Let's talk about tags

[Nevrus]

Why was Wharftown destroyed again?

[Nitro]

Let's not derail this topic into a surface vs UD discussion like some people love to do. I know outcasts are part of the discussion, but they are not the whole or end of it (not are they equitable to other UD races). Everything said about the Outcast tag is also a problem for the pirate tag.

[DangerDolphin]

I think a lot of people are missing one of the core principles of this server:

Surfacers and Underdarkers hate each other. They want to kill each other as much as they can. They want the other side to be wiped out.

Andunor was built in the Upperdark so it could easily trade with the surface. It is not a war camp, it's a trading center. Even in the case of Drow that usually hate surface elves, there are exceptions such as Vhaeraunites who believe all elves need to work together.

As to why this isn't understood, I think it's a combination between simplification of complex RP into "Red vs Blue", and a desire for any reason to PvP.

Back on topic though, I'd certainly be interested in Grumpy's idea of forcing people to research other characters somewhere to find out about them. I know that certain people are saying this is anti-RP, but it's better than the current tags.

[Kuma]

Back on topic though, I'd certainly be interested in Grumpy's idea of forcing people to research other characters somewhere to find out about them. I know that certain people are saying this is anti-RP, but it's better than the current tags.

No, it's an extra step, it's not actually better.

R E M O V E T H E M

Everything said about the Outcast tag is also a problem for the pirate tag.

pirate is actually well defined, RPwise, they have their own whole bunch of writs, are still nominally surfacers, get access to whatever sencliff offers, and if you remain low rank you can only be "detected" by high [skill] folks

not the same

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I think there are two different kind of tags, that are both getting jumbled together.

Outcasts are one thing - they are a concept, not very well-defined, not tied to a specific faction.

Then Pirates and RH are another thing - a concept, fairly well-defined, but deeply problematic for a whole bunch of reasons. To call them a "sub-class" misses the point, I think, Kuma.

It's like if there was an Outcast Guild.

However, both should share a common solution: roleplay. They should exist through roleplay, not through tags. Someone should be an outcast because they've become ... outcast. A pirate should be a pirate because their pirating. A holy order should be a holy order because they do holy things.

[Queen Titania]

Personally, I’m a big fan of the tags.

This is honestly my feelings too. I think its simply defined and effective.

If anything I would have the RH not work through the ring being worn, but only at the highest rank. You could apply similar with outcasts, but have it tied with levels, maybe, since there isn't any sort of rank for them.

[BaRKyy]

I'd love that change. Especially giving outcasts the tag past say level 20ish or so, or have it tied to some other mechanic aside from just beginning with it.

[Morgy]

I still don't really understand how I am supposed to react to an Outcast tag if I've never met them/had the character described to me in flawless detail. Why do I know they are an Outcast IC? OOC I have examined them and seen the tag. But IC, How did I find that out? It just baffles me and I'm yet to see a decent explanation of that problem.

[The Rambling Midget]

I think its simply defined and effective.

Effective at what, though? With Outcasts, the goal seems muddled and the definition a little too simple.

[Queen Titania]

I feel like that could be addressed by a background system in which the reason for being outcast (If not earned through IC means) is given to them. For example: Murderer from Sibiyad, or Cordorian Serial Loiter, which can be related to lore. (Obviously something more severe than these examples, but that is the gist.)

[Drowboy]

I still don't really understand how I am supposed to react to an Outcast tag if I've never met them/had the character described to me in flawless detail. Why do I know they are an Outcast IC? OOC I have examined them and seen the tag. But IC, How did I find that out? It just baffles me and I'm yet to see a decent explanation of that problem.

This is the guy. Raven. This is the guy that Juanita is looking for. The guy Lagos told him not to mess with. And Hiro has seen him before, outside the entrance to The Black Sun. This is the guy who gave the Snow Crash card to Da5id.
The tattoo on his forehead consists of three words, written in block letters: POOR IMPULSE CONTROL.

literally there's no reason for a murderer from, say, waterdeep, to be well known on arelith, especially considering the island is full of well known murderers that people interact with on a daily basis already.

