shan't go into cultural propaganda etc) but as players we get to do the heroic thing,/have the good death (possibly) and see the outcome, which is the pay-off, that one assumes unless the Elysium Fields are real they did not.Which is the downside to heroics/sticking your head above the parapets rl, I hope that Maelstrom doesn't follow the model of reality too closely or else conflict will dwindle as the proactive types all get greased leaving the sensible people to just get on with things
Marios(4/13/2008)
JC is the difficult one - I was tempted to bring this up earlier because I always like to get a jab in at 'slave morality'. You could argue that JCs secret Master Slave Plan was to provoke his own crucifixion to immortalise himself - I think that would be stretching it (and maybe contradictory to the Garden of Gethsemane - or not, I'm not a theologian). More realistically, I think this is the archetypal example of the sour grapes "Ha! I win by losing! Stupid Romans, stupid pharisees - material goods and earthly power is for suckers - being poor and humble is the _real_ victory condition". This is precisely the sort of thing a game that relies on active conflict desperately needs to avoid (see Gibbon and a horde of historians on how the progress of Christianity correlated closely with societies turning away from active pursuit of external goods, until the renaissance exhumed pagan 'positive morality'). Victory through passivity may or may not be a good ideal for life - but it's a really dull one for a game with no monsters! Fun fact - Catholicism didn't dwell on the crucifixion until late 9th/early 10th (i.e. post the big West European missionary phase) - they focused on positive aspects like miracles (there's a big mural somewhere in France, you can just about make out the crucifixion hidden away in an insignificant corner).-mariosI'm not a massive fan/advocate of Gibbon, but I take your point, I think I was again trying to use him as an individual example for if you did similarly as a player, then it could be construed as a win, because you bugged people enough for them to slot you, you made them act, is it a small victory a major one a peevish one? hmm I don't know, I've never been in that sitch. I would have thought that because you get to sit back afterwards and go; 'hey I must have been right 'cos they killed me, would be cool.
Marios(4/13/2008)
I think laying the "random mugger" to rest as a concept. In a game where money means nothing, I can almost see a justification (since you can't possibly want my stuff, this can only be the adrenaline buzz from killing) - but in a game with economics and economic inequality it's just as 'valid' as the casino. The Rwandan genocide has been described as the murder of those with shoes by those without (granted, it sucks that you can't gauge whether someone is likely to be a mugger by their pinched starvation wracked faces - maybe rules edition 4?)..Fair point, random mugging for cash is reason enough, I think I was looking at it purely from the recipient of death's point of view, if I get slotted by a mugger then I'll appreciate they need the cash/have a right to do what they are doing, unless; they laugh and say in an ooc stylee 'nah man we were just bored' in which case I'll call them twats
marios (4/13/2008)
I don't think it matters whether your goals are likely, just so long as you are actually sincerely pushing them - i.e. if it actually somehow became practical would you back down? If so, you've robbed the people who were working hard to prevent that happening.I agree, half hearted (ooc) is being unfair, if the character gives up (ic)hope and fails to give it their all that is perfectly acceptable.
~'What is Archangel worth? - 'Nothing...everything'~
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 27, 2008 2:16 AM
Posts: 589,
Visits: 1,121
|
|
Argh, it's late and I only read the first page so again apologies if my response is redundant.
Firstly, dying is part and parcel of the game. If there was no risk then it would be rubbish. It would be like playing Doom with IDDQD on, except so would the other participants thus all you could do is talk and possibly be angsty. One must participate in the game with full knowledge that death may occur and if this is unacceptable then don't play.
Secondly, death as a win condition is interesting but I wouldn't say it's mine. In Eos I'm playing a psychotic Orc beserker, plain and simple, and I fully expect to die but due to my character I'm hoping it's either (a) in a blaze of glory with insurmountable odds or (b) very sneaky and dramatically satisfying. Let's face it, the only thing he's predictable with is being unpredictable, ergo I expect, nay, *demand* that people get pissed off with him. This brings me to point three...
Costume effort. Since the last Eos I have bought leather, furs, props and tools to make armour, clothing and weapons for my Orc. A lot of it is character specific but if I kark it then I shall reuse it immediately in bits with some reconfigurations. The fact is I've had immense fun with just one event and even if I only get to wear it 15 minutes into Eos and I get jumped then that doesn't take away the fact I own some kit I'm very proud of and I shall create another character that can use it. If people face me off and hold back because of the effort I put into my kit then I'm going to (a) be pissed off because they'll let me win on that note and (b) they deserve me killing them then, since levels of kit shouldn't be a reason for players to change how they roleplay a situation (unless it's because I did such a good job of making myself look as intimidating as possible that nobody wants to actually make the first move). It's no FOIP secret we wiped the Aivielle on the first event, but by hell we gave them an excellent death (some might say exquisite with the mace execution polo style). I only hope that whoever kills me gives me the same level of interaction or greater. If creating unique kit and getting killed might upset you, don't make unique kit.
