Thinking out loud to UD and surface relations

[UilliamNebel]

This is a hard one.

But, I am always hearing talk that the devs and DMs side, are not thrilled with there being amicable surface and Underdark relations. Which I understand.

I get it for settlements, to an extent (the embassy in Greyport and general vibe of that specific area sort of can blur this).

But for individuals, especially adventurers, this actually feels really off for the Realms. Adventurers in the realms are both amazingly heroic, thus coming to where they are by and large strong enough in themselves to push back on social norms and prejudice to see folk's individuality with time. They are also utterly villainous as well, seeing anyone else as a means to an end, social taboos on relations be damned.

Unlike wider Faerun, the Arelith Isles are more or less, civilizations of adventurers. Adventurers lead their settlements, form their institutions, vanguards, etc, etc. So it is not unreasonable to think that adventurer laissez faire toward 'strange bedfellows' would be a lot more pronounced in the wider culture. The common folk NPCs wouldn't like it, alright, and the elites over them would likely go with the moods of their populace, so okay there too. But to within circles and organizations wholly made up of adventures, it feels a bit of a stretch.

I understand, foreign power influences project such divisions on Arelith as a region. But that is more so a further source of conflict between the society made up of adventures on the isles to those distant powers as more often a crisis of identity, than fuel for conflicts toward one another. Not that they suddenly all being on the isles agree on some sort of standard for all being treated equal, and socially acceptable to engage with. But enough so as to where it is more ‘The boss is looking at me over my shoulder so do I act cordial here’, versus ‘Kill these filth xenos for deh Emprah!’

After five years playing on the server, I still always have back and forth here, as things shift, server culture mood changes, etc, etc. And also, people bring up a lot of amazing points of both logic, and lore, to support concepts I previously had not mustered the imagination to consider, both ways on the issue.

[Old Lies Die Harder]

That seems a pretty thoughtful assessment.

I'll also throw in my two cents with the following points:

Constant raid/war events are exhausting to some people. There's a lot of folks that thrive on this type of play, but there's just as many that either prefer it be extremely limited, or dislike it entirely. Personally, I fall into the latter category. Raids are not fun for me to be involved in, and every time one happens it affects the whole server both in and out of character. Even if you're not involved in one of these events, you're going to be affected because the server it's happening on is going to tank in performance.

At periods of time where these sorts of events dominate the narrative, a lot of people get worn out by it. Whether or not it's setting appropriate to have a peace, a cease fire, or strange bedfellows, it becomes a welcome plot point when burnout on the constant PvP events reaches a peak.

I'll also note that because of the length of night time on the server, periods of constant tension and hostility between surface and underdark make moving around the server to do: writs, travel, gathering crafting materials, etc, is much more difficult. I understand the Underdark is supposed to be full of boogeymen, but I don't see the value of boogeymen all night every night. If a day is eight RL hours, that means you're looking at 3-4 hours of "danger might get attacked randomly," and for players that have had a history of lackluster experiences of this sort, that fact in itself is exhausting - especially if they only have 3-4 hours in a day to play.

So yet again, because of out of character logistics, these periods of 'peace' can really be welcomed, even if it ruffles the lore feathers somewhat.

[Eira]

There is still a long way between constant war and outright friendly alliances. No dev or DM is going to go "hm, UD and surface haven't mass group killbashed each other with lag in a while, you should change that" if they're just existing in parallel, being involved with their own stories, and not trying to outright get along.

To be realistic and accurate to lore, there should always be a range of relations between any people, groups, settlements, from best friends to bitter enemies. The only thing that wouldn't fit lore at all, is if everyone treated each other the same no matter what. Those who are intolerant of their traditional foes make those who are tolerant, shine out a bit more. And vice versa. Someone isn't better or worse for being friendly or unfriendly; they simply offer a contrast to represent the variety of personalities across the world.

[DM Poppy]

It is a deliberate imbalance between the Underdark and the Surface. The Surface thrives with bustling settlements, shared resources, and coexistence among diverse cultures. In contrast, the treacherous Underdark is infested with monsters and criminals, posing a threat to the Surface society.

Surface dwellers are urged to repel any attempts by the Underdark's inhabitants to disrupt their peaceful existence. The Underdark attracts malevolent forces seeking to undermine the Surface's stability and progress.