[Zavandar]

prefer the current system to how it was before

outcasts chilling in settlements disregarding NPCs (even though DMs would often control those NPCs just to demonstrate they weren't allowed). it was a problem both because of the outcasts and the people that accommodated them

that being said, how people are supposed to know of/react to outcasts is still definitely ambiguous (and i believe the biggest part of the outcast problem). i disliked having to ask myself "how would i know about this outcast" because every answer felt like metagaming. usually i'd err on the side of caution and just leave them be unless they overtly gave my character a reason to care

[Kuma]

I feel like that could be addressed by a background system in which the reason for being outcast (If not earned through IC means) is given to them. For example: Murderer from Sibiyad, or Cordorian Serial Loiter, which can be related to lore. (Obviously something more severe than these examples, but that is the gist.)

then you get the issue of what, exactly, is enough to be outcast for, and giving that actual textbook explanations feels really, really bad. there aren't many things that you can do on arelith that'd be "that bad" that you're considered utterly, utterly irredeemable from society on the get go, and still be within the rules. i guarantee you that other surfacer PCs can and will do the Outcast Warcrimes Selection Table and worse, and not suffer the same fate

by focusing so much of the RP on something that didn't even happen in the course of play to something with so little nuance, i really don't think you'll create a good system this way.

Personally, I’m a big fan of the tags.

This is honestly my feelings too. I think its simply defined and effective.

yeah but

its not though.

[AskRyze]

But the hostility example you give above...? I mean yeah, I agree that it'd be nice if there were more to it. But it's also not unreasonable.

You have to remember that your playing a MONSTER. You're playing a creature who's species, enjoys killing, torturing, enslaving. It's pretty reasonable that people won't want you around on the surface.

...

What sort of rp are you hoping for exactly?

Not going to lie to you, I was hoping to not just get mindlessly bodied by a wild pack of level 30s and violently bullshitting out my Snuggybear to hopefully not die. I expected what happened and understand why it did. To an extent I agree with it too, and it makes sense. Doesn't mean that it was very enjoyable or uplifting of an experience - I knew I was a dead man either way.

On my end, I was toeing the LE line and seeing if the 'good' characters, some of which were clearly knights or paladins, would initiate violence and kill an unarmed orog. In a way it just confirmed what my character knew. OOC, it also confirmed that I'm not going to go looking for any real shade of positive rp on the surface, but that's an aside.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

So I read every post (im sitting here without furniture in my new place, so yes I'm that bored) and even spent time thinking about why I personally would take the outcast background on any of my characters. The conclusion is that if I wanted to play a bad guy who built up a reputation over time, I would just play a normal bad guy, so that doesn't make sense. If I wanted to play a spy type character that blended in, I would likely make a regular rogue or bard and focus on lots of bluff (or maybe perform if I were a bard, but lies are bluffs more then performances even if perform works thematically for a disguise.) If I wanted to play something that everyone was a knew was a bad dude right from the jump, I would play an outcast. It's clearly what the background was made for. So now that you can see where I'm coming from, you probably can understand the confusion by some of the posts that call it vague, or say things like they want people to rp to find out that their character is a bad dude. I mean, you can just do that on any old character that's not an outcast, why do you need to be an outcast at all?

This of course got me to look a bit closer to the background, and at first I was thinking "It can't be just for the undercommon can it?" But then I thought some more, and remembered that its much easier to level in the dark, and much cheaper to loot your character if you can shop freely down there, and the free undercommon starts to look more and more appealing by the minute.

Based on all that, I'm just going to say that the free undercommon is the root of the issue with this class. Remove it, maybe make it a greater reward that any character can take (something you can do for all the languages, the reward needed can vary based on the likelihood of someone knowing it, but undercommon should be at least a greater reward for sure), and put outcast where it should be: in the hands of players that want to be hated for whatever crime they did before the character was being played that made them the outcast.

[The GrumpyCat]

But the hostility example you give above...? I mean yeah, I agree that it'd be nice if there were more to it. But it's also not unreasonable.

You have to remember that your playing a MONSTER. You're playing a creature who's species, enjoys killing, torturing, enslaving. It's pretty reasonable that people won't want you around on the surface.

...

What sort of rp are you hoping for exactly?

