Suggestion: Outcast - Make it Mandatory for Outcasts to write why they are an Outcast in discription

[JubJub]

I think this problem could be solved if non-Outcast Underdarkers could take over Surface settlements. Which I think they should be able to, to be frank.

... How, exactly?

I don't see how outcasts taking over a surface settlement would be good, you would then get a town where all the outcasts just chill while on the surface before wandering below.

[Subutai]

I also don't see it becoming anything other than a constant raid-fest. If, say, Bendir Dale was taken over by a group of people so awful that they'd all be cast out of surface society, why would the rest of the surface allow that? It would be like if a group of paladins set up shop in Andurnor, took the city over, and then the drow, duergar, monsters, and everyone else was just kinda cool with it and went about their day. The only reason it could ever last would essentially be the DMs saying, "Okay guys this is an evil outcast settlement now and it's just gonna stay this way", or some mechanical change that made the gate only open if your character had done enough dastardly deeds.

[Mr_Rieper]

I think this problem could be solved if non-Outcast Underdarkers could take over Surface settlements. Which I think they should be able to, to be frank.

... How, exactly?

I don't see how outcasts taking over a surface settlement would be good, you would then get a town where all the outcasts just chill while on the surface before wandering below.

The suggestion from Seven was for non-outcast Underdarkers to be able to sieze surface settlements. As in, monsters and drow being overlords to human/halfling villagers.

[Subutai]

I'm still not sure how that would work, anything other than very short term. Some goblins come in and drive the halflings out of Bendir, and then you're left with the exact same situation as if it were outcasts. A bunch of hated goblins sitting around in Bendir waiting for the constant attacks from every other surface settlement, and getting into a bunch of PvP.

It could be a fun plot for a little while, but it could never be a long-term "This is a surface monster settlement now".

[Orian_666]

Yeah, and that's a pretty valid point. The main counter argument to the current suggestion is simply that 'catagorizing' outcasts is perhaps a bit unfair and narrows a concept too much.

Ok here's a small suggestion of my own.

When a player first makes an outcast, before entering the game world they have to fill out a small area of text stating why their character is an outcast. They can only do this once and it is mandatory for playing an outcast. DMs can edit/remove it if it's obviously silly and abusive.

In every settlment there is a large board, or an npc - who has a list of active current outcasts. (Maybe outcast names get deleted after say, one OOC month of inactivity to save it getting too cluttered). This has the name of the outcast, and the paragraph of their crimes. It also has a 'picture' of them. (in an ideal would this would be their character description, but as that can be changed so much and so easily, or abused, this would probably be the one place on the server where *description of Joe Bob* would be a legit thing to use.)

Maybe this would replace the outcast tag? Or maybe it would work in addition to it. IDK. But it would allow a certain amount of cutomisation of the Outcast character, whilst also being a way for players to know whta said character did. The main drawback (other than scripting, I've no idea how hard this would be to do) is that it might put a bit more work on the shoulders of us DMs, to monitor such 'crime' descriptors for suitability.

I was actually going to suggest this very thing before I read you already did.

I'd change it a tiny bit though, instead of it being some custom text they have to write out on creation i'd have it be a selection from a large list of potential crimes.

I.E.
>Player creates character, chooses the outcast background.
>The next dialogue prompts them to choose 3-6ish? crimes from a provided list
>The list could include a whole myriad of crimes from Mass Murder, to sacrificing the local orphans to summon demons (idk, but i'm sure the team could come up with an extensive list of options to choose from)
>They complete character creation as standard and enter the game.
>A messageboard (or NPC like Grumpy said) is now in each of the "civilized" towns that details the outcasts name, picture, and their crimes. Anyone can read this board or speak to the NPC. Upon character deletion their entry is removed.

As for the outcast tag I think that should stay imo, even though you may not remember the exact details of their crimes from the shiney new outcasts board it is fair to suggest that their face is remembered by your character. If the outcast asks why they're not allowed in town then, for example, Guard A can send Guard B to go check the board to get the details and now the outcast can be reminded of their dreadful past of crime and debauchery!!

I know it's a tall order to implement something like this but details like this realistically would exist on an outcast, it helps avoid those awkward situations detailed in other comments here, gives the outcast a solid starting point to their back stories, and I think would add a lot of flavor the the role instead of it just being used so players can have a UD human.

