How can you actually stop a villain PC? And should you?

[MissEvelyn]

*Shrugs*I think veteran players who should know better are just as likely to be the ones who ignore unknown characters in town and blow past them while doing writs. I've rarely had issue with new people who seem more likely to take their time and explore and even talk to strangers. It's the people on their twentieth or fiftieth characters who just try to get to epics as fast as possible.

It's not a new problem either though the miniature golf course that is the writ system (which I love, don't get me wrong) has probably made it more visible.

I wholeheartedly agree with this - and I'd like to expand on how much writs seemed to have ruined good, immersive dungeon exploration RP. So few people stop to study and discuss the origin and motive of the dungeon. Now they just power through so they can move on to the next writ.

This isn't an inherit problem with the writ system - it's more that most people, especially in our generation of gamers, are by nature achievement hunters. And completing 3 writs in one day is an achievement where the reward is gold and experience points. There was a time when achievements in video games were rare and unwritten; you made your own goals and bragged to your friends and siblings about how you defeated the boss in Legend of Zelda without taking damage. But nowadays, most, if not all, mainstream multiplayer games are loaded with achievements to unlock, so naturally, players have adopted that mindset and carry it with them into games like Arelith.

This kind of mentality also furthers the belief that "roleplay happens after level 21". It's a saying that's been around far longer than writs, but now it really seems to be adopted more than ever. I'm generalizing with the anecdote, naturally, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has seen and felt it.

Personally, I think we slow things down a bit by making writs much more complex. Introduce random challenges to the writs, like for example, study the banners underneath the Goblin castles to determine which goblin clans have taken over. Something beyond "kill these" and "explore this".
I could come up with a whole host of small things the PCs could do beyond just killing, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Heck, we could even have the writ agent ask a question based on the writ's location, and if you answer correctly, you get a bigger reward. Naturally, the answer to the questions could be made randomized so that the information is different in every run, making it impossible to just memorize all the answers.

[Aradin]

^^ Big fan of Evelyn's writ ideas.

[Aradin]

Although we are getting pretty off-topic from my original question.

[Arigard]

Personally, I think we slow things down a bit by making writs much more complex. Introduce random challenges to the writs, like for example, study the banners underneath the Goblin castles to determine which goblin clans have taken over. Something beyond "kill these" and "explore this".
I could come up with a whole host of small things the PCs could do beyond just killing, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Heck, we could even have the writ agent ask a question based on the writ's location, and if you answer correctly, you get a bigger reward. Naturally, the answer to the questions could be made randomized so that the information is different in every run, making it impossible to just memorize all the answers.

I think something like this is an awesome idea and also in general as mentioned on another thread, that the social side of the character sheet should perhaps be focused on a little more for interaction within the world.

What brought me to Arelith personally as a new player last year and also what differentiated it from my old server were the systems that provided immersive tools and social RP options within the world. Things like the language system, the deep secrets within the world, the varied races and political systems etc, tracking etc. In previous worlds I have played on these things were not viable through mechanics and so people had to simply just 'pretend' their characters could do these things and it created a less well rounded and flatter experience. Arelith has a lot of systems that made playing DnD fun in the first place. Being actually able to do more than simply left click and attack provides you with the tools you need to embody the character role you are actually trying to be and so including these things more into the leveling process would encourage players to 'act out' the things they want to do.

Some other ideas to add:

-The theater in Cordor could reward XP for well written sonnets, or poems, or tales for example for bards.
-A random system from a thieves/adventurers type guild asking for items held/taken by monsters around the world that need to be retrieved (either pick-pocketed, or found somewhere)
-A series of scouting options like mentioned above to cover information on areas that might have been overrun, or now that we have the 'boss' system, where really strong monsters have risen to prominence.
-Medical/care style RP where NPCs come to certain areas (hospitals) with afflictions that need curing by prominent PCs and so groups need to go and find a combination of ingredients to cure that are random.

There's a ton of other things that I could think of if given time, but social systems like these would likely encourage RP between parties, offer non combat and interaction driven encounters and parties. Keep layering these kinds of systems into the world and you'll find that PvP/flat circle grinding naturally becomes lower down the list on things that people want to turn to when they log in, because they are creating stories and character arcs as they go very easily and naturally.

Re: The original debate. I don't think you should ever really go into a situation thinking "how do I stop this person, or that person". You should simply be true to the character that you are playing and then hopefully on both sides, eventually interesting stories will be built and come to fruition.

