Two things, to start off with.

1) I'm not going to name names, because as I'll illustrate, it's a recurring theme

2) This has nothing to do with me or any character that I play.

I overheard a conversation on the amulet the other night and it struck me poorly as a player, and I've been mulling these past couple days on how to address it diplomatically. I'm not sure I can, but I'm going to just throw this out there and hope some good comes of it.

When we have CvC conflict, if one is playing on the opposite side of the majority (even if the majority is wrong, hahaha), it is, as we are discovering, very difficult to create conflict while still staying within the boundaries of PvP consent. In other words, there's going to be LOTS of chatter. And, frankly, I am enjoying the heck out of the chatter lately. I am also enjoying watching names that I don't know well, or at all, rise to the fore with their character's beliefs and convictions. Sometimes, yes, things get overdramatic and overwrought and gag-a-rific, but you know what? At least they are trying, and in this game, that's what counts and that's what it's about, and let's all do the hokey pokey and turn ourselves around.

In fantasy fiction, there are only so many ways to portray an archetype. And I imagine, as a player, that you have the choice of portraying that archetype in your own unique style as best as you can, OR be so unusual and unique that you will stand alone. As the years pass, it gets increasingly more difficult to be original, at least in the eyes of the casual observer.

The other night, I heard a comparison to another "dark" character, in conversation. It broke my heart, as a player, because it felt like more of a OOC insult than it was an IC one.

So, let me tell you a story. When I first played GS, there was a dark character named Bleeds. He was awesome (as in, larger than life). I was warned by friends to never upset him or talk to him or look at him askance because he would destroy little ole backwoods hick me. Time passes, and as I grow into my character and get more involved in events and storylines and establishing myself, there were two other well-known baddies, Setzier and Armaxis.

Now, I did get to RP with those two, and yes, they were amazing and frightening and so forth. But, some of them old GS'ers never gave them a chance. All that would be said was, "They'll never be as good as Bleeds." "They're just trying to be like Bleeds." Etc. Which didn't mean anything to me personally, because I had never interacted with Bleeds as a fleshed out character, but ultimately, I believe the people who dismissed Setzier and Armaxis really missed out on some fantastic roleplay opportunities.

Setzier and Armaxis faded away (for reasons I suspect most people know) and with the Griffon Sword Saga came a NEW batch of "Dark" characters, all along the spectrum of the Lornon pantheon, some of which still play today. Back then, during that transition of generations, there was a very talented player who had a character named Mekthros. Now, at this time, a bunch of us players were friends, had met at Simucon or whatever, and it was common to hang out in chats, especially during merchant events. Mekthros developed quite a cult following of people who enjoyed his roleplay (there was even a Livejournal blog dedicated to some of the things he would do or say), but inevitably it would come up: "He's just trying to be like Setzier."

I remember we talked about it, in a group chat, and that (in general terms, without trying to speak for another player), it boiled down to: Yea, that's kinda disappointing. None of us that had interacted with Mekthros in any kind of depth never felt he was trying to emulate anyone but himself. Especially those of us who knew Setzier, Armaxis or Bleeds.

Now, if you are a knight in Elanthia, and I am remembering my history correctly - do I get to say, "You're just trying to be like Waldo2,"

If you are a militia leader in Elanthia, do I get to say, "You'll never be Valicar!"

If you are a dark knight, then I'll say, "What, you trying to be like Cemb?"

If you're a merchant warrior, "Oh blah blah blah, another Ardwen wanna-be."

If you're a powerful priest who does rescues, voila, "Trying to be like Kadesha (female) or Truekillr (male), huh?"

*

I see where this is a legitimate IC insult or jibe or mockery, but OOC I can't imagine what it would be like to be trying so hard to roleplay and not just go out and kill people, and have to hear that line: "You're just trying to be like WHATSHISFACE.", whether they are someone from the past or present of the game (or both, voila, a bunch of returning players like me, yay!)