Conversely, the Underdark struggles with Andunor, its lone trade city situated in hazardous caves prone to collapse. Andunor relies heavily on surface traders for survival, despite the citizens' resentment.

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

[Morgy]

The only thing that wouldn't fit lore at all, is if everyone treated each other the same no matter what.

This is a strong point. I do suspect often people forget this is Faerun, which is full of monsters and beings of /pure/ evil. Sometimes it seems real world values are brought into Arelith, when we 'treat every being as potentially equal' - just because they seem nice/pleasant. I'm not a big fan of that.

[somecritter]

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

And it absolutely works. Personally, I think we should push this narrative further.

The only thing that wouldn't fit lore at all, is if everyone treated each other the same no matter what.

This is a strong point. I do suspect often people forget this is Faerun, which is full of monsters and beings of /pure/ evil. Sometimes it seems real world values are brought into Arelith, when we 'treat every being as potentially equal' - just because they seem nice/pleasant. I'm not a big fan of that.

100% - It would be better for the stories if we could stop self-inserting. It is -just- a game. We can have a little bit of bigotry and xenophobia.

[Spriggan Bride]

I don't share the view the surface should be a benevolent place. It should be mixed with some trying for peace and progress and stability and some who have evil motives to varying degrees (not necessarily "I summon demons and undead", but say, heartless businessmen who exploit, etc) and a whole lot of neutral folk just looking out for themselves or even just trying to survive another day in a very scary world where monsters are literally everywhere. Losing this gamut and making it all about good surfacers vs evil underdarkers turns this into a more simplistic setting than it needs to be.

That's not to say surfacers, even evil ones, and underdarkers ought to be best pals, they can and should still hate or fear each other. But making the surface too "nice" is a disservice to players trying to add some shades of grey and that includes the leaders and prominent figures, not just the criminals in the margins.

[magistrasa]

The intermingling of surfacers and underdarkers isn't a matter of insufficient knowledge of the setting or insufficient motivation to hate one another - it's primarily caused by the need for better avenues of storytelling. Good and Evil alignments are naturally drawn to one another because it's only through interacting with their opposite extremes that these ideologies can be properly explored. Good needs to be tempted by evil in order to be meaningfully challenged. Evil need to be confronted by good in order to develop into a compelling character arc. Dry, bland, PvP combat scenarios do not fulfill this need sufficiently. If space isn't made for these forces to interact within some "setting appropriate" bounds, then the setting is inappropriate for the kind of narratives that people want to explore. Rather than putting a stop to these kinds of interactions (which is a futile effort since, again, they are sort of necessary for a story of any depth), pathways should be drawn and spaces should be carved out that allow for these sorts of interactions to take place within a sort of quarantine, without disturbing the core integrity of the setting.

Outcasts were somewhat fulfilling that role, at one point - serving as a bridge between Good & Evil, Above & Below, in a manner that was moderately acceptable to surfacers (they're not monster races, so they're still kind of a surfacer even if they live in the underdark) - but the Outcast tag has sort of undercut their ability to serve that purpose. Now they're expected to be seen as no different from monsters, although it's not clear why that's the case to any player faced with the tag.

I think the Outcast tag has possibly even further eroded "setting integrity," by simply normalizing the idea that monsters and humanoids are really no different and the only thing that separates them is a layer of rock. Monster races regard their Outcast neighbors as equals, which is already a rarity within the Forgotten Realms, while those same monsters are perceived as maintaining a certain civility and relatability among the surface folk due to the somewhat literal humanization of the underdark. It erodes the sense of alien terror that they might otherwise maintain elsewhere in the Realms. The Outcast tag and daylight penalties and server rules and setting history all try to encourage and enforce a segregation of the two worlds, but when you look past the mechanics and the source material, what reason really exists to be unyieldingly at odds? As it stands, there's no logical, demonstrated reason to treat each other as "others." We inhabit a persistent, living world that is, contradictorily, unable to evolve.

If I were to wave a magic wand and change anything on the server, I'd rewrite the presently convoluted relationship and disparity of expectations between the surface and underdark settlements - to both intentionally create avenues of interaction between the two sides that don't involve combat, as well as to more clearly and sensibly draw divisions between the two sides that gives meaning to their inherent conflict outside of, "This 3.5 handbook says I'm supposed to hate you so !"