So, death isn't really a win condition but it's every players duty to make a character death as dramatic as possible, a real talking point, a think of legend to be discussed for years to come. The Orcs are still talking even now about the legendary charge those foo...ahem, brave poncey elves made against us, and how we held our ground Rourkes Drift style (Orcs Drift?). I still remember how one of them begged us to spare them, and how another whimpered as he saw his comrade being executed. I wasn't on the receiving end but their sterling efforts at death were a total credit to them. So yes, I just hope they felt their deaths were as legendary as we thought they were.
My golden rules are:
1) Don't change your roleplaying for anyone.
2) When you're at the stage where a death is certain, ham it up and give the dying PC some spotlight time.
3) If the situation allows, drop OC for a second and tell them how much you appreciated their death on a dramatic level (no gloating) and perhaps offer them a drink if available. If this step isn't available at least tell them that you'll buy them/share a drink later with them.
4) End it on a handshake, a smile and a kind word or two. They may have had the character for a considerable length of time and it's important that they feel like the correct outcome has been reached rather than they've been bullied. I know my Maelstrom character fits the bill since he's been there since event 2, and if Heinrich gets slotted that's a real part of me that dies too. Saying that, I'm a thick skinned b'stard and I'll live. 
___________________________________________________
PD:- Dr/Cpt Heinrich Bellamorto - Pickled Surgeon
- "Shoot him in the eye, the face is for ruffians and amateurs."
- "I'm holding a pistol and I have a pocket that cries PARTY! We are NOT having a quiet one!"
- "Lovable in a Hitler kind of way" - Sass
EOS:- Jarn - Psychotic Runty Orc Beserker
- "Hello my Pretty Pretty...fancy some muddy cuddles?"
- "If we are what we eat, I could be you tomorrow..."
RL:- Pete Bridges - IT Mercenary and RA (special) Agent for Suffolk Mental Health Partnership
- "[LARP], it's not like drugs although it's probably just as expensive"
- "Yes, I snorted the Everclear and the Strawberry stuff with pips in"
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 2,003,
Visits: 8,528
|
|
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
Oh sorry if I missed it I am a terrible scan reader.
It's a definition I'm happy to have the opportunity to put out there again - I think it's possible for "For me, roleplay isn't about winning!" to sound morally superior, but "For me, roleplay isn't about achieving contested IC goals!" is more clearly a position on whether or not you're interested in PvP games.
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
Although as an aside, it is interesting to note that Spartans and their whacky culture did not end up dominant in ancient greece I think I was trying clumsily to illustrate that their death is perceived as 'cool'/'a good death' by many who are inspired by them(I shan't go into cultural propaganda etc) butas players we get to do the heroic thing,/have the good death(possibly) and see the outcome, which is the pay-off, that oneassumes unless the Elysium Fields are real they did not.Which is the downside to heroics/sticking your head above the parapets rl, I hope that Maelstrom doesn't follow the model of reality too closely or else conflict will dwindle as the proactive types all get greased leaving the sensible people to just get on with things
Kalos Thanatos - the 'beautiful death' (and they had the right idea - you didn't whinge about the wrong sort of death occurring - the kalos thanatos was something you were responsible for actively looking for - if someone complains about 'dying badly' in larp, perhaps it's a sign that they weren't looking hard enough for their kalos thanatos). Heroic eugenicist, Helot-suppressing militant gender-segregationist collectivists (my kind of heroes!).
I don't think the Spartans fell through being too proactive so much as through demographic crash (effective birth rate way too low because they married far later than everyone else in Greece - women's rights are so costly!). I wouldn't say that the lesson from history is predominantly that proactive people get killed leaving the inactive in power - proactive people do die a lot faster than the inactive, but the inactive rarely wield power because there's always someone that bit more proactive to walk and snatch it from their feeble grasp. I think, if anything, Maelstrom gets more active the more it parallels real history.
The element that seems to be missing is 'kleos' or stature/reputation - "coward" doesn't seem to sting people which is fairly historically unusual.
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
I'm not a massive fan/advocate of Gibbon, but I take your point
"Waah! Evil Christianity made my beautiful pagan Romans go all weak and sissy until they couldn't fight the barbarians!".
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
I think I wasagain trying to use him as an individual example for if you did similarly asa player, then it could be construed as a win, because you bugged people enough for them to slot you, you made them act, is ita small victory a major one a peevish one? hmm I don't know, I've never been in that sitch. I would have thought that because you get to sit back afterwards and go; 'hey I must have been right 'cos they killed me, would be cool.
There are two ways of looking at it "I won the moral victory" or "I lost, but I got to play in a high stakes game with people who were very good". The first one is rather passive aggressive and relies on asserting the value of negative acts (Aha - I won because I _wasn't_ politically or materially strong), the second asserts the value of positive acts (I nearly won because I nearly had lots of important people onside - then I got too cocky, slipped up and the pharisees had me).
If you prefer - winning by "being the overdog" or by "being the underdog". Being the underdog is about asserting that social/observable goods aren't actually worth wanting/acquiring/holding - which is a very bad OOC ethic for a game which is driven (1) conflict and (2) acquisition.