The reason I'd prefer it be crimes chosen from a list is simply to avoid trolls. I'd hate to go to the board and see an entry for "Joe Bloggs: Outcast for stealing candy from halflings." As per grumpys suggestion the DM's should be able to check on that but until one of them can get to it it'd still be there. Having the list simply avoids that situation entirely.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

> don't want UDers to just raid all the time
> don't want UDers to make a meaningful presence on the Surface*
> don't want UDers to be cosmopolitan with non-monster outcasts
> don't want to go back to Udos

*I'd argue the only meaningful way is to make all the Surfacers shit their pants because suddenly UDers are involved in settlement systems.

Honestly, guys. Like what do you want out of the Underdark-Surface interactions?

If you want to Big Brother Outcasts, go for it. But I'm warning you that's a real slippery slope. And it really only sounds like a massive complaint lodged at their entire existence.

We've never had to have anything explained in a character's backstory ever. Arelith's been around for 15 years. Why are we entertaining this discussion now?

[Orian_666]

We've never had to have anything explained in a character's backstory ever. Arelith's been around for 15 years. Why are we entertaining this discussion now?

Because the role requires there to be an explained backstory by default. If someone is an outcast on the surface, literally mechanically stated outcast, then there has to be a reason for it and that reason would be known to most. Otherwise why bother having outcasts at all? How can they be an outcast if people don't know who they are or why they were outcast in the first place?

We're entertaining the discussion now because over time, especially long periods of time, things change, evolve, and adapt. You can't expect Arelith to be exactly like it was a decade ago when the hardware, software, mechanics, contributors, and admins have all changed several times since then. Change can be good, often time it's extremely necessary to avoid things becoming stagnant. If Arelith never changed from how it was 15 years ago then I wager it would have died a long time ago.

This wouldn't be the first change Arelith has seen, it likely won't be the last, and just because it specifically hasn't been done before doesn't mean it's a bad thing. To act like it is after all that's changed, mostly for the better, since Areliths inception all those years ago is a bit disingenuous don't you think?

[Gobbo Champion Inc]

Why would every surface pc in arelith know the backgrounds of every outcast, from every corner of the forgotten realms? Even in the age of news papers, tv news and the internet most people dont know the names or appearances of most of the monstrous people in the world today. Of the most wanted criminals, or terrorists. The most immersion breaking thing about this at all, is that people recognize them to begin with.

If the quality of rp is an issue, hide it behind rpr 20, or a minor award.

The outcast tag is very problematic because to fix the issues that it has created trying to solve one problem, it has created another, one that risks being even more ham-fisted, and awkward.

[Orian_666]

Comparing the setting to a modern day doesn't prove anything. Every variable is different in such a comparison.

And no one has to know a detailed background of the outcasts, but it does stand to reason that if your PC has visited any of the settlements then they most likely came across a notice about said outcast. Picture, a brief list of crimes as to why they're an outcast, and that's it.

If the majority of people didn't know at least a few details about an outcast then are they really an outcast? If they're welcome to just walk around populated settlements without most people recognizing them as someone that was kicked out of civilized society then are they really even an outcast?

Outcasts are ostracized from society for committing heinous acts, but you can't be ostracized if the people in that society don't recognise you for the outcast you are.

The Tag is a good step toward making that more realistic, but with it comes new problems that have been outlined in other comments. If my PC recognizes someone as an outcast (Via the tag) but can't recall why then it simply creates awkward situations. It's not the end of the world to simply state "I just know your face, I saw it on a poster stating you were kicked out of town for crimes you committed", so not going into detail and keeping it vague, but not being able to find out those details if needs be is still a problem because that information should/would be readily available in the setting that Arelith is in.

[Gillesbreton]

I was actually going to suggest this very thing before I read you already did.

I'd change it a tiny bit though, instead of it being some custom text they have to write out on creation i'd have it be a selection from a large list of potential crimes.

I.E.
>Player creates character, chooses the outcast background.
>The next dialogue prompts them to choose 3-6ish? crimes from a provided list
>The list could include a whole myriad of crimes from Mass Murder, to sacrificing the local orphans to summon demons (idk, but i'm sure the team could come up with an extensive list of options to choose from)
>They complete character creation as standard and enter the game.
>A messageboard (or NPC like Grumpy said) is now in each of the "civilized" towns that details the outcasts name, picture, and their crimes. Anyone can read this board or speak to the NPC. Upon character deletion their entry is removed.

