Where have all the good ones gone?

[Dezza]

Does anyone wonder these days as they go on their merry journeys across the servers where the good ones have gone?

There are a few it seems, a few bright lights in the gathering darkness but they seem to be fewer and farther between.

What am I talking about? Good characters of course. Is the introduction of evil merely a passing fad and once people get over the fact that its hard to RP and play evil characters effectively they will come back to good ones? WHo knows at this stage.

From a GM's perspective I have noted that the changing nature of the alignment base of characters is certainly having an impact in quests.

'You must gather a ransom to rescue this child if you want to see them alive'
"who cares, how much is it worth to her family?" is more and more commonly the responses one gets.

So this is my lament, I am guilty myself of testing the waters of the 'dark' side but I am one who will never truly be beguiled by its evil taint.

While there can be heroes of light and heroes of dark consider this. Who will be remembered by the people? Those heroes of light of course!

So to the people out there who still persevere as bright lights under the ever increasingly dark skies over layonara I salute you and am with you. (even if I dabble a little bit in the dark side heh)

[Polak76]

Well Dez i think the reason you don't see many good people across the servers is due to the power of Corath corrupting the world and all those whom are of goodness quivel and shy from our unholy and dark dominance!

Now that i've got over my moment of glory, I totally agree with you.  But the odd thing is I still see people creating good or neutral characters yet I don't feel they RP them being good but rather hope to obtain the best of both worlds.  

Me personally as you know I don't last long with good aligned players.  I think the best I've got to is lvl 6 then its 'hit the erase button'.  
I am sure we'll see more of them once the excitment of evil characters dissipates.

[Weeblie]

The less good characters on the server... the more good the good ones will feel!

[LynnJuniper]

'You must gather a ransom to rescue this child if you want to see them alive'
"who cares, how much is it worth to her family?" is more and more commonly the responses one gets.
   
              I think you have a point there Dezza, however I do not equate this to the opening up of alignments and the want to play the dark side in general. I do not think the problem lies fully with the choices of the current player base. Consider for a moment the amount of time between the first Plot quest ending and the new one beginning, and now also consider the difference between the two. “Defeat Bloodstone. Obvious Enemey. Save the World” There, right there you have something that brought good and bad together for something more understandable. Good or Evil, Bloodstone was worse. So , he had to go.
  Consider now. Sure, the Dragons are Evil, but the plot itself is more implicit, dealing with the nature of the things afterwards. The purpose isn’t so direct yet, isn’t so clear. I feel that this is one of the driving forces of the apathy, or 'darkness’ you’re seeing, which brings me to my second point.
   
  “While there can be heroes of light and heroes of dark consider this. Who will be remembered by the people? Those heroes of light of course!”
   
  Really? Favorably?
   
  Every plot quest and many of the quests I’ve been on recently shared a theme amongst commoners, those that would do the 'remembering’ It went as follows.
   
  “Damned adventurers ruined my life.”
   
  Let me ask you this: If you felt as if the very people you were trying to save weren’t grateful at all, and even went as far as to prosecute your good efforts and intentions on a daily basis, how much would you care to simply do the right thing?

[Skywatcher]

For a truly good character it shouldn't matter what the people think of them only that they did their best to do what was right and to help the people.   I mean there are many people in our society that hate the police but if the police were police only when the people liked them they wouldn't be very good police.  I like the contrast with the darker side characters.  It allows more opportunity to explore the ethics of a good character.  You really find out how much you know about your character when challenged by the opposition on your apparent hypocrisy in a situation.  Makes you think through what your principles really are.

The only frustrating part so far is the lack of cooperation in groups since there are so many different motives and agendas.  It seems harder to get a group on the same page but I guess that's a leadership challenge.

[stragen]

Dezza,

Your most likely just missing my characters, since I moved to a different time zone.  But fear not I shall return!

Yes, I understand what you are saying.  Groups of selfish (evil) characters can be challenging (frustrating) to accomplish tasks with as each character is looking out for themselves first, and won't fully commit with a cooperative effort.  It is much easier to accomplish any task with a group of selfless (good) characters.  Of course that is oversimplifying things.

I guess the trick with running quests for selfish characters is to have a 'carrot' that would motivate the characters to try to accomplish the goal.  The usual one is self-gain, money, power, possessions, but self preservation also works.  Of course the evil characters will all be trying to sell each other out to come out ahead in the end.