For my own experiences, "strange bedfellow"-type relationships are typically antagonistic in nature, even if cordial on first appearance. Both sides of the interaction are usually trying to manipulate and bring about some change within the other to draw them closer to their own ideological extreme. Which I'd argue is something that makes sense within a reasonable logical framework. A paladin introducing an orog to the concept of selflessness and altruism makes the world a less evil place. A Lolthite Drow turning an elf away from the Seldarine weakens the enemy. We know that killing each other isn't going to accomplish much of anything when the defeated foe can just get revived and forget the interaction ever happened. Can you really blame people for trying to do more with their story?

[Takes]

Newish player here and my experiences are pretty disheartening as it relates to what I'd call pop-up conflict. I'm messing around and slowly leveling two characters, learning who they are and having a real blast with them. They are both low to mid-level. I have had interesting conflict with people I have adventured with that has been pretty enjoyable.

I have a very high tolerance for conflict and a willingness to roll with the punches.

That being said over the last few hours I have been faced with very well warded, fully leveled (can tell from their DCs, AB and so on) groups of characters who offered strong arm RP where there was literally no option other than PvP. I have in the past on other servers and eons ago on Arelith always felt that I could offer to do things, to carry out some task or spy on someone or deliver a message and walk away without being stomped on. Both situations were very different than that.

There is a palpable lack of foreplay involved with the PvP. It checks the boxes, of course, no rules are broken. But it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It just feels like being RP'd at, rather than RP'd with.

I don't have any real answers that are not obvious and juvenile calls to invest into longer term stories. I guess I just wanted to express this vague discomfort with C- grade conflict and hope that the next series of random encounters with hostile characters are more well thought out and more purpose driven because what I experienced tonight was just not fun.

[PowerWord Rage]

PVP conflicts, especially random ones, are seldom enjoyable when there're power disparity, more so especially on the weaker side.
From the POV of the aggressor, it's not easy to amass the numbers to perform the raid and most of them, if not all, will want 'something' achieved.
I'll attribute this kind of situation which is usually rare, as something akins to 'bad things happen to good adventurer'.

On a side note, it is hard to actually debate which side has more 'rights' or 'wrongs' in any form of conflicts. Generally, 'must win' mentality isn't exactly easy to determine because no one in their right mind will want to be the loser unless, it's planned.
This mentality is also prevalent with the losing side because a person who doesn't care about winning, does not actually care about losing. But i'll agree that my reasoning is not the best reasoning because there're too wide, a range of circumstances that are usually complicated and this is where the DMs come in. So, the usual applies, report if you feel that anything is unfair/rule break.

Edit :

For my own experiences, "strange bedfellow"-type relationships are typically antagonistic in nature, even if cordial on first appearance. Both sides of the interaction are usually trying to manipulate and bring about some change within the other to draw them closer to their own ideological extreme. Which I'd argue is something that makes sense within a reasonable logical framework. A paladin introducing an orog to the concept of selflessness and altruism makes the world a less evil place. A Lolthite Drow turning an elf away from the Seldarine weakens the enemy. We know that killing each other isn't going to accomplish much of anything when the defeated foe can just get revived and forget the interaction ever happened. Can you really blame people for trying to do more with their story?

I'll agree with the above quote that it's absolutely wonderful if there're such interactions but there's a critical problem that i foresee.
For such RP to happen, it will spans over a period IRL months (not going to touch years) to build up.
Time is the huge gulf that endangers this kind of RP. Because by the time that if things go awry due to exploits ( OOC means ) or other things, the damage done accumulated throughout the months/years perhaps may not be irreparable but, it's devastating enough.
I for one, does not and am not able to perform RP of this standard nor try to.

[Edens_Fall]

The intermingling of surfacers and underdarkers isn't a matter of insufficient knowledge of the setting or insufficient motivation to hate one another - it's primarily caused by the need for better avenues of storytelling. Good and Evil alignments are naturally drawn to one another because it's only through interacting with their opposite extremes that these ideologies can be properly explored. Good needs to be tempted by evil in order to be meaningfully challenged. Evil need to be confronted by good in order to develop into a compelling character arc. Dry, bland, PvP combat scenarios do not fulfill this need sufficiently. If space isn't made for these forces to interact within some "setting appropriate" bounds, then the setting is inappropriate for the kind of narratives that people want to explore. Rather than putting a stop to these kinds of interactions (which is a futile effort since, again, they are sort of necessary for a story of any depth), pathways should be drawn and spaces should be carved out that allow for these sorts of interactions to take place within a sort of quarantine, without disturbing the core integrity of the setting.

