Why aren't Warlocks being nerfed?

[Erin Greene]

I like your whole post, grip.

because the story would be better served by loosing.

This is far more important than any statistic on any character sheet.

Erin Greene:
just because you can 'win' a fight doesn't mean you should. We're playing a multiplayer collaborative storytelling game - not Counterstrike or a sport. We can talk about skill, builds, and balance for ten pages, but at the end of the day the point is to create a fun story that multiple people can participate in. While you may not agree with the way some people choose to do this, don't claim that it's "Poor RP."

I don't really see that in a lot of PVP. A lot of PVP is done with the specific idea that there is no specific endgame in mind, that you are actually fighting to see who will win. Whats the Point of RP with a pre-ordained result? It's not roleplaying then, it's writing a book with multiple authors.

Roleplaying in a D&D context is playing a character without narrative control beyond what your stats give you.

I do think purposely losing and not having a good IC reason for why you lose beyond "I don't want to win OOC" IS bad RP, because it means the character isn't being played to who they are and what they can do.

The bending your concept thing being discussed there is things like "Well the current state of the server is that Evil could wipe out all good forever and rule unopposed, and it would if it could" but not doing it out of courtesy to other players, so, bending your RP.


Another example being "Winning the fight" but despite being a drow slaver who would assuredly drag that elf away as a captive and stick a knife in them for Lolth, letting them live and go back to the other elves to warn that the drow are still dangerous and should not be messed with.

That is bending your RP. But the idea that level 30 Warlock who can eat dozens of level twenty fighters for breakfast without breaking a sweat letting them KILL him or her on purpose by playing idiotically, far worse than they've ever played in a fight before, without a compelling IC reason to do so, I'd say that would be bad RP, because everyone involved knew it shouldn't have happened.

I am not saying people should never lose because of RP. But it should be justified IC somehow, not entirely justified OOC by saying "This person has been around too long and we need new blood OOC"

That would be like the Witch King having managed to kill Eowyn and then letting Merry kill him because "I don't feel like winning because good needed to win here". It would create a weak narrative.

Better to have the DM's help with the whole thing somehow and bring up a prophecy or something that edges you towards losing and staying IC while doing it.

[Griefmaker]

The above sounds a lot like the problem of players having the "I must win" mentality. Always winning does not mean it is a good story nor good RP. If that were the case, only power builds (specifically casters, especially clerics) would be played because being able to drop pretty much anyone with one spell would apparently be the only way to create good RP.

ICly, a character should always be trying to survive, win, etc. OOCly is a far different story. Try to not confuse IC with OOC.

Great RP often comes from a player, not a character, choosing to allow their character to lose.

[CragOneEye]

I still defer to my most recent post but not sure if it was seen as it came shortly before Erin's post, and his/her's post made a new page.

[God In Action]

I like your whole post, grip.

because the story would be better served by loosing.

This is far more important than any statistic on any character sheet.

Erin Greene:
just because you can 'win' a fight doesn't mean you should. We're playing a multiplayer collaborative storytelling game - not Counterstrike or a sport. We can talk about skill, builds, and balance for ten pages, but at the end of the day the point is to create a fun story that multiple people can participate in. While you may not agree with the way some people choose to do this, don't claim that it's "Poor RP."

I don't really see that in a lot of PVP. A lot of PVP is done with the specific idea that there is no specific endgame in mind, that you are actually fighting to see who will win. Whats the Point of RP with a pre-ordained result? It's not roleplaying then, it's writing a book with multiple authors.

Roleplaying in a D&D context is playing a character without narrative control beyond what your stats give you.

I do think purposely losing and not having a good IC reason for why you lose beyond "I don't want to win OOC" IS bad RP, because it means the character isn't being played to who they are and what they can do.

The bending your concept thing being discussed there is things like "Well the current state of the server is that Evil could wipe out all good forever and rule unopposed, and it would if it could" but not doing it out of courtesy to other players, so, bending your RP.


Another example being "Winning the fight" but despite being a drow slaver who would assuredly drag that elf away as a captive and stick a knife in them for Lolth, letting them live and go back to the other elves to warn that the drow are still dangerous and should not be messed with.