To use such an insult, quite frankly, shows an ignorance to detail that perhaps is easy for us, as players, with all the scroll, and all the things going on. However, I think our characters who live and breathe in Elanthia might be reminded of someone from the past on occasion, but would certainly notice the differences as well. It's a terribly narrow view, from my perspective. It's like saying the Prime Minister of England is trying to be like the President of the United States, just because they both lead powerful English speaking countries.

I think if you dismiss someone's efforts as some attempt to be like someone else, you're also doing yourself a disservice in noting the nuances. AND, if whomever from the past or present of the game had such a striking impact upon your character that you remember their name and archetype, then it seems particularly foolish to dismiss the opportunity to similar experiences.

Now, speaking as a player, in the off chance that you encounter another character that reminds you of any that I play (heaven help those poor souls), don't you ever let me find out that you blew them off because they were trying to be like me. Because, let me tell you, creating conflict and (especially) intrigue without resorting to mechanical shenanigans so that other PLAYERS can participate is HARD. Finding a NICHE in a game that has been around this long is PROBABLY NIGH IMPOSSIBLE, so you better believe, for every archetype there's going to be overlap. And if you hear the bad guys sounding similar, it's probably because there's just not a lot of things that can be said to the morally self-righteous - it's certainly not because someone wrote a script and everyone is following it.

So, maybe moving forward, as things get more complex and nasty and mean between morally ambiguous sides of the conflict, would you pretty please with sugar on top and a free pass to the local brothel, give some thought and consideration to those who are trying really hard to carve out their own niche, and avoid making comparisons to other characters, past, present or future?

Thank you.

Respectfully,

~ Bill, Coyote.

A few fast points from my pov. The logs were bad and the few I rp on the 'good side' hold that event very personally. I dont know who it was that didnt care but I do. I tell many to take to the towers and rooftops when they cant stand toe to toe. As for the blood ritual. We had someone kicked out because he said no. Since no one else was kicked out it is a logical assumption that the remai ing people gave blood. This is beginning of the end game. There is no more time really to be wishy washy on things.

as for rp in general there is a ton of metagaming going on in many ways. It is beyond frustrating to me but I just play through it. You simply cant stop it. W3 can sit here and talk about all the bad forms of rp or simply ignore it and enjoy the story. I can tell you...focus on the bad will not give you time to enjoy the good so my advice...roll with it. Its not right but it wont stop

Re: OOC knowledge

Keep in mind that his town is freaking covered from the rooftops to the cobblestones in post-it notes. How anyone every notices a new note tacked to the tree, or the moot hall door I'll never know. The town is wallpapered in them!

That said, I try to keep my characters to what they should know, but remember that a lot of stuff is being shared via letters tacked to this and that. This knowledge is IC, so if someone posts a long rambling letter about something, then everyone in town has a legitimate IC reason for knowing it's contents whether they were personally present or not. Of course, that is a two edged sword since what gets posted in a letter might very well not be accurate, or intentionally misleading or false. Everyone but Radeek gave blood? Does Carandar know for sure? No, he wasn't there, but if someone says it happened, or someone writes it in a note and tacks it to the tree then that knowledge is out there IC'ly. Whether it is right or wrong is another matter.

Did they give their blood? I don't know either IC'ly or OOC'ly, but Carandar doesn't care either way. Anyone following Cross is allied with someone who would send hordes of undead children against the landing and to him that means they are of questionable character, or at least questionable judgement.

<But Radeek was called first and was ejected out if the room.

Great post Madmountan. Just one small error. Radeek was actually called third. Two others submitted to the blood letting first. And believe me, that was one hard decision to make as a player. I would so love to be with you guys causing mayhem. So to all those who stayed with Cross, Good Luck and have tons of fun!

Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato

Radeek Andoran
General, Drakes Vanguard
Black Raider of the Mir'Sheq

Radeek's player. You are right, I just looked. I'm sorry! Radeek was third indeed.

Kenstrom has created an odd situation in the landing where the....evil, or morally grey, characters outnumber the good guys in a lot of situations. I once ,a while back when Talador was wrapping up, commented that the landing was becoming a dark place, you had a mayor who ate people, demon trees doing strange things, a (npc) population that stood aside and did nothing while this happens in their name a general lack of concern about dark deeds done in the name of protection and so on. His response was "well the players are the good guys", but this isn't really the case anymore, it probably wasn't the case back then. The players are evenly split between the bad guys and the good guys, and in some cases those "evil" players are the majority.