For example, are you a Paladin that has no fear? Cool, then in that moment where you are surrounded by enemies and they are being hostile, perhaps you have no fear to stand there protecting those you are with whilst they get to safety. Will it put you into what some might call a 'losing' situation as a player? Sure, but you are being honest and playing both the strength and the weakness of your character & backing up the selfless and altruistic nature of the Paladin. Will your character likely be captured, or taken by the 'evil' group, perhaps, but then the agency of you being immune to fear as a positive trait has now become a complicated issue that both gives your character respect (from those he has martyred himself for), but also offers an interesting engagement for all involved, because those you have fought might react to your selflessness and your courage in interesting ways.

On the flip side as an evil char, perhaps you are overwhelmingly greedy, or arrogant. Perhaps you have an obsession with control/domination and rather than constantly trying to 'win' every encounter as evil vs good, view your character in a way that also allows those flaws to come to the surface. Perhaps you overstep your reach, or get too confident about the things you can achieve and eventually put yourself into a situation where through your own misguided confident and greed you also enter into what might be called a 'losing' situation by traditional players.

I guess my point is, as in the other thread is that strengths and weaknesses of your characters can be very situational and they won't always and shouldn't always simply be things that allow you to 'win' at all costs. We are playing level 30 chars, but they still have flaws, they still have fears, they still have socially driven things that will cause them to make mistakes, or overstep, or react in a way that isn't optimal from a gaming standpoint and that's cool, interesting and it develops more in depth stories that way. When you are happy to do that and role play through those eventualities and stay true to the character you might find that the idea of winning vs losing takes a back seat fairly easily to complex narratives and relationships between a series of flawed characters all interacting naturally.

[Pincushion]

I've not read all of the replies, so I'm sorry if I reiterate some points made prior.

My recommendation is to not look at the 'story' of your character and those around them, or even the greater 'story' of Arelith as one linear narrative. The server has much more in common with a Saturday-morning cartoon than it does with something like Game of Thrones or Lord of The Rings; conflict occurs, it resolves itself and there is character development over the period of these conflicts, but there is usually a status quo that is returned to. I understand that this can seem a little jarring at times, especially when an event seems so impactful for those you conquered just to rise up again to start the next big thing - but I assure you that it's far, far better than having characters suffer from permanent defeat through methods like permadeath and limited lives before their time.

The key difference between most narrative media and Arelith is that every single element has a player behind it, instead of a centralized force dictating what happens to all of the moving parts. It might be satisfying for your paladin to finally vanquish the evil necromancer, but the player of that necromancer had a lot more cogs in the machine than simply the conflict between you and them. Their sudden loss might cut short some interpersonal developments they had with someone else.

I think this touches a little on literary theory, especially the idea of 'focalization'; if we were to judge Arelith to be in the same literary space as something like a novel, though more akin to a 'choose your own adventure' book than anything else, whose point of view are we viewing? A logical answer is that we see the world through our own characters, however, this partially dismisses the viewpoint of others and how they consume the media that Arelith generates - with that in mind, calling Arelith to be completely unfocalized would be fairer and also representative of how conflict operates and perhaps should be viewed between the two opposing sides; just because one conflict ends in a satisfying way for one side, does not mean the narrative experience of the other side should have to end in a way that leaves the player - the consumer of their narrative - unsatisfied.

I've blathered on a little bit as I'm writing this on my phone, but I just wish to put across the idea that winning or losing in a way that makes permanent change is not something we should be trying to 'attain' - it is, frankly, not the strong point of this collaborative medium. Arelith is not good at making stories with a beginning and an end, because Arelith never ends (hopefully!). Arelith is amazing at creating impactful scenes and moments instead of long, winding narratives like other media does. These interconnect and develop a personal storyline of their own, where we see ourselves consuming our personal focalized story while also allowing ourselves to add to the greater tapestry of the server where we all contribute to making a roleplay experience that feels truly 'alive.'

Look at each conflict, plot, event or conversation as its own short story which ties into a greater world, and you'll find yourself far more satisfied in your day-to-day Arelith activities. Sure, that villain you killed and cried over the corpse of is selling stuff to Lucrecia in the Merchantile and *nods*'d you before using a portal lens, but lovely was that scene an amazing experience. Don't let anything outside of that affect your perception.