Obviously, if there is no carrot, then only the good characters would remain, and the quest may proceed.  But the usual outcome is that the group bickers (roleplays) over the direction of the quest.

There are still plenty of good aligned groups, organisations and cultures.

Cheers,

Stragen.

PS:  Perhaps its time to taste the power of the darkside. :-)

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

*Simply returns Dezza's salute with a smile.*

[Interia_Discordius]

I personally think in dark times the very nature of good (aside from the good good ) would generally be a more dark good. Again, this is coming from a player who's played evil or neutral her whole life, so good is a huuuuuge challenge. I do see your example often on quests, but as I'm only a player of 2-3 months, I can't say I have a comparison over how it used to be though. To sum it up, I'll just say, I don't think it's -that- bad.

Makes me giggle over how many times the good guys kill the bad guys and lose all the information though. Wasn't killing unarmed people considered evil? **grins**

But I won't get hypocritical here...

[Harlas Ravelkione]

Just send the evil folks to Fort Llast no 115. Kobal will welcome them with dwarven steel and muscle.

It is good to know that the dwarves no longer have to leave the cities in their constant search of battle

-----

On a more serious note the fact that this happens is putting a damper on some quests. Reluctance to help out, greed and selv centeredness is dominating many discussions. The only way towards progress is often that the good characters take things in their own hands and press the group forward. Seriously, do not be afraid to throw people out of parties if they act against the progress of the party or the quest in general. It is often the natural thing to do, but happens very rarely due to people not wanting to spoil the fun for others. Agreed that it is not nice to be thrown out of a quest, but if you play your character in a certain way you must expect others to do the same and react on you accordingly.


Harlas

[Interia_Discordius]

Oh, I never realized people -wouldn't- throw others out of quests. I figured with the one you were holding, Harlas, I'd get thrown out for sure if my compulsive action was ever found out ingame

But, thank goodness, so far, it hasn't been...Only time will tell.

Really though, I'd think if you play an evil character or choose to go down the darker path of a route, you're pretty much agreeing to deal with the consequences that comes along with such decisions.

Maybe that's what we need more. Talk of greed and such can happen, but maybe there should be a consequence if it's overdone...I remember a particular quest where the team had an argument about taking a reward right in front of the person they were going to help. Something could have happened right there and then.

But we can't deviate too much from the quest, right? ;

It's a hard call to make, I'd imagine...Both IC and OOC. There's always the argument of would a good person throw out a bad person because they mention wanting to do it for the reward or wanting more of the reward? I'd imagine a good verbal lashing, but at the same time, I'd imagine a good character would want said bad character to be... good. You know, preach thingy.

Pfft. I managed to ramble there. Hope there's -something- of use within that post.

[lonnarin]

One of the funny things though is how evil characters demand lots of payment coldly from the NPC at the beginning of the quest.  Then the Paladin and the good party members speak up "never mind him, we'll do it for FREE!".

Evil gets fired pretty quickly if it can't beat pro-bono.

That being said, it's important to understand that evil seldom thinks of itself as evil.  Sure there might be a few antisocial freaks who roll around in entrials all day, licking skulls and sneering at paladins "I'm soooo eeeeeevil!"  These people are generally viewed by their ammoral peers as lonely drama-queens with little potential for advancement.  Now the tax collector who forecloses on the widow's farm, the corrupt guard who plants evidence or the vengeful soldier who slaugters without mercy... they see themselves as the last bastions of righteousness and what they do as being good.  You'll find that the most evil people in history have very lofty opinions of themselves, and are quick to categorize anybody who stands in the way of their greed as part of some nebulous, foreboding "Axis of Evil".

On the flipside, good people rarely call everybody evil to their face... The goodness within them urges them to try and ease the pain and suffering of the evil character through mental healing and redemption.  Sure, it's important to "fight evil", but only as a last resort.  Killing somebody just because they say they worship Corath is like your local minister drive-by-shooting goth kids for Jesus.

[miltonyorkcastle]

... heh, even the Norseman got kicked out of a party once... he was in favor of challenging a dragon that was eating one of the other party members... the rest of the party didn't think that was very wise... then again, old Cole was never known for his wisdom...


On a different note, I really like the conflicts of interest happening in quests. I mean, I really dig it. Sure, the quests can go all to craps and maybe the PC's "lose" because they never could agree on anything... but then, that's so much more real, more true to life. When a group of random people join together and they don't already have a common cause, they're going to keep to their own set of values and their own agendas.