Outcasts were somewhat fulfilling that role, at one point - serving as a bridge between Good & Evil, Above & Below, in a manner that was moderately acceptable to surfacers (they're not monster races, so they're still kind of a surfacer even if they live in the underdark) - but the Outcast tag has sort of undercut their ability to serve that purpose. Now they're expected to be seen as no different from monsters, although it's not clear why that's the case to any player faced with the tag.

I think the Outcast tag has possibly even further eroded "setting integrity," by simply normalizing the idea that monsters and humanoids are really no different and the only thing that separates them is a layer of rock. Monster races regard their Outcast neighbors as equals, which is already a rarity within the Forgotten Realms, while those same monsters are perceived as maintaining a certain civility and relatability among the surface folk due to the somewhat literal humanization of the underdark. It erodes the sense of alien terror that they might otherwise maintain elsewhere in the Realms. The Outcast tag and daylight penalties and server rules and setting history all try to encourage and enforce a segregation of the two worlds, but when you look past the mechanics and the source material, what reason really exists to be unyieldingly at odds? As it stands, there's no logical, demonstrated reason to treat each other as "others." We inhabit a persistent, living world that is, contradictorily, unable to evolve.

If I were to wave a magic wand and change anything on the server, I'd rewrite the presently convoluted relationship and disparity of expectations between the surface and underdark settlements - to both intentionally create avenues of interaction between the two sides that don't involve combat, as well as to more clearly and sensibly draw divisions between the two sides that gives meaning to their inherent conflict outside of, "This 3.5 handbook says I'm supposed to hate you so !"

For my own experiences, "strange bedfellow"-type relationships are typically antagonistic in nature, even if cordial on first appearance. Both sides of the interaction are usually trying to manipulate and bring about some change within the other to draw them closer to their own ideological extreme. Which I'd argue is something that makes sense within a reasonable logical framework. A paladin introducing an orog to the concept of selflessness and altruism makes the world a less evil place. A Lolthite Drow turning an elf away from the Seldarine weakens the enemy. We know that killing each other isn't going to accomplish much of anything when the defeated foe can just get revived and forget the interaction ever happened. Can you really blame people for trying to do more with their story?

Very well said and totally agree.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

I definitely think the setting could use some help and more stability as to what role each settlement plays, I definitely think that we could use some more things to focus on as level 30s besides bashing each other (though this is not as simple as waving a wand, you need ideas and those ideas have to stick).

But neither of that is the most pressing issue right now.

There is a common term that has been tossed about over the last two or three years, that pvp is a tool for rp. And it is. But I think a good number of people have gotten confused by that, and instead use rp as a tool to get to the pvp. I run into characters like this all the time now it seems, and I don't play in the underdark so it's not just them. Hell, I think half the elves left the Coronation of a new Coronal to go get into the same pvp fight they were in the day before, and the day before that, and the week before that.

I'll be honest, I'm an opinionated jackass that thinks I have all the answers, and this one baffles me because it just feels like it's getting worse over time. That's not to say I think it's an unfixable problem, it just needs people that both have the power to and want to fix it.

[Ad Astra]

I think it's worth considering that 'heroes' go up against 'events' and 'villains' created by their Dungeon Master, and that in this case, we have people palying those 'things' that cause 'events' and the 'villains' themselves.

[Hazard]

Nerf saves, unlock devastating critical, and make death penalties severe.
People will be less likely to strut around looking for a fight when mostly anyone could get unlucky, roll a 1, and have their ego shattered by a nobody.

... Or, you could just make an announcement that people need to modify their behaviour, and remove the problematic players instead of making excuses for them, slapping their wrists or looking the other way. (EVEN IF THEY ARE YOUR FRIEND OUTSIDE OF THE GAME/SERVER).

People who RP just enough to not break the rules and get away with their lame Snuggybear 'my self insert must win!' faction plays, should just be told to get better or GTFO.

It's pretty disgusting (and impressive) the stuff people have managed to pull off while not being permanently banned, or being punished in some meaningful way (like having characters deleted), but even more disgusting (or impressive) that often they get away with it completely because "technically no rules were broken/it was an 'honest' mistake".

Sorry, but things aren't going to get better if you're too scared to ban the people making it this way. You could try to hope to change them as people, but that's not how the internet or online-gaming has ever worked.