Not going to lie to you, I was hoping to not just get mindlessly bodied by a wild pack of level 30s and violently bullshitting out my Snuggybear to hopefully not die. I expected what happened and understand why it did. To an extent I agree with it too, and it makes sense. Doesn't mean that it was very enjoyable or uplifting of an experience - I knew I was a dead man either way.

On my end, I was toeing the LE line and seeing if the 'good' characters, some of which were clearly knights or paladins, would initiate violence and kill an unarmed orog. In a way it just confirmed what my character knew. OOC, it also confirmed that I'm not going to go looking for any real shade of positive rp on the surface, but that's an aside.

I realize we're moving the topic away briefly from outcasts. But I feel it neccesarly to repeat the statement that has been true about Monsters for the last 10+ years of the server.

"Here's the thing: when you play a monster race, expect to be treated as a monster race. Every civilized town for RP purposes can be considered to have a number of residents. If you got an ooc warning about hanging around a populated surface town if you are an underdarker, thank your lucky stars because the IC interaction would be: "look, a monster, everyone kill it." and then having the entire local militia attack until you all died. In fact, if you're playing a monster race, we're permitting it based on the understanding that you will react in just this way...avoiding towns upon fear of death.

Goblins, Kobolds, Drow, Orogs, etc, are considered a "Monster Race". Part of the RP of being allowed (note the very careful phrasing) to continue to play a monster race is rping as if you are a monster, an unwelcome member in traditional surface society. If you can't do that, there's absolutely no rule that says I can't delete your character for bastardizing the role play of the entire server. In fact, ask around, I will do it without hesitation or remorse if I feel as if in any way your rp is corrupting the vision of RP for the server.

Bottom line is, it's ok to agree to disagree on the principle, just so there is an understanding that if/when we catch it, the consequences will be severe. Up to and including permanent removal of the character and/or player permanently, in extreme or repetitive instances"

-Jjjerm, previous server owner

When you play a monster race, you do so on the understanding that surfacers will HATE and dispise you. That is the deal you signed in for.

The same is true of Outcast.

The name is Outcast

It should be pretty clear.

then you get the issue of what, exactly, is enough to be outcast for, and giving that actual textbook explanations feels really, really bad. there aren't many things that you can do on arelith that'd be "that bad" that you're considered utterly, utterly irredeemable from society on the get go, and still be within the rules.

The problem here is a dissoance between Game and Story.


'Arn't many things on Arelith that'd be 'that bad.'.

Remember. On Arelith death tends to be temporary. We do not have an enforced permadeath system. But because PCs don't have an enforced permadeath system, (and becamse most centeral npcs don't also die perminently often) that doesn't mean death should be treated as meaningless.
Likewise, because of the PG13 ruling, we cannot show or detail the horrific things that happen - both by Outcast and in the Underdark but - and this is important That Doesn't Mean That They Are Not Actually Happening

So yes, maybe on Arelith murdering your own family is a 'whoops hold on, lemme whip out the o'l ressurect scroll!' But it's not on the mainland and honestly - it SHOULDN'T be treated with such lightness on Arelith either.

And the argument that 'Outcasts can't exist because of the PG13 rating, anything that falls under that is infinately forgivable.' Well - Then for one I seriously question your moral judgement.

And for another - that whole thing covers the Underdark too. In theory that place should be extremely dark and none PG13, but we don't allow such. So we have to presume that the players 'respect' the narrative enough to imagine that terrible things are happening, even though we can't show them.
If what you're saying is that unless it's graphically, grousomly, on screen, it shouldn't exist then - well, that's not a bad argument for scrapping the underdark entirely, to be honest.

[andthenthatwasthat]

Cordorian Serial Loiter

Cordorian Mime...

[Queen Titania]

Moving to Feedback

Please keep in mind this has been discussed quite a bit in the past between outcast and disguise and pirates, etc. This is just a fraction.

viewtopic.php?f=37&t=28717&p=228638&hil ... em#p228638
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=28520&hilit=outcast+system#p226694
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=27544&hilit=outcast+system#p217941
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=27453&p=217252&hil ... em#p217189

viewtopic.php?f=18&t=28633
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=27544
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=27975&p=221712

When the suggestion forums re-open though, I encourage players to use the collective ideas spawned from this thread and others to form their own proper suggestion and see if the dev team is willing to approve your idea or not.