Abuse of Nice and what to do.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

That is not entirely right. Alignment alone does not justify IC actions.

Just because I am chaotic evil and it would make sense that I just kill everyone I come across does not make it interesting or engaging roleplay. You are still responsible for making it fun and interesting to whoever you are roleplaying with, even if that means bending your character slightly. That is the essence of the Be Nice rule.

Correct.

One of our five foundational rules that are more important than the legalism of having more than one character in the same faction.

[Echohawk]

OPs situation is allowed. Live and learn, character can use this as a turning point in their outlook and worldview in any direction you want.

[Void]

Alternatively, you can choose not to go all out, you can purposedly tune down your prowess, miss a few attacks, maybe use the wrong spells and it so happens the drow escapes. Maybe the drow knows your name now and will seek you later. You still roleplayed your character correctly and you engaged the other player in a far more interesting way than a quick visit to the fugue.

//opinion
I'd be pissed as a player if I was playing that drow and learned that the player I encountered decided to fudge the dice "to make it interesting in the long run". Fudging dice rolls is DM's job. Not player's. From a player, I'd expect them to keep their puppet/character true to its mask and make the character act consistently and accordingly. Trying to "help the other guy" by making mistakes on purpose cheapens the experience for people involved.

It is reasonable enough to give them a chance to talk their way out of the situation, but if you start "selecting wrong spells", this can be seen as disrespectful towards effort they put into getting there.

With all due respect, the description for 'chaotic evil', or any evil in general is not "You must indiscriminately kill everything in your path". That is a very lazy interpretation that is being used by players to justify their OOC tendencies.

This can be summarized in fewer sentences.
In D&D. "Evil" is egoism, "Good" is altruism, "Law" is order, tradition and respect of authority, while "Chaos" is emotion, acting on whim and freedom.

A chaotic evil character is an extremely selfish individual that acts on a whim and places his/her whims above interests of others. And only that. That does not mean they seek to murder everyone, (unless they find murder fun), but it does mean that they will likely hurt others if they get in the way of their whims. They still can have friends, loved ones, and might not even be that interested in killing.
---------
@OP.

I'm kinda surprised that you ended up only with two optiosn : "Kill" or "Let them go". While there are also "call friends for assistance", "write notice about banites skulking about and post it on message board", "challenge banite to a drinking contest" and "Talk about glory of Flamelord". And many other things.

[Cuchilla]

About the "Kill them or let them go".

There might be another possibility? A hin way: Prank them, ridicule them, use ironi, sarcasm, serve them pies loaded with peppar, in short, make their stay in Bendir a torrment for them, so they will pray on their knees to let them out of Bendir.

[Arigard]

What you quoted was an obvious generalization, made precisely to make a point.
Just because something makes 100% sense from a Roleplay perspective, sometimes we as players do not want to do it, because it will detract from everyone's enjoyment in the long run (sometimes even shorter run).

I agree with you up to a point & personally, if i run into a character I can see is lower level, or I'm with a group of say 5 people and we run into a solo adventurer, I will always try to look for reasons not to click the hostile button, because we all ultimately need to play the game together and you want people to have fun. However it's a two way dance and both sides have to be willing to compromise and meet in the middle, or it doesn't work and honestly in those situations where one side refuses to play ball, it's often cleaner just to 'end' the encounter altogether by simply doing what your character would do.

But, say I let a low level Paladin go and he runs back to his other Paladin friends and then says "Hey there's evil guys out there" should he now be telling those other Paladins "But hey, don't go get them, they let me go" OOC? No & I wouldn't want him to & if they then turn up, RP and then attack, what right do I have to be annoyed by that? They haven't broken any rules, it all makes sense for their characters to do so and I made a choice as an evil character (say your Drow) to be in that situation and part of the world, & the threat of conflict comes with the territory. Is it a pleasant surprise when something blossoms from those experiences? Yes, for sure, but you run the risk and it turning into combat is a risk that should always be on the table, or it devalues the danger of being there in the first place.