As for the outcast tag I think that should stay imo, even though you may not remember the exact details of their crimes from the shiney new outcasts board it is fair to suggest that their face is remembered by your character. If the outcast asks why they're not allowed in town then, for example, Guard A can send Guard B to go check the board to get the details and now the outcast can be reminded of their dreadful past of crime and debauchery!!

I know it's a tall order to implement something like this but details like this realistically would exist on an outcast, it helps avoid those awkward situations detailed in other comments here, gives the outcast a solid starting point to their back stories, and I think would add a lot of flavor the the role instead of it just being used so players can have a UD human.

The reason I'd prefer it be crimes chosen from a list is simply to avoid trolls. I'd hate to go to the board and see an entry for "Joe Bloggs: Outcast for stealing candy from halflings." As per grumpys suggestion the DM's should be able to check on that but until one of them can get to it it'd still be there. Having the list simply avoids that situation entirely.

The problem with keeping the tag is that is meta-gaming to a huge extent. I don't walk past a police officer on the street and somehow he magically knows I committed a crime in my past without prior knowledge of the case. I asked two of my cop friends if they would spot a suspected criminal walking down the street if they were not on that case and they both told me, no don't be ridiculous.

I have played law-enforcement characters on Arelith before (pre-outcast description), and there is a rewarding level of spying, intrigue and investigation RP that comes from sussing out how dubious someones reputation is. In pen and paper a DM wouldn't introduce a character in a town and say "This is a bad guy" straight up - They would leave it for the players to figure out themselves, not just spoon feed them like a child.

[CosmicOrderV]

I feel like even if the board doesn't have the exact reason why they're an outcast--so long as there is simply a board to point at and use as an IC means of identifying outcasts--it would do some good. This idea is great. It can be as detailed, or as basic as the Dev's see fit. It's just a way to integrate the concept behind what Outcasts are already supposed to be, anyways. It helps us establish the WYSIWYG rule. Can't go wrong with that.

This said, there still might be an issue with the concept of Outcasts in the first place.
A lot of the good / evil dichotomy seems a bit hamfisted. Evil things live underground. Good things live above. Somewhere in the middle, they mesh/clash. This might sound cool in theory, except in an organic environment, the dynamic might change. I can't help but feel like issues that arise around this all, come from the forced nature of it all.

[Sea Shanties]

Like the idea of entering text, don't think it should be choosing from a list of crimes in the background-- where's the room for creativity there? People should be able to come up with something that isn't generic.

Re. backstory not being required on Arelith, it kind of is actually for some things like assassin or harpers tokens, special races etc. So it's not entirely unheard of. I'm for the idea of outcasts needing some sort of accountability that DMs can enforce (and perhaps other players can find out through a little effort) but still think it needs to be kept out of the description itself.

Also on this..

Notably, outcasts are ostensibly supposed to ALSO be the vector for the UD to infiltrate the surface, but with the advent of the tag, this is no longer an option.

It seems a natural that the spies who the UD would recruit now should be non-outcasts... perhaps using the Outcasts to do this, as they're still in a great place as middlemen being known villains who would draw such shady people into their orbit. I'm sure there are dozens of evil or CN characters out there who would love to betray their settlements and races if the UD would pay them.

A lot of the good / evil dichotomy seems a bit hamfisted. Evil things live underground. Good things live above. Somewhere in the middle, they mesh/clash. This might sound cool in theory, except in an organic environment, the dynamic might change. I can't help but feel like issues that arise around this all, come from the forced nature of it all.

I do get flashes of World of Warcraft when things get too Surface VS UD.

[Orian_666]

I was actually going to suggest this very thing before I read you already did.

I'd change it a tiny bit though, instead of it being some custom text they have to write out on creation i'd have it be a selection from a large list of potential crimes.