That is bending your RP. But the idea that level 30 Warlock who can eat dozens of level twenty fighters for breakfast without breaking a sweat letting them KILL him or her on purpose by playing idiotically, far worse than they've ever played in a fight before, without a compelling IC reason to do so, I'd say that would be bad RP, because everyone involved knew it shouldn't have happened.

I am not saying people should never lose because of RP. But it should be justified IC somehow, not entirely justified OOC by saying "This person has been around too long and we need new blood OOC"

That would be like the Witch King having managed to kill Eowyn and then letting Merry kill him because "I don't feel like winning because good needed to win here". It would create a weak narrative.

Better to have the DM's help with the whole thing somehow and bring up a prophecy or something that edges you towards losing and staying IC while doing it.

I empathise with what you're saying, I used to think that way. What changed my mind was playing a level 30 sorcerer that could put out enough spell damage (epic evocation) to kill most any other character, or indeed group of characters. Having an 'auto-win' button changed my mind that IC RP should always follow IC realities such as the power of a character, because I knew then that it wasn't fun to either always win, or always lose. Now I think of Arelith very much of being like a book, written by multiple authors. The aim of the game is to have fun by playing a good story, of which winning or losing may well be irrelevant. Letting a contest be determined by mechanical power best works between two very evenly matched opponents, but that is rarely achieved by the level scale of D&D.

Now, playing the story is of course not the only side to Arelith- it is a video game after all! There's enough exploring and PVE in the server to quench all our thirsts for competition, whilst still playing the story.

[Mithreas]

^ This.

[Roketter]

Pvp doesn't solve the conflict. I remember my epic druidess/wizardess and her paladin friends could disintegrate all the banites in pvp, she would read timestop scrolls and cast harm on them, and the paladins would smite them in seconds where they stood.

But what after ?

Are they going to delete their characters ? No. Are they going to surrender forever and declare you the owner of the server ? No. Are You going to keep on killing them because your team is three times as good in pvp and builds ? No

More likely, you'r going to rp a capture or execution scene and send them over to either their guildhouse or the fugue plane because that's the reasonable extent of your conflict with them within server rules.

Pretending to win by pvp is a misconception about how the server actually works. Factions that win and get towns are not necesarily those who can whoop the enemy team's rear, but those who have a fluid amount of members that roleplay often with each other and have the necesary time and patience to win the election. Being the evil ruler of the evil castle has nothing to do with eating dragons for breakfast, but with constantly being there to organize events and provide roleplayfor your people.

Lastly, about the lvl 30 warlock leting himself get killed by playing idiotically... well... never underestimate the capacity for people to cast spells in the wrong order or charge when you should in fact retreat. I remember a time my dragonshifter decided he could stop the entire drow army by himself.... and he hadn't died even once in his journey from lvl 1 to 30 so far...
The worst humillliation was in fact, that i had to be rescued by the other druids who finally won the day.

[P Three]

Pvp doesn't solve the conflict. I remember my epic druidess/wizardess and her paladin friends could disintegrate all the banites in pvp, she would read timestop scrolls and cast harm on them, and the paladins would smite them in seconds where they stood.

But what after ?

Are they going to delete their characters ? No. Are they going to surrender forever and declare you the owner of the server ? No. Are You going to keep on killing them because your team is three times as good in pvp and builds ? No

More likely, you'r going to rp a capture or execution scene and send them over to either their guildhouse or the fugue plane because that's the reasonable extent of your conflict with them within server rules.

Pretending to win by pvp is a misconception about how the server actually works. Factions that win and get towns are not necesarily those who can whoop the enemy team's rear, but those who have a fluid amount of members that roleplay often with each other and have the necesary time and patience to win the election. Being the evil ruler of the evil castle has nothing to do with eating dragons for breakfast, but with constantly being there to organize events and provide roleplayfor your people.

Lastly, about the lvl 30 warlock leting himself get killed by playing idiotically... well... never underestimate the capacity for people to cast spells in the wrong order or charge when you should in fact retreat. I remember a time my dragonshifter decided he could stop the entire drow army by himself.... and he hadn't died even once in his journey from lvl 1 to 30 so far...
The worst humillliation was in fact, that i had to be rescued by the other druids who finally won the day.

^ ALL THIS.