On fudging the dice, don't agree. It's a bit like saying "let them score some goals so they feel better". It doesn't really help anyone in the long run & as another said cheapens things.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

But, say I let a low level Paladin go and he runs back to his other Paladin friends and then says "Hey there's evil guys out there" should he now be telling those other Paladins "But hey, don't go get them, they let me go" OOC? No & I wouldn't want him to & if they then turn up, RP and then attack, what right do I have to be annoyed by that? They haven't broken any rules, it all makes sense for their characters to do so and I made a choice as an evil character (say your Drow) to be in that situation and part of the world, & the threat of conflict comes with the territory.

I understand your position; I think a lot of people have articulated this position or would otherwise support it.

And I don't want to tell your position is wrong because I would in turn be breaching the Be Nice rule.

But I want to articulate why your position will long-term be detrimental and is the not most optimal way of viewing interaction and conflict.

The paladin and his paladin friends are well within their narrative rights and server rules to take that course of interaction. However, a skilled and thoughtful roleplayer would immediately jump to the conclusion -> "Why did the drow let you go?" The answer to this question is infinitely more exciting than, "Where did the drow let you go?" The latter would be a question a player who has an itchy trigger finger would immediately jump to.

We can hide behind characterization and "low Intelligence paladin" as an excuse for why that first question wasn't asked, or investigated, but I'd say humbuck.

Paladins chasing you down because you let one of them go could be an exciting avenue of roleplay if done in a cat-and-mouse situation, where the objective is not to 'seek and destroy' but 'seek and discover' - but I bet you, 9 times out of 10, that is likely not the motivation.

Evil characters thirst for the opportunity to interact with heroes in a way that doesn't resort to violence and conflict. One of the greatest and most powerful 'victories' that can ever be achieved on this server is when the Big Bad turns the Good Guy. Or, the Good Guy redeems the Big Bad. That's a massive mechanical and narrative swing that has now occurred in the server's balance-of-powers. A drow poisoning the mind of a young paladin could be infinitely more rewarding than killing a paladin. A paladin that could intimidate a drow into giving information is infinitely more rewarding than killing a drow.

Violence begets violence on Arelith. It never results in a winner, only hurt feelings, gossip, and DM intervention.

A good roleplayer in the paladin camp would recognize that you, as the drow, let one of their lowbie paladins go. They would take your action, spin it, and create a narrative around it. Maybe that involves "hostile roleplay" but that doesn't necessitate turning red, clicking hostile, and rolling d20s.

One is never going to make an impression on this server if they're the paladin in your scenario, Arigard. So I think you've the right to be annoyed. I know I would be in your shoes. - maybe not annoyed, but disappointed.

[Royal Blood]

This.is frustrating to consider. OOC I believe we all have a courtesy to try to make.interactions fun which is what the OP says he did by letting him go. Not knowing all the details I'd not want to judge the faction in question to harshly maybe there's details missing?

But I think this uncommunicated courtesy is something you have to choose to invoke with the understanding the other side may not interpret it that way. Personally I think it makes you a good RPer and if someone took advantage of that? Well shame on them, really. If that's how they want to play it will catch up with them. People just won't care what their characters do. So what they can PVP. Without substance and story it's empty.

The good thing is you can let this impact your character as little or as much as you want to. As some comments have suggested the angle of considering what it means to be good and show mercy and if that's right is interesting? Maybe your character turns more LG and a bit merciless?

Ultimately, I'd view it through an IC lense. I would be careful about OOC getting frustrated and maybe letting it turn into a PVP fest. I've seen things descends to that before and it's not pretty. One side eventually quits or gets banned for rule breaking.

Absorb it and learn better yourself and have fun

[Reallylongunneededplayername]

I'm nearly a week late, Though I like to drop my cents anyway;

As to the situation itself: Personaly I have three rules for roleplaying:
1) have fun.
2) Make fun for others, or if you can't then at least try not to ruin their fun
3) Play your character.

I don't think the same answer should be a blanket for 'all' characters or 'all' players.

Really I'd jus ask yourself the three questins above
*Is it fun for me?
*Is it fun for the other person?
*What would my character do?

I love these parts of Grumpy, I myself have been told these 'rules' ten years ago, And actually take them as rules.
And they shouldn't be personal to be honest, They should be rules.

We got the "be nice rule" since forever, And I feel it has been stepped upon repeatedly under the excuse "It is RP" and "IC".

Currently one player could push around another in so many ways that it effect the player oocly, Yet because it is perfectly find to RP a D-bag, DM's will not act/ Give the impression they do not act.

/end