I.E.
>Player creates character, chooses the outcast background.
>The next dialogue prompts them to choose 3-6ish? crimes from a provided list
>The list could include a whole myriad of crimes from Mass Murder, to sacrificing the local orphans to summon demons (idk, but i'm sure the team could come up with an extensive list of options to choose from)
>They complete character creation as standard and enter the game.
>A messageboard (or NPC like Grumpy said) is now in each of the "civilized" towns that details the outcasts name, picture, and their crimes. Anyone can read this board or speak to the NPC. Upon character deletion their entry is removed.

As for the outcast tag I think that should stay imo, even though you may not remember the exact details of their crimes from the shiney new outcasts board it is fair to suggest that their face is remembered by your character. If the outcast asks why they're not allowed in town then, for example, Guard A can send Guard B to go check the board to get the details and now the outcast can be reminded of their dreadful past of crime and debauchery!!

I know it's a tall order to implement something like this but details like this realistically would exist on an outcast, it helps avoid those awkward situations detailed in other comments here, gives the outcast a solid starting point to their back stories, and I think would add a lot of flavor the the role instead of it just being used so players can have a UD human.

The reason I'd prefer it be crimes chosen from a list is simply to avoid trolls. I'd hate to go to the board and see an entry for "Joe Bloggs: Outcast for stealing candy from halflings." As per grumpys suggestion the DM's should be able to check on that but until one of them can get to it it'd still be there. Having the list simply avoids that situation entirely.

The problem with keeping the tag is that is meta-gaming to a huge extent. I don't walk past a police officer on the street and somehow he magically knows I committed a crime in my past without prior knowledge of the case. I asked two of my cop friends if they would spot a suspected criminal walking down the street if they were not on that case and they both told me, no don't be ridiculous.

I have played law-enforcement characters on Arelith before (pre-outcast description), and there is a rewarding level of spying, intrigue and investigation RP that comes from sussing out how dubious someones reputation is. In pen and paper a DM wouldn't introduce a character in a town and say "This is a bad guy" straight up - They would leave it for the players to figure out themselves, not just spoon feed them like a child.

Again, real world comparisons don't translate to the Arelith setting, every variable is completely different.
In the setting, smaller more tight knit populations, where truly heinous acts (something deserving of being cast out from society) /would/ become very broadly known to the local populace.
More over a description of that person would be more readily available.

People aren't generally cast out of society for petty crimes, things that for example your cop friends wouldn't recognise a person. However I bet you if you asked them if they'd recognize the most notorious local criminal/s in their area then chances are they would.

For example, in the Town I live in IRL the population is about 70k (arguably larger than the entire settled population of Arelith imo) but even I recognize certain local criminals by sight, just from living here, i'm not even a cop. On top of that if someone came to my town and asked 1000 random people who the most "notorious" person in town is I can promise you 9/10 of them would say the same guy (Not a local criminal but certainly well known enough that he'd be their answer)

Now, like I said real world comparisons don't translate, but I just felt it was necessary to offer a counter point to yours for the sake of posterity. Now just consider the differences in population, society, community, communication, etc etc in the setting Arelith is in, when you take all that into account it's not unreasonable to assert that someone that committed a truly heinous act, one serious enough to literally be chased out of society, would be a well known person. Drawings of them with their crimes listed plastered everywhere available as a warning to others.

I feel like even if the board doesn't have the exact reason why they're an outcast--so long as there is simply a board to point at and use as an IC means of identifying outcasts--it would do some good. This idea is great. It can be as detailed, or as basic as the Dev's see fit. It's just a way to integrate the concept behind what Outcasts are already supposed to be, anyways. It helps us establish the WYSIWYG rule. Can't go wrong with that.

This said, there still might be an issue with the concept in the first place.

Even that would be fine, just something that you can point to IC and say "Nope, you're definitely not supposed to be here, there's the proof!!" to avoid those silly situations where PCs fervently argue their innocence even though it's very well and broadly known they are not. However mechanics don't allow for any other recourse beyond "Yes you are, because I know you are, now leave or get bashed."

[JubJub]

... How, exactly?

I don't see how outcasts taking over a surface settlement would be good, you would then get a town where all the outcasts just chill while on the surface before wandering below.

The suggestion from Seven was for non-outcast Underdarkers to be able to sieze surface settlements. As in, monsters and drow being overlords to human/halfling villagers.

That would be even worse. If UD race took over a settlement on the surface every surface settlement should be lining up to storm the place , not to mention then it would become a surface place for UD races to chill.