You have the top of the evil pile, the lichborn, who at this point have apparently re sworn oaths to the great evil Althedeus, we know this because we watched them summon a sacrifice and respond to a voice in the air and then attack the city, and from their commentary after the fact. Following close behind you have the Crosslings, and remember at this point we have had multiple confirmations IC to confirm suspicions of Cross's nature, from his own speeches in the city, to the Faendryl Palestra, the Magistars, the Curator, other various npc's. Cross is a tool for Althedeus and therefore evil, regardless of what you think of his war on the empire. Moving down you have the morally grey characters than have always been in the landing, Stone's "followers" who released a curse on the city while playing with strange eyes, the Onarian assassins who always play lose and dirty with the rules...those sneaky little assassins that they are...your general evil, but not aligned, characters like Grhim, and your hidden characters that you may not see acting evil but those of us who know them recognize that at any time could cause chaos....like Raelee for instance.

Now the characters might not recognize the evil nature of any of these groups, but that doesn't mean everyone is going to play ignorant of all the dire warnings.
That is a lot of people, even if you acknowledge there is group spill over and group divisions.

Who are the "Good" guys? A tiny band of knights who have been shown to bend oaths like pretzels, and have the dubious distinction of spending the last conflict protecting a deathknight in waiting? A "landing defense" force that can't make up it's mind on anything? A forest gnome who would rip out the hearts of every orphan and force feed them down Surofee's throat if he thought it would save his people? A collection of people who are not united in any way but generally rise up to fight something heading at the walls (and even from this number you have to subtract the many who are in the above "not good" group)?

Despite the claims to the contrary there are not a lot of people playing "heroes" in the landing. Falvicar maybe, Bristenn probably though always with the empire in mind, and a handful of others. The rest either have their own agenda or are perfectly happy to forgive any evil done if it doesn't upset the social peace of the landing. Dark heroes or apathetic heroes is the flavor of the day.

There is an old fantasy trope that evil fights among itself, and it is why it falls apart in seemingly insurmountable situations, I always hated this trope, it seemed stupid. However in the landing we have seen it, on the amulets, nightly lately, lichborn yelling at crosslings, the Sheruvian yelling at lichborn, Stone's followers yelling at everyone, and even people yelling within their own little evil groups, it is hilarious. It is going to be commented on.

Malik is very persuasive in game, his statements are well composed and well timed to deliver maximum impact, in the end though we know enough IG to know that Cross was behind the War with Talador, he controlled Walkar that initiated the conditions for it's start and the Golemn that picked the one time to strike that would enrage the most people, this we know from his own words. He has regularly taken possession of citizens bodies and caused their death. The words of the Palestra and the Magistar just confirms he is aligned with the other power players in the story line. Despite Malik's well delivered words, or maybe because of them, the message stands to be countered.

I love the evil RP, Grhim has always been a favorite character of mine, even if I comment IG on his constant yammering on the amunet. Cruxophim is odd...just odd, but interesting. Malik's predictable shadowing of any power source...these are all great additions to things. Radeek's character conflict was something I was genuinely wondering how would play out given the blood magic aversion/tehir background/empire hating sides of that character.

You are bad guys, in bad days, near an endangered city. However there are a lot of you, and you are going to be compared to each other because frankly, you are so collectively so loud it is impossible not to do so. When a lichborn a crossling a sheruvian and a lichborn/crossling are all competing on the amunet over who can deliver the most dire messages in the shortest time possible, and arguing with each other at the same time it is going to be commented on.