[malcolm_mountainslayer]

*Shrugs*I think veteran players who should know better are just as likely to be the ones who ignore unknown characters in town and blow past them while doing writs. I've rarely had issue with new people who seem more likely to take their time and explore and even talk to strangers. It's the people on their twentieth or fiftieth characters who just try to get to epics as fast as possible.

It's not a new problem either though the miniature golf course that is the writ system (which I love, don't get me wrong) has probably made it more visible.

I wholeheartedly agree with this - and I'd like to expand on how much writs seemed to have ruined good, immersive dungeon exploration RP. So few people stop to study and discuss the origin and motive of the dungeon. Now they just power through so they can move on to the next writ.

This isn't an inherit problem with the writ system - it's more that most people, especially in our generation of gamers, are by nature achievement hunters. And completing 3 writs in one day is an achievement where the reward is gold and experience points. There was a time when achievements in video games were rare and unwritten; you made your own goals and bragged to your friends and siblings about how you defeated the boss in Legend of Zelda without taking damage. But nowadays, most, if not all, mainstream multiplayer games are loaded with achievements to unlock, so naturally, players have adopted that mindset and carry it with them into games like Arelith.

This kind of mentality also furthers the belief that "roleplay happens after level 21". It's a saying that's been around far longer than writs, but now it really seems to be adopted more than ever. I'm generalizing with the anecdote, naturally, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who has seen and felt it.

Personally, I think we slow things down a bit by making writs much more complex. Introduce random challenges to the writs, like for example, study the banners underneath the Goblin castles to determine which goblin clans have taken over. Something beyond "kill these" and "explore this".
I could come up with a whole host of small things the PCs could do beyond just killing, and I'm sure I'm not alone. Heck, we could even have the writ agent ask a question based on the writ's location, and if you answer correctly, you get a bigger reward. Naturally, the answer to the questions could be made randomized so that the information is different in every run, making it impossible to just memorize all the answers.

I feel only so many random question/answers could be developed and they could easily be exhausted/memorized within discord groups which would in turn again just punish new players more than the "i done this 15 to a 100 times already".


There are players who i talked to who grind till 30 because they legit believe the server culture demands them to and we joke regularly how insane i am to attempt lots of RP before 20. (They like to be conflict oriented and their first time on arelith was being rofflestomped and exiled by level 6, years ago).

[TheRedMasque]

So after much deliberation once I got done reading every single post in this thread, I've come to a singular conclusion: trying to stop a villain (or hero) PC is like trying to catch a waterfall with a pasta colander. You don't do it because it's an impossible lost cause.

Honestly though, I understand where Aradin is coming from and commend them for asking a tough question. Unfortunately, it is only a difficult question because the question is inherently flawed. The answer is very simple, you don't, because as a player, you shouldn't be asking yourself metagame questions on how to stop another person's player character.

How do I stop the villain (or hero) are questions only your character should be asking themselves...not the player. As a player you should never ask this question at all. As a player, you should be asking yourself - what can I do to contribute in telling a great story for myself and for other players?

First and foremost, you always stay IC and constantly ask yourself - what would my character do? If the villain, or hero, keeps coming back from the dead, it is a problem your character should be trying to find a solution for. Death is not absolute in the Forgotten Realms. But some things are. Besides, there are worse things than death and other ways to score major victories against your opponents. Some fantastic inspiration for this can be found in episode 93 of Critical Role, where Laura Bailey's character epically defeated a powerful hag with nothing more than a little persuasion and a cupcake...I kid you not...a cupcake.

As a player trying to contribute to a story, you can reach out and collaborate with other players, facilitate events. Maybe your IC opponents want to die epically? Maybe they like their characters and want to play with them for awhile. Creating fun for everyone involved is the goal. If something is fun for one person and not another, players need to address that with each other and heavily reconsider the kind of roleplaying everyone is choosing to involve themselves in, because IC actions generate IC consequences. And always always always remember that as a player, you are the only person responsible for your character. Another player has a metagame problem with your character coming back from the dead? Tough luck. Players should only be concerned with roleplaying their own characters, not other people's characters.

[ReverentBlade]

I find roleplaying in dungeons when I'm concerned with handling a clunky, awkward game without dying to be tedious and cumbersome. I prefer to be able to devote my full attention to my character's roleplay. It has nothing to do with writs or achievement hunting or trying to level as fast as possible. It has everything to do with wanting to get out of an environment where I produce sub-par quality RP ASAP.

[Preserver]

I will express my perhaps problematic opinion !