[Subutai]

At this point, it doesn't even seem like outcasts serve a purpose. As DM Grumpcat said, the original purpose of outcasts was to get by the settlement kill scripts on the surface, so the UD could spy on the surface. Without those scripts, the original purpose is moot. Now, the struggle has been to find a place for them other than "people who can just hang out wherever they want", and we've ended up with the tag.

Personally, that seems like something that would be better RPed than enforced mechanically. Especially when you get into situations where there are characters who have been exiled from Cordor multiple times for horrific crimes, only to come strolling back a month later when their latest exile is lifted, and end up exiled again, and yet somehow there are all these level 3 characters who have committed such heinous crimes that they're forever banished from the entire surface world, and every single person instantly recognizes them? That seems like a stretch to me, to say the least.

I'd much rather just see the use of the Exile boards or something, and leave it up to exiles to find a place in the UD by their own RP merits, than to just say "Well, this guy is a felonious tax dodger who isn't allowed anywhere the sun touches ever again".

[Mr_Rieper]

Personally I would think Andunor would work better if the only surface races that were allowed to start there were slaves. The concept of an outcast is too organic and specific to allow it to be a starting option. It's like the Mark of Destiny. It should be something that people can seek out and opt into, not something they can choose at the start.

Have an NPC in Andunor that allows characters to willingly become outcasts IF they can get there. No more tags, no more "metagaming". Outcasts as a concept now only include the dregs of society who either took themselves down to the Underdark, or were effectively exiled off of the surface for being both infamous and powerless.

If you want to start as a human in Andunor, you start as a slave. It sucks, but that's what life would be like for you down there. If you want to be a scruffy lawless human, go to Sencliff.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I don't see how outcasts taking over a surface settlement would be good, you would then get a town where all the outcasts just chill while on the surface before wandering below.

The suggestion from Seven was for non-outcast Underdarkers to be able to sieze surface settlements. As in, monsters and drow being overlords to human/halfling villagers.

That would be even worse. If UD race took over a settlement on the surface every surface settlement should be lining up to storm the place , not to mention then it would become a surface place for UD races to chill.

Call me what you will, but I don't see how any of those things consequences are a bad thing.

[JubJub]

Pretty sure the server wouldn't be happy if another situation occurred where UD races openly walk about and run a town. Just as if the Triad took over a UD district I would guess it wouldn't go over well. it should never be the case where UD races feel so comfortable on the surface that they run and linger about a surface town.

[Subutai]

Assuming this is all about swarming a town and voting in a UD-race leader, this also seems like it's kind of abusing the mechanics of the election system. If a bunch of drow showed up in Cordor, mass-registered to vote with Gerald, and then elected some matron as Chancellor, I don't see why anyone, government officials included, would even comply. Whoever's counting the ballots would almost certainly be given leave to just toss out any ballots voting for the drow matron, and any other attempts to take power would be met with violence. I really don't see anything like this being anything more than a UD raid where, once the surface PCs are killed, the raiders just hang around in the settlement for a while until they get driven out.

Like I said once before, I think that seems like a fun little plot. Goblins raid Bendir Dale and, not being the brightest race on Faerun, start trying to run the place, only to very quickly go scurrying for their caves when it becomes apparent that the rest of the surface doesn't take kindly to monsters taking over settlements.

But as far as taking over a settlement for the long term? The only way I can imagine it working is by DM/mechanical enforcement.

[Ork]

The suggestion from Seven was for non-outcast Underdarkers to be able to sieze surface settlements. As in, monsters and drow being overlords to human/halfling villagers.

That would be even worse. If UD race took over a settlement on the surface every surface settlement should be lining up to storm the place , not to mention then it would become a surface place for UD races to chill.

Call me what you will, but I don't see how any of those things consequences are a bad thing.

Sounds dope. Sign me up.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

Assuming this is all about swarming a town and voting in a UD-race leader, this also seems like it's kind of abusing the mechanics of the election system. If a bunch of drow showed up in Cordor, mass-registered to vote with Gerald, and then elected some matron as Chancellor, I don't see why anyone, government officials included, would even comply. Whoever's counting the ballots would almost certainly be given leave to just toss out any ballots voting for the drow matron, and any other attempts to take power would be met with violence. I really don't see anything like this being anything more than a UD raid where, once the surface PCs are killed, the raiders just hang around in the settlement for a while until they get driven out.