Also, and I know this may be shocking, but some of us simply are not good at PVP. It's simply not a talent/skill/luck-pool we've developed. Does that mean we shouldn't get to win sometimes? Not all the time, no one gets to win all the time. But ALWAYS losing because PVP is "the only win" is incredibly frustrating.

[Dinosaur Space Program]

PvP is not the end, it is a means to an end. Usually that end is intimidation/terrorism, pushing back a hostile PC or force, or standing one's ground on principles.

PvP is one of the guiding forces of the collective narrative, not a hammer that pounds everyone into the shape you feel they should take.

That's my two cents on it.

Edit: It should never Be a hammer that pounds people into the shape you feel they should take.

[Sazu]

The above about PVP not mattering is a huge whopping delusion. Or at least half the story. I've seen many a great RP plots destroyed by PvP.

So yes, it can very much be a hammer that grounds some character's plots into complete dust.

[Erin Greene]

Incidentally, to make it plain, all of my posts in this thread are my own personal opinions and should certainly not be taken as indicative of the server.

[Durvayas]

The above about PVP not mattering is a huge whopping delusion. Or at least half the story. I've seen many a great RP plots destroyed by PvP.

So yes, it can very much be a hammer that grounds some character's plots into complete dust.

Seen that happen so many times, especially by entrenched epic characters maintaining the status quo.

Someone's forming a new evil cult? Organized church smite, plot over.
Someone gets kidnapped to be used for leverage? Epic party rolls up from nowhere, smite, plot over.
Outed as a heretic in the UD? (usually results in) Smite, plot over.
Drow house warfare of any kind? Generally results in smiting, and then one of the factions dissolving, with all its plots.

[CragOneEye]

The above about PVP not mattering is a huge whopping delusion. Or at least half the story. I've seen many a great RP plots destroyed by PvP.

So yes, it can very much be a hammer that grounds some character's plots into complete dust.

Seen that happen so many times, especially by entrenched epic characters maintaining the status quo.

Someone's forming a new evil cult? Organized church smite, plot over.
Someone gets kidnapped to be used for leverage? Epic party rolls up from nowhere, smite, plot over.
Outed as a heretic in the UD? (usually results in) Smite, plot over.
Drow house warfare of any kind? Generally results in smiting, and then one of the factions dissolving, with all its plots.

In my experience if you play anyone from Team evil whether it's Team UD or Team Evil from the surface, you sadly always have to have PvP build or ppl in your faction with a PvP build to win, given I found Team good tends to always like to "Smite/PvP" team evil and that Team Good always needs to win.

[Cortex]

There is no difference between behavior in "team good" and "team evil", there isn't exclusive behavior and there is poor show from both sides.

[CragOneEye]

There is no difference between behavior in "team good" and "team evil", there isn't exclusive behavior and there is poor show from both sides.

The difference is you rarely see all of team evil uniting and banding together to defeat team good, Team evil will always have some losses because of such. (as it should be) But I found it's a lot harder for team evil to have -any- wins without having power builds on it's side.

[Cortex]

It depends on the players, not the "team".

[Dinosaur Space Program]

In my experience if you play anyone from Team evil whether it's Team UD or Team Evil from the surface, you sadly always have to have PvP build or ppl in your faction with a PvP build to win, given I found Team good tends to always like to "Smite/PvP" team evil and that Team Good always needs to win.

Wow CragOneEye. Just wow. That is a Very broad generalized statement that has so many examples to the contrary I don't even know where to begin. I am glad you put "In my experience" in there or else I would feel obligated to pull your argument Completely apart.

[Kuma]

god damn but i regret semi-popularising the term "team good" and "team evil" in recent years, that was purely meant as a genericising split during the rift crisis. it's a harmful box to ram characters into

i also apologise retroactively for coining feylock

[Scurvy Cur]

There is no difference between behavior in "team good" and "team evil", there isn't exclusive behavior and there is poor show from both sides.

The difference is you rarely see all of team evil uniting and banding together to defeat team good, Team evil will always have some losses because of such. (as it should be) But I found it's a lot harder for team evil to have -any- wins without having power builds on it's side.

This fallacy...