I did play a villain once: Lladria. She was a Priestess of Talona who wanted to do Talona things. The specifics are not relevant to the nature of this thread, but the general point remains as such: to fit within a constructive and narratively enjoyable bit of fantasy storytelling as it seems to be Arelith's tendency (Grumpy's example of Star Trek feels perfect!) a PC built as a villain should have a clear Endgame that they are OOCly already aware should be averted by the forces of good through great effort and loss.

Given that none of us are villains IRL ( ), I believe that the player satisfaction from playing a villainous character comes in a considerable amount from the reactionary play with the good guys. In this sense, a villain tends to play mostly for the rest of the playerbase and considerably less for themselves. I also believe that these types of characters should work in considerable collaborations with Staff and DMs to provide the best experience for the rest of the playerbase.

That of course does not entail that a villain PC is not capable have a personal and exquisitely self-contained dimension of RP that remains unrelated to the big overarching plot that they embody. Expressions of day-to-day RP that are based in their alignment and type of evil are excellent to set the stage and the character's nature beyond "I WANT TO CONQUER THE WORLD AND KILL ALL THE GNOMES" (which by itself is a commendable objective). A villain other people know is more enjoyable to fight and oppose, as one feels the personal connection to the ongoing storyline.

To me, the way a villain should be handled by their players for a satisfactory narrative experience is through: creation, establishment of an Endgame, prolonged gameplay to create the stage for the Endgame (a period through which all sorts of RP can happen), execution of the Endgame and defeat. I believe a villain exists to be the test that heroic (or simply non-villainous) characters have to face to establish and confirm their heroism. I also believe a villain must be impactful: the Endgame must have a degree of theatrical flare, it must damage the good guys significantly and must have high stakes!

Therefore I believe that yes: good guys should stop a villain PC... ultimately. The virtue and excellence in playing a villain PC is mostly through the buildup of IC hatred without the immediate removal: bide your time, prepare the Endgame and go out with the biggest bang you can.

THAT SAID - people are free to play what they most enjoy ! This is my very personal view and it might not sit comfortably with others.
Be nice to eachother and Praise Talona.

[Void]

First and foremost, you always stay IC and constantly ask yourself - what would my character do? If the villain, or hero, keeps coming back from the dead,

Actually, the likely scenario is that the hero would abandon their faith/convictions, become a depressed drunk and die in a ditch, forgotten.
Or die for real in the battle with villain.

But those are not very entertaining.

Death is not absolute in the Forgotten Realms. But some things are. Besides, there are worse things than death and other ways to score major victories against your opponents. Some fantastic inspiration for this can be found in episode 93 of Critical Role, where Laura Bailey's character epically defeated a powerful hag with nothing more than a little persuasion and a cupcake...I kid you not...a cupcake.

The thing about the hag is that it features players and a DM interaction. In this case DM decides what happens in the world, and therefore players can win. Or lose horribly.

When a villain is another player, with their own agency, there's no driving force of DM behind the actions in the world. Which means a player hag can simply decide not to die if that's not what's fun for the player.

Realistically speaking if you want a conclusion, then in case of hero opposing a villain, or a villain opposing the hero, the antagonist should be DM controlled, because in this case a conclusion is possible, as DM would permit it. After all, the antagonist was spawned into the world by the will of the world/DM, and was not actually played through by someone who has poured ten thousand hours into the character, grinded all the way to the creation of their evil/good empire, actually amassed their wealth and now became (emotionally?) attached to all the things they've got.

As a player trying to contribute to a story, you can reach out and collaborate with other players, facilitate events. Maybe

I feel that rather than trying to be a story writer for an environment such as arelith it is more appropriate to be an actor. You make a puppet, make the puppet act its role in consistent manner, and generally do not try to plan things in advance. Because, when you plan things in advance and play them out, you risk cheapening the story and railroading experience for other people. Let things emerge by themselves. At least that's how I feel about it.

-----------

With all that said, the most plausible way to stop a vilain pc, is to make the player behind the character married or promoted. Thne they won't have time to play anymore. (/joke).

Another option is to reach conclusion of their story (so they feel satisfied and walk away from the stage).

And yet another way is to help them reach their goal, because once they're there, they may lose all motivation to play further (because once you've reached what you wanted, there's nothingg left to do).

And as a last resort it is possible to simply roll your own character. After all, if you faced an impassable wall and indestructible opponent, there's only so much time you can continue playing, before it becomes tiresome.