Pacifistic Character Progression

[Dorganath]

It's probably worthwhile to point out that Rowana's main character is in fact quite pacifistic (Katian, so she plays that way by choice, not dogma) and has done the vast majority of her advancement through GM quests and RP bumps.  She's 20th level though has not yet applied for WL status.

[Hellblazer]

Took her a while to if I'm right, so all props to her for keeping at it all that time *two thumbs up*

[Dorganath]

Yes, it took her a long time, but it took her more time because she became a GM in the midst of that progression.

[Rowana]

Regardless of my character's progress or no, I guess my question is, what is the difference between attending quests regularly and having a magical bump every so often that would have to be approved through in-depth character development anyway? I do understand, as Dorganath points out, really well what you are getting at about the difficulty. I just don't know that an artificial bump will be any easier to obtain that simply attending quests or RPing and receiving RP exp along the way. If you look back at various requests, Alignment shifts, ear approvals, database edits and such, they take time to get a GM to connect up because we are a volunteer group and only have so many hours for various contributions. We do get out there as quick as we can but sometimes, it just doesn't get done for a long while. It really is actually probably easier to attend quests regularly to achieve the same ends.

I do know that there have been some folks in the past who have had issues trying to get to quests, and that's really a whole other animal, but if you are attending quests and RPing around on the server you're going to be able to achieve the same things as characters who regularly hack their way to experience for various reasons. (No disrespect to all you Voraxians!) As a GM I've noticed that the folks who spend a lot of time dungeon crawling don't spend near as much time in quests and I think it balances out between the two. Certainly those who are not pacifists could take advantage of the additional quest hours where the pacifists could not take advantage of the additional hunting exp it's true, but really, it's very few people who take full advantage of both.

~row

[Shiokara]

Alright. It is enough for me that you've heard out and understood my argument and even agree somewhat in context. If you say that my reasoning is flawed in reality because quest-goers for the most part are not the same people who level via combat means, then I'll back down from this suggestion.

Anyone is, of course, welcome to continue arguing for it if they disagree, but since I am interested only in seeing that the system is equitable for all characters I'm backing out. Thanks to everyone who contributed and considered the possibilities and pitfalls here. It's been a good discussion, I think.

[Hellblazer]

I think it's mainly due to the hours available for quests. I was talking about this exact thing today with an old player that left. And she left because she felt some pressure not to attend quests or impromptus if she wasn't sure she could stay the whole time. Now she did say that it was always tactful and respectful, but that after a while it drained her fun out of playing here. A lack of respect for the char development due to not being able to anteing quests because of her playing availability she said. All of that can come into play I guess, vs the easy way of getting the xp and other development a chars would have otherwise.

Also, most of the quests I have seen lately have been a mix of rp and bashiness, that wouldn't suit the pacifist chars much. Not to count the quests that have been closed off as they are series or to lower level, which is not bad at all, but it can take out a lot of possibilities to those chars out there that would try to gain their xp through quest for pacific chars. I think there need to be a whole lot more no bash quest unless utterly stupid actions were taken, so that those who wants to try out pacific chars can then have the choice of what to do, by their time allocation, and if the quest suits the chars beliefs.

Yes, it took her a long time, but it took her more time because she became a GM in the midst of that progression.

Oh please don't misunderstand me there Dorg. I understand her time constraint of why it took this long. But still, because of that she could have decided to go an other way, but staid with her plans. Which is why I tip my hat to her.

[Rowana]

You know, causing a community member to 'backdown' is rarely ever my intent when I respond to posts. It is not so in this case, nor am I calling your logic 'flawed' per se. There are problems with the current offering however, and the system would really need some fleshing out to truly be more beneficial then attending quests/obtaining other RP exp. That was more my point.