Arelith is like this because you allow it to be like this.

Playercount isn't everything. It's not a measurement of success or quality. Playercount being 'big number' isn't more important than actually having a community and server we can be proud of and want to invest ourselves into.

[Hazard]

Nerf saves, unlock devastating critical, and make death penalties severe.
People will be less likely to strut around looking for a fight when mostly anyone could get unlucky, roll a 1, and have their ego shattered by a nobody.

... Or, you could just make an announcement that people need to modify their behaviour, and remove the problematic players instead of making excuses for them, slapping their wrists or looking the other way. (EVEN IF THEY ARE YOUR FRIEND OUTSIDE OF THE GAME/SERVER).

People who RP just enough to not break the rules and get away with their lame Snuggybear 'my self insert must win!' faction plays, should just be told to get better or GTFO.

It's pretty disgusting (and impressive) the stuff people have managed to pull off while not being permanently banned, or being punished in some meaningful way (like having characters deleted), but even more disgusting (or impressive) that often they get away with it completely because "technically no rules were broken/it was an 'honest' mistake".

Sorry, but things aren't going to get better if you're too scared to ban the people making it this way. You could try to hope to change them as people, but that's not how the internet or online-gaming has ever worked.

Arelith is like this because you allow it to be like this.

Playercount isn't everything. It's not a measurement of success or quality. Playercount being 'big number' isn't more important than actually having a community and server we can be proud of and want to invest ourselves into.

That's the 'rules and behaviour' side of things. Arelith has another problem, and that's the mechanical side.

The game design has moved away from personal power/class fantasy and towards borrowed power/consumables.
This doesn't seem related at first, until you step back and look at things from an MMO's game design perspective. How certain changes in the game-play loop not only affect behaviour, but also what types of players you will attract/retain and what behaviours you will incentivise and cultivate.

We're now on a server where to win, you need to play the mini-games and invest outside of your character into things that are absolutely necessary to defeat another player. Scrolls requiring 80 lore. Consumable and expensive items such as gems/books/etc, runic materials for sequencers because we cannot use our own spells, and so on, and a character that can even make effective use of these in the first place.

Instead of simply having the tools to do what you want, natively, as you should and as we used to, you now are required to participate in these side-quests of amassing stockpiles of 'the thing' if you want any chance of fighting back against someone.

You are required to powerbuild in ways that go against class fantasy. Every caster is required to be a "Discipline Specialist", every second mundane is required to be an all knowing Wikimaster, sorry, I mean "Loremaster".

You must devote your entire build and leveling experience, your gear and your feats. Simply being the class you wanted to be is not enough. You need to build the way the PvP-meta decides if you want your RP to amount to anything more than getting your teeth kicked in by the people who 'are' willing to do these things, build those ways and spend the gold on those items.

So, imagine all the people who don't want to engage or don't have a 'I must win' mentality. They won't bother with these things, and if they happen to come into possession of these items, what do you think the chances are of them using these expensive items on some lame-o RPing 'at' them (not with them)? I'll tell you. It's none. They aren't going to, they're going to keep the item/sell it and just take the loss.

You are left with the 'I must win' crowd rising to the top, as they have, because the systems in place not only incentivise this behaviour, but actively reward it. They are able to shut down RP they do not like, and the only way to fight back is to sink to their level and play the game 'their' way, not 'your' way. Which is exactly what has been happening, which is exactly why this mentality keeps spreading and getting worse, instead of waning and getting better.

It isn't hard to win at PvP. It isn't hard to bully others on a roleplaying server. Anyone can do it, all it requires is the lack of integrity/shame, and a disrespect for others or their roleplaying/storytelling.

The game design choices have steered us to where we are, and a lack of serious punishment for people who aren't playing in the spirit of the game but are (possibly/allegedly) following the letter of the law has amplified the problem.

I know it wasn't intentional, but that's just how it goes. A roleplaying server is made or unmade by its roleplayers. Only two things can cultivate and quality control a server's community. Game-design and moderation.

If you build an arena in the middle of a playground, you're going to have people fighting in the playground, and so you can't scratch your head and wonder "Why do these things keep happening?", especially when these unwanted elements aren't actively dealt with.

[Shadowy Reality]

The game design has moved away from personal power/class fantasy and towards borrowed power/consumables.