<<Setzier and Armaxis faded away (for reasons I suspect most people know) and with the Griffon Sword Saga came a NEW batch of "Dark" characters, all along the spectrum of the Lornon pantheon, some of which still play today. Back then, during that transition of generations, there was a very talented player who had a character named Mekthros. Now, at this time, a bunch of us players were friends, had met at Simucon or whatever, and it was common to hang out in chats, especially during merchant events. Mekthros developed quite a cult following of people who enjoyed his roleplay (there was even a Livejournal blog dedicated to some of the things he would do or say), but inevitably it would come up: "He's just trying to be like Setzier.">>
<<I remember we talked about it, in a group chat, and that (in general terms, without trying to speak for another player), it boiled down to: Yea, that's kinda disappointing. None of us that had interacted with Mekthros in any kind of depth never felt he was trying to emulate anyone but himself. Especially those of us who knew Setzier, Armaxis or Bleeds.>>

Dear God, Mekthros. That man was brilliant. Thank you for sending me back to the LiveJournal of his quotes: http://mekthrosquotes.livejournal.com/ So many memories!

You bring up a good point, however, but it touches upon something that I've noticed for a long time. This game has such a long history that we've had people playing for 20 years or more. Needless to say, a lot has happened in that time, and the game has matured, grown and changed over time. We've had our high points and our low points.

And yet, when I hear people start to name off good roleplayers or storylines, it's almost inevitably people or storylines who haven't been around for 5, 10, or 15 years. How often, when discussing well-played villains, does the name Bleeds show up? Or Berr when discussing warriors? How many times will Terate be talked about, or Spike the War Rat? How many of us really remember the Bregandians or the banaltra?

To draw on more recent history, several of us remember the GSS, even though it ended several years ago. These days the GSS appears to be increasingly remembered as a high point of enjoyable roleplay. As someone who lived through the GSS, I'll agree that the roleplay was very good, but I also remember well how frustrated many people were that it seemed to be highly exclusive, where only certain people were allowed to take part in the central events. Many people who were involved left the game shortly after the GSS ended and have never returned.

Of course, we've had many good memories over time, but it seems we do a severe disservice by constantly looking back so far as if the present could never hope to measure up. I've come to know many roleplayers in the past couple years that are every bit as good as the people in the past. I knew Mekthros well, but Caden from Plat also excelled at wit and general menace. Jaired is as close to an anti-hero rogue as I could ever imagine, and he's still around! Fehala and Aihan are utterly amazing in capturing the essence of the sylvan spirit. Raelee is a quintessential seeker of knowledge at all costs. I've never had the pleasure of meeting him in game, but Silvean's board posts alone perfectly exemplify the Faendryl mindset.

In the end, we should remember that, though we have many good memories of the past and should rightly cherish them, we do ourselves a huge disservice by holding those memories up as the standard of what this game should be. Not only do we cheapen the experiences we have now, but our memories are all too often selective, picking out the good and discarding the not-so-good. If we're open to letting the present speak for itself, rather than measuring it against the past, we may find that we enjoy it far more.

Gretchen

Visit the GSGuide wiki, now home to merchant shop inventory lists! http://gsguide.wikia.com/wiki/GSGuide_Wiki
Meeting Nilandia: http://gsguide.wikia.com/wiki/Nilandia
AIM: Lady Nilandia

>>In fact, in this particular instance, his rants were better than Grhim's of the last couple of nights. I enjoy most of Grhim's antics, but the killing children mantra, though OK when first brought up, became tiresome to both Rlen and me.

The thing is Rlen, I've had no less than 5 people talk to me OOC who were really enjoying what I'd been doing the past few nights. Although you, and your character might not have been, some people were displaying some extreme inner-conflict during the past few nights, which is really what feeds the insanity of Grhim's rants. I guess this goes to the point of just because you're not enjoying something, don't assume everyone else is not.

Grhim's player,
Chris

Brace yourselves for a long post. Apparently, I had a lot more thoughts on this than I thought I thought. :)

I don't know if my character is a particularly "good guy" as she's neither good nor a guy, but she was one of the loudest voices mocking the destruction of the defenses on the night it happened. I'm sorry it was perceived as OOC; that certainly wasn't my intention, and I'm certain it wasn't what anyone else intended either. From an IC perspective, those towers really haven't done a whole lot of good. Taladorians, undead creatures, spores, krolvin, big evil bats wearing Lichborn faces and even the odd rolton regularly made it past those defenses. OOC, we know that's because invasions are at their most fun when the town gets almost crushed, but IC, our characters have surely seen that the towers have been fairly ineffectual. I'm not sure a single wave of defenders has been turned away by them, and if I've noticed that, I'm sure Lylia and other characters have as well.