So, I'd agree with Harlas that reluctance to be helpful in every situation puts a damper on some quests, but only as far as accomplishing whatever task might be presented. I think it's actually opening up new avenues of role play not previously explored in so much detail. Conflict is important, especially internal conflict.

Oh, and one more reason this is good news: The bad guys will never ultimately win because eventually they end up stabbing each other in the back, or simply never agreeing on anything. In the meanwhile, the good guys eventually find a common cause and once that happens it's very hard to defeat the group that's working in unison.

[Gulnyr]

What happens when the conflicts become too dominant?  

I don't mind some conflict now and then.  It adds to the fun.  Constant conflict isn't fun, though.  A lot of the quests I've been on in the last couple of months have become arguments between sides at some point.  I don't mean minor disagreements that get discussed rationally, but heated arguments.  It's demoralizing.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

And while a good, IC conflict is great(!), when it bleeds over to more than idle grumbling at the screen about idiotic characters, it really detracts from the fun factor.

[Skywatcher]

Another frustrating aspect of the era seems to be a tendency for betrayal or at least totally independent actions.  At least a few times I have been on quests where the group was working on sometimes long efforts and working out what action to take and then at some point a single character takes off without any discussion and changes the course of the quest against the will of the group.  Although, this happens in real life too and sometimes results in interesting twists in the outcome of the quests (so I am not saying its totally bad, please don't think I am trying to jump on anyone), it can still be very frustrating.  I guess it will be up to the good characters to kick those people out of groups if they have that tendency but I don't like the thought of that either since that's a bummer for anyone to get excluded from a quest.  I don't have a good answer here either but just thought the situation was related to other trends being discussed.

[miltonyorkcastle]

I'm with you Stephen, in that the conflicts should remain in character. Letting in character conflicts bleed into negative OOC commentary is immature and selfish, to say the least. As has been said, we're in this to have fun.

It's one thing to admit that you don't like a character's actions or words, but to take that dislike and turn it into angst against the player doesn't really serve to better RP or the world and community.

Rather, examine exactly how your character would respond and act accordingly. Not how you would respond, but your character. There is a creativity involved in responding to conflict, a process I personally enjoy and look foreward to. Not everyone does, which is understandable and perfectly fun, but I urge you to enjoy playing the part of your character in all situations, especially the ugly ones. In other words, enjoy the ugly situations, don't let them turn you ugly with them.

Finally, Gulnyr, when you say demoralizing, do you mean yourself or your character or perhaps both? In any case, depending on the nature of the quest and the GM, I suspect a "gentle" reminder from the GM that there's more going on than personal vendettas would bring some perspective back to the players on the quest. In essence, it's a reminder to "get your butt moving."

For instance, you're trying to save a sick and dying boy, then it turns out the boy is actually a lycanthrope, and suddenly the party is torn between saving him and killing him. Somewhere in the midst of the heavy debate that takes up an entire session, the GM gently drops a line like, "The boy's fever has worsened and he writhes in pain. You figure he has less than an hour before the disease consumes him and he dies." At that point, one of three things happens.

1) The group continues to argue and the boy dies due to inaction. (PC's "lose")
2) Those in favor of saving the boy quit bickering and find the way to heal him. They might have to work around those opposed to saving the boy's life, but use trickery, outright combat, or some other means aside from argument to make it happen.
3) Those in favor of killing the boy quit bickering and kill the boy, either by preventing those trying to save him from completing their work or from outright "murder."

I suppose, then, this goes back to my post above. The only thing demoralizing to me about internal conflict is when no one actually decides to do something. Even still, it really only has to do with accomplishing or not accomplishing the "mission" set forth in the quest.

I admit, though, personally, I'd rather have everyone in the party get into a drag-out fight and all end up dead or in the stocks than just sit and bicker all day. And then those that chose to avoid the bickering and fighting could actually be productive.

I've been known to leave parties and pursue my character's personal agenda otuside of the main quest when there was a strong disagreement, and I've been known to go along with things my character didn't entirely agree with because at least some cnsensus was made and people were doing something. If it turns out I'm neutral in a debate that starts to drag out and tear focus away from the quest itself, I've been known to just up and start doing something without consulting either side. I have yet to have a character of the nature to randomly stab people for incessant inaction, but a few of my characters have come close before.

Gulnyr is right. Some internal conflict is fun, but too much and the quest PC's will miss their opportunity for lack of action. Better to act and be wrong than to not act at all. Still, it's very true to life that sometimes inaction wins out, so I still say internal conflict is a good thing for RP. It's just not so good for getting things done.