This was always a thing. Everyone always had the tumble + umd dip so they could use the consumables, it was just easier to use all of the consumables. Mages always dipped for Discipline as well.

None of these things is new. The main difference is that scrolls are only available through lore now, so UMD dip is not longer enough.

Consumables deciding victors and losers was always a thing, from the old WMs being able to just use Timestop at any time, or Heal Pots not having a sobriety hit. You always needed consumables if you were fighting against mechanically savvy people.

The difference is that a lot more people are mechanically savvy now. Whereas before you could kill people with normal tactics, such as just left-clicking them, now they employ consumables in an efficient way, forcing you to have to do it as well.

I am not saying I like this, I actually don't and always voiced my opinions against the scroll and wand dance meta. But just pointing that this is not recent or new.

[AskRyze]

This was always a thing. Everyone always had the tumble + umd dip so they could use the consumables, it was just easier to use all of the consumables. Mages always dipped for Discipline as well.

None of these things is new. The main difference is that scrolls are only available through lore now, so UMD dip is not longer enough.

Consumables deciding victors and losers was always a thing, from the old WMs being able to just use Timestop at any time, or Heal Pots not having a sobriety hit. You always needed consumables if you were fighting against mechanically savvy people.

The difference is that a lot more people are mechanically savvy now. Whereas before you could kill people with normal tactics, such as just left-clicking them, now they employ consumables in an efficient way, forcing you to have to do it as well.

I am not saying I like this, I actually don't and always voiced my opinions against the scroll and wand dance meta. But just pointing that this is not recent or new.

I'm just going to +1 this. As the game gets older, people who play the game get better at the game. People who get better at the game start to learn what works and what doesn't. Acquiring edge case power is one of those elements that just works if you build into it.

I'm reminded of a streamer who used to coach starcraft complaining about how "competence creep" has affected his game. He said something along the lines of "You used to be able to climb to Diamond rank using [a relatively basic strategy], now that won't even get you out of Silver rank... because the people who are still playing this game are the same people who have been grinding it for the last half a decade." Now consider that Neverwinter Nights is a game that's almost as old as I am, and as much as new classes come and go the core framework and engine stays the same.

Almost everyone knows how to make a hypercompetent character, or they know a friend who's been playing long enough to shoot them a Good Build. I believe, the frustration comes in when "what works" and "what I want to do" don't overlap. I'm sorry, but there's not a modern reality where non-Mind DC mages are going to sweep the floor with the competition anymore, and I've had to come to terms with that myself.

As an aside, consider that the Consumable Meta almost categorically requires you to interact with other players to acquire said consumables. If you want to 'get good', you have to involve other people in your play - no random griefer can be an island unto themselves. Not sure if that is a bug or a feature, but I figured I'd throw that thought into the pool.

[Ork]

I have to balance hazard's argument with saying the worst offenders of factionous and exclusive play I have encountered are rarely the player interested in engaging in PvP-centric stories, but the ones that don't want anything to do with PvP. I do think a healthy act to do once and awhile is to disconnect from the out-of-character environments surrounding Arelith and play authentic to what interests you. Championing the invisible army of people that whine, bemoan, and complain while wallowing in their circumstances will sour anyone's experience playing this game.

[LurkingShadow]

It is a deliberate imbalance between the Underdark and the Surface. The Surface thrives with bustling settlements, shared resources, and coexistence among diverse cultures. In contrast, the treacherous Underdark is infested with monsters and criminals, posing a threat to the Surface society.

Surface dwellers are urged to repel any attempts by the Underdark's inhabitants to disrupt their peaceful existence. The Underdark attracts malevolent forces seeking to undermine the Surface's stability and progress.

Conversely, the Underdark struggles with Andunor, its lone trade city situated in hazardous caves prone to collapse. Andunor relies heavily on surface traders for survival, despite the citizens' resentment.

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

For being so reliant on the surface they sure hate it and mess a lot with it. Whats up with that?

[Azensor]

It is a deliberate imbalance between the Underdark and the Surface. The Surface thrives with bustling settlements, shared resources, and coexistence among diverse cultures. In contrast, the treacherous Underdark is infested with monsters and criminals, posing a threat to the Surface society.

Surface dwellers are urged to repel any attempts by the Underdark's inhabitants to disrupt their peaceful existence. The Underdark attracts malevolent forces seeking to undermine the Surface's stability and progress.