I can't speak for others' reasons, but there's another reason I finally just sat down and said "nope!" about playing chase with the towers, and it is an OOC one: What would I have had my character do if she'd found the miscreants? For one thing, the Cross contingent moved like ghosts. There was no way we could have caught up, and most of us finally stopped trying once we realized it was fruitless. For another, the opposition had a good dozen or so people even at that late hour, most of whom have close to 20 levels on Lylia and one of whom is a known mass murderer. I don't mind getting my character killed, but I'm not going to push her face first into a wood-chipper repeatedly. She's not dumb. For yet another thing, there needs to be some way Lylia can come back to being on neutral or good terms with some of these characters, at least for me. I don't really like protracted, months-long conflict, so I'm not going to put my character in a position where it'll be exponentially more difficult for her to forgive others' actions against her, which is what would happen if she went to defend the towers and got killed doing it.

On the other hand, it would have made for some fabulous anti-Cross propaganda, so maybe I should have sacrificed her a couple of times to rob some of Cross' followers of their "we haven't lifted a finger against you" talking point. :)

Some story elements are scripted for the "bad guys" to win, which is as it should be. No one should feel he or she is constantly fighting a losing battle. The thing with the towers was pretty clearly intended to be one of those times. By the time your opposition saw the messaging about icy blue flames wreathing a particular tower, it was already far too late to get there. Also, it's kind of hard to defend against a magical force that sets the wood and everyone around it on fire, so even if we'd found Cross, we couldn't have done more but watch helplessly and bleat "Staahhhp!"

So, given that the towers A) couldn't be defended in time, B) couldn't be defended effectively anyway, and C) had proven ineffectual in numerous recent invasions, how would those of you destroying the wood have recommended the "good guys" handle it? To me, the "go ahead and burn them" gambit was far from being OOC and was in fact about the only tenable roleplaying choice left open to the team that was pretty clearly scripted to lose that skirmish.

In a way, it parallels what Grhim and others who talked about killing children versus releasing the tormented undead were doing. Past a certain point, when your character's pretty much scripted to lose this round, you can go down fighting (verbally or otherwise), accept defeat meekly or absent yourself from the situation. "Meek" isn't in Lylia's vocabulary, and shuffling off to Icemule while the Landing's towers burned didn't really seem like a valid in-character choice either. Standing around jawing about it was the only alternative. Could Lylia have gotten irate or horrified instead of mocking and scornful? Yeah, that's always a possibility, but I tend to save that for something other than stacks of wood. I didn't come up with the idea of hanging out and mocking the tower-burning, but whoever did had a great idea. Sometimes, it's okay not to go in the direction you're being funneled, and refusing to be baited was as valid a character choice as any amount of hand-wringing would have been.

Not everyone was equally blase about Cross' attacks on the towers, by the way. You haven't heard Lylia give more than a passing mention about the implicit threat of burning the town's defensive stockpiles, but others, including Ephya, were really torn up about it and have every justification for being angry at other characters for their actions. The "good guys" are no more monolithic in their beliefs and goals than the "bad guys" -- and in fact, I don't even think those terms have much validity when characters on both sides have done some very noble or very dark things.

I miss Setzier and Armaxis. They were spectacular roleplayers and wonderful friends.

I think the burning of the logs is definitely more important and impacting to the "townspeople" of Wehnimer's Landing, instead of the adventurers. The adventurers, are basically living weapons themselves. Able to wade into hordes of undead, fight gargoyles from the skies, withstand a wave of demons. The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker (Yep, I did it) are the ones who rely on defense towers (and lower level folks), even the town militia, who while some may be skilled, none compare to Adventurers. It was definitely a message to the townsfolk.

I never got involved in the Griffin Sword Saga, either one, as a player. But from what I do remember, it was very Black vs White. Lornon vs Liabo. Which is fine for some situations, but I've always felt characters are more than just that. Everyone has a line, some cross it, some won't. Some cross it because of something, and sometimes that something is greater for some, than others. Ultimately, it often comes down to survival. We can always find justifications when it comes to survival, and sometimes rightfully so.