Initially I was under the impression from this post and several others on the topic, that people felt pacifism was not supported by the GM team. It is of course and I'm glad that's not a misconception that is currently in place. There is likely always room for improvement so suggestions/debates are typically welcomed by the team, and as you can see we do give them attention (Even if we don't always answer. Answering to the fullest of our ability or even sometimes by half tends to quash discussions and that's really not our intent, as I've said). I'll bow out here if any wish to continue to puzzle through this potential solution to pacifism support, but I wanted to make clear that pushing a player into silence is not the intent we enter into these discussions with.

~row

[Rowana]

Also, most of the quests I have seen lately have been a mix of rp and bashiness, that wouldn't suit the pacifist chars much. Not to count the quests that have been closed off as they are series or to lower level, which is not bad at all, but it can take out a lot of possibilities to those chars out there that would try to gain their xp through quest for pacific chars. I think there need to be a whole lot more no bash quest unless utterly stupid actions were taken, so that those who wants to try out pacific chars can then have the choice of what to do, by their time allocation, and if the quest suits the chars beliefs.

Alright one more and then I swear I'm done because this is the very thing I was targeting earlier. Why is it that people feel GMs do not support pacifism in a quest that has the potential for combat. That is an issue that needs addressing.

Okay, really leaving it, though I will be reading so please do share your thoughts on this question!

*bows out*

~row

[Shiokara]

I was going to send this as a PM, but I want this here for clarity. My decision to bow out of this discussion is wholly my own and not related to the responses. I simply can't think of any other concepts to introduce to try and balance things out, nor am I as convinced in my own position that this is necessary.

I realize that my word choice of "backing down" or "out" is one that connotes a beaten sort of mindset. This is inaccurate. I just wasn't thinking about my words as carefully as I normally do. I called my own logic flawed because that's how I perceived it to be. By flawed I mean it does not represent the reality, but rather represents the potential possibilities.

As for Row's last question my answer is this: It's possible that pacifistic characters don't see themselves in the bashier sorts of quests for a few reasons:
     - They don't want to get in the way of bashier players' fun
     - They don't want to be complicit to those basier actions either
     - Players use those little quest keywords not as an interpretation of potential occurrences, but rather as a guide to what they can expect/what is likely to happen
     - Finally. Players use the quest calendar summaries as a guide to answer the questions "Does this fit my character? Will my character have a place in this quest?" If all they have to go on are short summaries or key words like, "Some bashy, some puzzles"*, then they may not have enough information to justify trying to make the event, or they may conclude that they won't have a role altogether.

*I'm not thinking of any quest here. Just thinking of the types of keywords one finds to gather information on a quest.

My last, and final, suggestion for this particular question is this:
    - Consider writing up more inclusive summaries, or
    - Consider writing what various roles may look like in a quest, just to show players that their character could indeed have a supported role in the quest.

[Hellblazer]

You actually pinpointed all the points I would have written.

But I think the second point is mostly it. In my personal opinion. If a pacific character wouldn't associate with people they know to prone violence then they would certainly not associate with them on a quest. So subconsciously or consciously, when the player sees the name of other players, or if he knows that the GM is really more the bashier type. He will probably not go on that quest, or bring an other character to the quest, if he can make it at all.

[Dorganath]

I know this is a sort of tired expression, especially when used as a trendy buzz-word in business situations, but part of the problem, I believe, is that people in general have trouble thinking "outside the box," or more specifically, they're stuck in the box.

A player of a pacifist character may see that there's the potential for combat on a quest and decide not to go on those grounds alone.  I would ask: Why?  It's one thing to avoid violence oneself, but to avoid those who may engage in violence is very limiting on many levels.  Maybe that predicted "bashiness" is simply a challenge that lies between Point A and Point B, with whatever is at Point B being something very interesting or important, perhaps even to the pacifist character.  This character could come along to be sure that a minimum amount of harm comes to the others through healing and magical protections/enhancements.

If you think about it, except when there is a specific "summons" in the quest event notice, the idea of assembling for a quest is rather artificial. No one's really going to cross continents to end up in some small village at the exact moment that some little girl claims to have lost her dolly to a "monster" and can you please, please get it back.  In most cases, the RP of it all works out best if you just happened to be in that place and something happened that needed attention.  In any case, a pacifist character can still go on the quest that may include bashing if for no other reason than to hopefully reduce the number of people who come to harm.