Conversely, the Underdark struggles with Andunor, its lone trade city situated in hazardous caves prone to collapse. Andunor relies heavily on surface traders for survival, despite the citizens' resentment.

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

For being so reliant on the surface they sure hate it and mess a lot with it. Whats up with that?

Surface goods =/= surface people

[Xerah]

I have to balance hazard's argument with saying the worst offenders of factionous and exclusive play I have encountered are rarely the player interested in engaging in PvP-centric stories, but the ones that don't want anything to do with PvP. I do think a healthy act to do once and awhile is to disconnect from the out-of-character environments surrounding Arelith and play authentic to what interests you. Championing the invisible army of people that whine, bemoan, and complain while wallowing in their circumstances will sour anyone's experience playing this game.

This is important. I don't play the game on the cutting edge of the meta. I build and play my characters the way I want to. Do I know how to optimize and make good decisions? Yep, but I'd rather play the game I want to play than be forced into playing a different way. It's crazy how overblown PVP META idea is.

I don't know why people would want to play NWN as a PVP centric game (it's 20+ years old!), but they stay here for some reason. I also don't know why someone who has really intense level of complaints stays here either. Of course both sides have some good ideas from their points of view, but the delivery often just makes me want to ignore them.

[LurkingShadow]

It is a deliberate imbalance between the Underdark and the Surface. The Surface thrives with bustling settlements, shared resources, and coexistence among diverse cultures. In contrast, the treacherous Underdark is infested with monsters and criminals, posing a threat to the Surface society.

Surface dwellers are urged to repel any attempts by the Underdark's inhabitants to disrupt their peaceful existence. The Underdark attracts malevolent forces seeking to undermine the Surface's stability and progress.

Conversely, the Underdark struggles with Andunor, its lone trade city situated in hazardous caves prone to collapse. Andunor relies heavily on surface traders for survival, despite the citizens' resentment.

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

For being so reliant on the surface they sure hate it and mess a lot with it. Whats up with that?

Surface goods =/= surface people

Surface goods does imply the surface people handle it. There is not a bunch of Drow and Duergar handling the harvest season.

[Bazelgeuse]

Surface goods =/= surface people

The Slave Clamper of Andunor probably disagrees with that

[Edens_Fall]

It is a deliberate imbalance between the Underdark and the Surface. The Surface thrives with bustling settlements, shared resources, and coexistence among diverse cultures. In contrast, the treacherous Underdark is infested with monsters and criminals, posing a threat to the Surface society.

Surface dwellers are urged to repel any attempts by the Underdark's inhabitants to disrupt their peaceful existence. The Underdark attracts malevolent forces seeking to undermine the Surface's stability and progress.

Conversely, the Underdark struggles with Andunor, its lone trade city situated in hazardous caves prone to collapse. Andunor relies heavily on surface traders for survival, despite the citizens' resentment.

This stark divide between the Surface and the Underdark emphasizes the differing living conditions and resources. The Surface represents stability and progress, while the Underdark remains a harsh environment endangering the Surface society. This intentional imbalance offers rich storytelling possibilities, as players navigate the conflicts arising from these contrasting realms.

For being so reliant on the surface they sure hate it and mess a lot with it. Whats up with that?

It's mainly due to the one-sided nature of the interaction that causes the resentment. For example Andunor is forced by the setting to allow surfacers to visit and trade, however every surface settlement is also forced by the setting to kill and exile every Underdarker. So they raid and enslave as a way to vent.

[DM Poppy]

It's not a way to vent. It's a way of living.

Andunor is a trade city, but it is the capital of slavery on Arelith.

Your typical merchant in Andunor is not going to be a Paladin from the Radiant Heart, if so they need to strongly reflect on their RPR. It is scum trading with other scum.

But despite the fact it is scraping at the bottom of the bucket in terms of morality, even these Surfacer Traders are hated because they are doing what the monsters cannot. Stable trade of supplies. Without them, despite how they are loathed both up and down, Andunor would loose resources and income that it cannot afford.

This is game settings, Arelith lore. It may not reflect what has been built in game but it serves to maintain a direction of development.

Though, I think there s a number of players who should step away from their computer and take a moment of pause. Several individuals are commenting on matters of gameplay far to critically.

So I'll ask people to consider what they write and the politeness of their writing before they submit it as these topics risk being locked.