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
they laugh and say in an ooc stylee'nah man we were just bored' in which case I'll call them twats
Sounds like a symptom of a crushingly boring game (indeed, a game where the only reliable entertainment might be being a mugger/hunting muggers) - I can't imagine that being an issue at Maelstrom.
Sikorski (4/14/2008)
I agree, half hearted (ooc) is being unfair, if the character gives up (ic)hope and fails to give it their all that is perfectly acceptable.
IC fear/despair are all to the good - what's bad is if it leaks out of the character into the player so that the character has no motivation and player OOC resents the group that the character fears/is in despair over. It's an emotional hydroelectric dam - if you release the pent up torrents outside of their designated IC channel, there'll be nothing to make the turbine spin.
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Cold Water and Brass Tacks
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 12:44 PM
Posts: 1,180,
Visits: 1,031
|
|
markst (4/13/2008)
How much fun really is it to be killed by another player. [quote] Ive had many deaths. being dobbed by the stepney lads was some of the best entertainment Ive had, and i was dead for most of it. Depends whose killing you i suppose. A system without permenant character death oppurtunity turns into Warcrack. Id far rather a group of players plotted my demise than be taken out by a random Goblin 'monster' scout. Not allowing players to kill each other is a completely artificial mechanic which in my opinion makes no sense. It means at some point you have to start making artificial adjustments to peopoes characters to explain why they havent just killed each other. This does not mean you should encourage pillocks to play who just go rounmd murderin folk. But then your system should be robust enough that that kind of behaviour is dealt with by the Player group IC. If its a repeated problem with an OOC nobwit you can just ban them. [quote]Everyone has a favorite character, how would you feel if 5 people got together on your next event and murdered you? five people all concerned enough by my story telling to take me out. Id be well impressed.
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, November 28, 2008 2:06 PM
Posts: 796,
Visits: 1,062
|
|
| Frankly I dont see any difference between killing a PC and killing an NPC, its still killing. The distinction is unimportant, both are characters that lived in the world and which have been removed from the world. People talk about the effort that has gone into a PC. How is that relevant? I would hope that people put some effort into their character design and costuming and so on. NPCs also have a lot of effort put into them. So why is being killed by a random bandit better than being killed by a PC? The character is still removed from the game world. As for favourite characters, I firmly believe that if you cant stand to lose a character you probably shouldnt be playing it. No LRPer should become dependent on their character. Most LRP game worlds are dangerous places, and the most dangerous people in them are usually the PCs, so why shouldnt they be dangerous to each other? However, there must be consequences to IC actions. If a PC kills someone else, then they should face the consequences, whether the victim was a PC or an NPC. If they were a notorious criminal the consequences might be a medal; if they were a merchant the consequences might be that merchants hire assassins or refuse to trade in the area. PCs shouldnt get away with actions just because they are PCs, and those consequences might include death.
_____________________________________________________ It is not a competition. It is a web forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Overlord
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:40 PM
Posts: 1,595,
Visits: 4,256
|
|
Sarah (4/14/2008)
Frankly I dont see any difference between killing a PC and killing an NPC, its still killing. The distinction is unimportant, both are characters that lived in the world and which have been removed from the world. Speaking from my own perspective this is exactly the kind of environment I try to create at Eos events. I aspire to getting my players to think of everyone as just characters. Unfortunately many games do not and PVE or PVM is seen as a safer bet as people playing those parts don't care as much as the "real players". Part of good plotting for fests IMHO is creating believeable agendas for NPCs that have comparable depth to player agendas.
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 27, 2008 2:16 AM
Posts: 589,
Visits: 1,121
|
|
Allen Stroud (4/14/2008)
Sarah (4/14/2008)
Frankly I dont see any difference between killing a PC and killing an NPC, its still killing. The distinction is unimportant, both are characters that lived in the world and which have been removed from the world. Speaking from my own perspective this is exactly the kind of environment I try to create at Eos events. I aspire to getting my players to think of everyone as just characters. Unfortunately many games do not and PVE or PVM is seen as a safer bet as people playing those parts don't care as much as the "real players". Part of good plotting for fests IMHO is creating believeable agendas for NPCs that have comparable depth to player agendas. Spot on. If I can tell it's an NPC I'm killing then something has gone wrong. Plus, the tendancy is that killing NPCs is ok but PCs is not. It shouldn't make a difference but it does.
___________________________________________________
PD:- Dr/Cpt Heinrich Bellamorto - Pickled Surgeon
- "Shoot him in the eye, the face is for ruffians and amateurs."
- "I'm holding a pistol and I have a pocket that cries PARTY! We are NOT having a quiet one!"
- "Lovable in a Hitler kind of way" - Sass
EOS:- Jarn - Psychotic Runty Orc Beserker
- "Hello my Pretty Pretty...fancy some muddy cuddles?"
- "If we are what we eat, I could be you tomorrow..."
RL:- Pete Bridges - IT Mercenary and RA (special) Agent for Suffolk Mental Health Partnership
- "[LARP], it's not like drugs although it's probably just as expensive"
- "Yes, I snorted the Everclear and the Strawberry stuff with pips in"
|
|
|
| | |