Athus (WL and Aeridinite priest), more often than not, would be made invisible by a mage and spend combat healing people rather than bringing out his clericy-might to smite foes, and this was long before the dogma we have today.

So just because NWN makes characters into killing machines doesn't mean you have to be one.  Just because a quest talks about bashing doesn't mean you have to participate in the actual bashing, if it even occurs. A lot of times, you see "depending on character actions," and that's very true.  Many times there's a choice between bashing and finding another way around.  Usually the choice to enter combat is the simplest and quickest, but that doesn't mean there aren't other options in quest situations.

Regarding people staying away from quests who feel like they won't have the time to complete the whole session, that's an unfortunate decision.  I'm pretty sure there is not a GM present who has not had people need to leave in the middle of a quest. It's not that big of a deal.  Life happens, and we all have them to one degree or the other.

Anyway, there's no denying that playing a pacifist has its challenges.  It very much does, especially in advancement.  It's kind of along the same lines as playing a hated race.  These are RP choices that we make and which carry a specific burden with them, but such choices are also opportunities for creativity and exploring what may be possible. I'm not suggesting that pacifists try and find some way to justify violence because that's what the game offers, but rather to take a step back and see what can be made of each situation through the eyes of a pacifist philosophy.

[miltonyorkcastle]

To expand on Dorg's comments above, there is a distinct difference between "conflict" and "combat." Conflict is not only what drives the game, but what drives life in general. We strive, and there in fact must be something to overcome or one can never achieve. A Pacifist is one who chooses specifically not to engage in certain kinds of conflict, usually that which involves physically harming another living creature.

The point is, if you assume a pacifist is one who avoids "conflict," then you're envisioining a character that can never exist, in a game or RL. For many people, just waking up in the morning is a conflict to be overcome, and were one of these to be a no-conflict pacifist, well, I suppose they'd never make it out of bed.

All quests involve conflict, and sometimes that conflict is resolved via combat. As Dorg pointed out, most of the time the problem can be solved without resorting to combat, but combat is often the players' choice. There should be no reason why a pacifist character should have to avoid a quest for IC reasons, even a quest which has a heading like "Gathering an army to kill trolls." The pacifist has a duty to either protect those he does not wish to be harmed while at the same time not directly harming anything himself, or, if she does not wish to even indirectly cause harm by supporting the army, she has every right to show up and try to convince the army of PCs that there has to be a better way, even offering some potential non-combat solutions. The pacifist may be utterly ignored, of course, but he/she is participating in the conflict that's important to him/her.

All of that is said to address IC concerns of advancement and participation as a pacifist. The OOC concerns, like ruining the fun for others, not being able to make quests, inequality in advancement opportunities, etc. are a whole other pickle.

[ycleption]

Here's the issue in my mind - the game is very different currently. Back in the Hlint bench days, there was a lot more opportunity for the casual type of RP which can help sustain the fun of playing a character who doesn't engage in violence. Today, its harder to find. Back then, random RP awards were more common. Most of the current characters who I can think of who are relatively pacifistic were started back in those days, and seem to be played less often now. I can think of a number of more recent pacifistic characters whose players simply lost interest, or never really got the character off the ground.

The issue is cyclical - there are not enough pacifistic characters, so players don't request non-bashy quests, so DMs mostly run bashy quests, so fewer people submit/play pacifistic characters, so there are not enough pacifistic characters, so players don't request non-bashy quests, so DMs mostly run bashy quests, so fewer people submit/play pacifistic characters, so there are not enough pacifistic characters, so players don't request non-bashy quests, so DMs mostly run bashy quests...

Some kind of carrot to encourage people to submit that Az'attan zealot, and to give them something to look forward to in playing that character, could help break that cycle.

Now, whether we need more pacifistic characters is a whole 'nother issue, and I still have the reservations I noted in my first post (and I also appreciate Row's and Dorg's comments as well)... but just my perspective on things.