[Gulnyr]

Finally, Gulnyr, when you say demoralizing, do you mean yourself or your character or perhaps both?

Demoralizing to me.  I get enough politicking and in-fighting by paying attention to real life.  I like the quests where the enemy is not a guy in your own party.  Maybe there's not a lot of pushing the character or stretching the limits then, but it's nice to play to unwind.  If I just wanted to be involved with arguments somehow, I could watch C-SPAN or call my sister.  It gets old fast.

I don't want every quest to be so clear-cut.  That would be boring.  I've just had enough of the wall-to-wall arguing.  It's really sucking all the fun out of it for me.

[Polak76]

... heh, even the Norseman got kicked out of a party once... he was in favor of challenging a dragon that was eating one of the other party members... the rest of the party didn't think that was very wise... then again, old Cole was never known for his wisdom...


On a different note, I really like the conflicts of interest happening in quests. I mean, I really dig it. Sure, the quests can go all to craps and maybe the PC's "lose" because they never could agree on anything... but then, that's so much more real, more true to life. When a group of random people join together and they don't already have a common cause, they're going to keep to their own set of values and their own agendas.

So, I'd agree with Harlas that reluctance to be helpful in every situation puts a damper on some quests, but only as far as accomplishing whatever task might be presented. I think it's actually opening up new avenues of role play not previously explored in so much detail. Conflict is important, especially internal conflict.

Oh, and one more reason this is good news: The bad guys will never ultimately win because eventually they end up stabbing each other in the back, or simply never agreeing on anything. In the meanwhile, the good guys eventually find a common cause and once that happens it's very hard to defeat the group that's working in unison.

I agree totally.

I don't think I've ever made it through a quest without arguing about something, but I guess that's what I enjoy most in quests and generally the others feel the same way from my experiences.
Also where is it written that all quests must continue on a linear motion and end up a success?  Failure usually makes for more interesting RP and as quoted above opens the door for many new adventure hooks.  Usually if I can't find any excuse how a quest can benefit my char I'll leave.  I've done this on many ocacsions and most of the time the GM's send me a tell asking me to stay.  Even on monday night Chanda and I decided to leave on our own when nothing seemed to be interesting, but the quest was only brief so we lasted till the end.

However lets not be disillusioned and think that the evil or selfless characters ruin quests.  Good characters can be just as bad if not worse.  I can't tell you how often during quests I've had people send me tells that theyre irriated and bored with how the good leaders are running the quest.  Sometimes i recieve tells from good characters asking me to spice things up.  Many times i get tells that one good character is annoyed with another.  Actually it makes me laugh when i see them fighting over something rediculous because they want to boast how great and righteous their char is.  The only thing that irritates me is when good characters want to be evil as well. One minute they're generous the next they're greedy.  One minute they're not killing monsters the next they're activiating the widget.  

Overall however, I'm pleased with the balance.  I think its the best it's been in my experience and like somone commented above, at least the good characters will really shine in this new world.

[Tanman]

Also where is it written that all quests must continue on a linear motion and end up a success? Failure usually makes for more interesting RP and as quoted above opens the door for many new adventure hooks.

Absolutely. sometimes a failure to a quest makes for an interesting story. Not everyone is infalliable, and it makes for interesting tales.

[Acacea]

I think Gulnyr and Milton are pretty much on the same page. Conflict can be exciting and great for character development, but stagnant bickering with hot tempers will lead to either IC leaving the quest or IC taking things into one's hands eventually - or the DM will eventually decide the task has more than failed in the given time. In any case OOC harsh feelings are often kept as well in that kind of conflict. Quest after quest of such sessions are indeed very draining, and are usually different from the fights and conflicts along tangled but walked paths.

I don't think it's really to do with the evil and good things, though, but rather just the fact that quests are often mixed about with characters who don't ever work together and frankly don't often have the time to learn - there will be a host of new people next session to repeat the last. Just what comes with a lot of players, really - it's not like where you get a single party of mostly characters that are used to each other, or that the DM is familiar with. You have to learn to work together fast, or you might not at all, and that is not really an alignment thing, from my end of things.

Between-session action helps to some degree, but not that much - if you can't manage to go anywhere on DM-time, chances are you won't iron out your differences on your own time, either. Still, it's good to try and get as much out of the way as possible.