In my experience if you play anyone from Team evil whether it's Team UD or Team Evil from the surface, you sadly always have to have PvP build or ppl in your faction with a PvP build to win, given I found Team good tends to always like to "Smite/PvP" team evil and that Team Good always needs to win.

And this one both need to light themselves on fire and find a ditch to die in, for all the self-pitying whine they contain.

"Team good" isn't any more unified than team evil, most days (there's at least 3, possibly as many as 5 or 6 sub groups of good guys who do not always work well together), and team evil has some serious problem children who love to win and take their ball and go home when they lose. If you don't think it does, you really aren't looking hard enough. I think Team evil is the only side I've ever seen engage in a mid-pvp bash, lose the fight because they stopped to bash their victims instead of engaging the still-living adversaries, and then grouse like no tomorrow about how the mean good guys bashed them at the end of the fight. Talk about self delusion.

[Cortex]

god damn but i regret semi-popularising the term "team good" and "team evil" in recent years, that was purely meant as a genericising split during the rift crisis. it's a harmful box to ram characters into

i also apologise retroactively for coining feylock

Like usual you're the source of much dismay!

[Kuma]

god damn but i regret semi-popularising the term "team good" and "team evil" in recent years, that was purely meant as a genericising split during the rift crisis. it's a harmful box to ram characters into

i also apologise retroactively for coining feylock

Like usual you're the source of much dismay!

JUST LIKE THE GOOD OLD DAYS HUH

[Sazu]

Crag has a point actually. Bash his opinion all you want(like it isn't a form of sucking up), his words are true.

My only difference in that opinion is that BOTH sides commit to this reasoning, the need to have powerful characters on team good and/or evil shows how much PvP matters.

[Dinosaur Space Program]

There is a saying that "It goes both ways." He argues it only goes one way when in fact it does go both.

Also, what was already said in this thread has double potency here. It is all about the Players involved. Not the alignments/characters played.

I have known players to flip flop alignments and builds and 'sides' and bring their particular brand of Terrible Conduct with them every time.

[Scurvy Cur]

My only difference in that opinion is that BOTH sides commit to this reasoning, the need to have powerful characters on team good and/or evil shows how much PvP matters.

Which is just like saying he is completely wrong (and incidentally, makes your post factually defensible).

The entire thesis of Crag's two posts was that "Evil should powerbuild and gang up for PvP because team good is going to mob you down with a monolithic block of epics, because the good guys always need to win, and this makes them different from team evil". The implication is that he does not feel that the other side does it, or that it matters less, otherwise he would not highlight the difference.

I believe this to be factually inaccurate on the basis that there are some bad sports among players of evil characters as well, and thus grounds for roundly and deservedly criticizing a sloppy opinion.

[Sazu]

Alright... point taken...

However...

There's another human condition that seems prevalent. The need for good to win over evil. And thus Crag's point simply points out that evil has an uphill battle. Good does not.

[CragOneEye]

My only difference in that opinion is that BOTH sides commit to this reasoning, the need to have powerful characters on team good and/or evil shows how much PvP matters.

Which is just like saying he is completely wrong (and incidentally, makes your post factually defensible).

The entire thesis of Crag's two posts was that "Evil should powerbuild and gang up for PvP because team good is going to mob you down with a monolithic block of epics, because the good guys always need to win, and this makes them different from team evil". The implication is that he does not feel that the other side does it, or that it matters less, otherwise he would not highlight the difference.

I believe this to be factually inaccurate on the basis that there are some bad sports among players of evil characters as well, and thus grounds for roundly and deservedly criticizing a sloppy opinion.

I feel it tends to happen more often with team good than it does with team evil, but is not my main point, it's more so "team good is going to mob you down with a monolithic block of epics", the moment they discovered you're playing an evil character. I've been victim to this mentality time and time again, but not only have I been victim of it, I seen others get victimized by it as well. And it usually turns an excuse for epics to bully lowbie characters, making it no longer fun for them to play.

But that's digressing my point, my point is if you -manage- to make it as far as epic without that problem, it tends to become a problem when you are an epic yourself, and the only way to not die all the time is by power building your evil aligned character, because believe it or not, escape or running away is not always an option.

Then there is the point Sazu makes above, which I was subtly trying to get at.