Like I said once before, I think that seems like a fun little plot. Goblins raid Bendir Dale and, not being the brightest race on Faerun, start trying to run the place, only to very quickly go scurrying for their caves when it becomes apparent that the rest of the surface doesn't take kindly to monsters taking over settlements.

But as far as taking over a settlement for the long term? The only way I can imagine it working is by DM/mechanical enforcement.

You're hitting on precisely the problem, Subutai.

Why shouldn't a mass drow covert operation cripple Cordor? Why can't they orchestrate an electorate to vote for them? Why isn't this possible? Why can't we have a drow house take up the Chancellory?

The line of thinking that this mass of NPCs who somehow prop up PC action have their own biases and preferences is problematic.

The whole bureaucracy should be totally neutral. They shouldn't even ask questions.

You're imposing a view point on this unseen mass of unseen NPCs. We can't use them for our convenience. Let the DMs handle their perspectives. That's not our job. This is player-run, remember? NPCs don't decide anything on Arelith - at least, they shouldn't.

Maybe we'll disagree on this, but in general, people really like to come up with all kinds of excuses. Honestly, it's not a good sign. Everything should be an open door - and if it happens, it happens.

[CosmicOrderV]

I'm legitimately surprised by how much awesome feedback there is in this thread.

That would be even worse. If UD race took over a settlement on the surface every surface settlement should be lining up to storm the place , not to mention then it would become a surface place for UD races to chill.

Call me what you will, but I don't see how any of those things consequences are a bad thing.

Sounds dope. Sign me up.

Seconded.

[Subutai]

The whole bureaucracy should be totally neutral. They shouldn't even ask questions.

You're imposing a view point on this unseen mass of unseen NPCs.

This is the core of our disagreement. Why should the bureaucracy be neutral? I'd counter that by saying that the bureaucracy should be neutral and allow characters like a Drow to become Chancellor, or Bendir Dale mayor, that you're essentially arguing that the DMs should have to take an active and direct role in elections like that, rather than the implied situation currently, which is that the bureaucracy won't stand for it. If, mechanically, UD races can't be elected as Cordorian Chancellor, then those mechanical limitations reflect the political situation. The King of Cordor, for example, might ban them outright from participating, in which case it doesn't matter how many Underdarkers sign up as citizens to vote for a Drow candidate. The King will reject it out of hand. Why force the DMs to deal with that every time the players decide to do it, when the result is always going to be the same? Perhaps there's simply a standing law, even without the King, that specifically forbids any Drow or Underdark denizen from running for or being elected as, a candidate?

The process being entirely neutral implies that there are no laws or regulations in place to prevent that sort of thing. Mechanical limitations imply that there is. If there are no mechanical limitations, this entire debate is moot.

[Gillesbreton]

Kind of drifting away from the main subject... lets bring it back to the Outcast Description topic and how best to improve the system in regards to it.

[Ecthelion]

Why would every surface pc in arelith know the backgrounds of every outcast, from every corner of the forgotten realms? Even in the age of news papers, tv news and the internet most people dont know the names or appearances of most of the monstrous people in the world today. Of the most wanted criminals, or terrorists. The most immersion breaking thing about this at all, is that people recognize them to begin with.

If the quality of rp is an issue, hide it behind rpr 20, or a minor award.

The outcast tag is very problematic because to fix the issues that it has created trying to solve one problem, it has created another, one that risks being even more ham-fisted, and awkward.

About this, I agree, but that was debated as of when the Outcast tag was being implemented. The staff chose to make it that way, so, if our characters are supposed to know every outcast, for it to make sense, might aswell know their deeds. For the record I wasn't for that tag in the first place. I don't think it makes much sense nor that it's good for creativity but well, that's the way chosen and will do with it. As for removing outcasts, that is a solution aswell as Mr.Rieper said.

On side-note, lots of you are completly off-topic and posts mostly belong to the other thread in the Feedback session that was opened by Seven. No need to derail it here.
Edit : Apologies. Didn't see the other was locked. If you feel the need to keep up the discussion though, do make a new one instead of derailing this one.