It's also why, I've referred to "groups" of characters in my storyline summaries as adventurers, instead of "heroes" like I used to do years ago.

My goal with Cross into Shadows (besides raising the stock value of Deeds, and breaking characters) has always been to showcase that I do not think our experience in the game should always be black vs white. I've always seen it as light grey vs dark grey vs pale grey vs storm grey vs steel grey vs off white vs pure white vs deep black vs bluish-black vs....you get the point. Honestly, it's one of my favorite things about all of the players involved. Yes, it causes division, it causes chaos, it causes headaches for people sometimes. But this isn't laser tag. We're not blue team, red team. Some things unite players, other things divide them. That makes the characters even better. The fact people cannot be so easily clumped into red team/blue team. It's made Cross into Shadows extremely enjoyable for me, but I'm also a little biased.

Cross into Shadows: This Ain't Yo Grandma's Griffin Sword Saga



-GM Kenstrom-
Waylayer of Wehnimer's Landing
Human Guru
Giantmen Guru

<I don't think the adventurers should think the town doesn't need the defenses anyways.

Either some of you have never experienced it, or others have forgotten, but there's nothing quite like the feeling you have when you're standing on the ground outside the North Gate, up to you neck in post capped baddies, and this great big arrow looking thing comes flying down and impales one of them for an instant crit kill and it bales your rear out of one serious jam. Well, that's just not going to happen now due to the logs being destroyed, and I guarantee if Vathors and the like show up the ballistas will be sorely missed. Don't make the mistake of undervaluing what the towers and those who man them do for you when you're down there fighting. Too many of us forget where we came from and I, for one, will seriously miss the ballistas and the opportunity it gives younger adventurers to participate and do some real damage during the large scale invasions with high level adversaries. So right along with this post I'd like to say THANK YOU to Tower Commander Ephya and all those who man the towers during invasions for the incredible job they have done thus far. I do appreciate your efforts.

As a purely OOC side-note, what a great tactical move to destroy the logs.


Only the dead have seen the end of war - Plato

Radeek Andoran
General, Drakes Vanguard
Black Raider of the Mir'Sheq

Lylia would be far from the first or only person to think the towers were an ineffectual defense mounted by a tiny frontier town against powerful enemies. In an OOC sense, she couldn't be the first person to think so because I just took up the banner someone else first raised (not sure who it was, but I appreciate their doing so as it gave me an IC way to react to an event that I understood in an OOC way I couldn't influence or affect much). Another thing to consider: During a conflict, what people say and what they feel aren't always the same thing. You, the player, now know what I, Lauren, think about those towers, but can you say Madmountan knew whether Lylia was serious when she said to go ahead and burn them because they didn't matter anyway? Misinformation, disinformation and propaganda are important tools too -- and they're the best ones the defenders had that night, given that you were getting some extra help. (Again, I'm not complaining about that; every side deserves a chance to win, and the Cross faction is pretty heavily outnumbered and outgunned on many other occasions.)

For what it's worth, I know at least two of the people standing there and talking smack on the amulet about burning the towers down was roleplaying it as a distressing turn of events in person, so at least a couple were indeed trying to demoralize their opposition by saying things they didn't believe. I think it was a very sophisticated roleplaying choice and one that's devilishly difficult to play. It's relatively easy to be The Bad Guy or The Good Guy and fill that role as it's written. It's tougher to play someone who isn't always honest -- the wolf in sheep's clothing, the brusque and prickly exterior that hides a soft heart, the opportunist who says whatever puts her in the most flattering light -- yet to do it in ways that make it clear it's a conscious choice to lie. That's sometimes mistaken for inconsistencies in character, but in these two cases, it was very easy for those nearby to see the characters were upset even though their words made them sound blithely unconcerned.

I've played GS for a long time, albeit with a pretty big hiatus in the middle there. Yes, I imagine the town as containing more than just a bunch of player characters running around on an empty virtual stage and understand that citizens and merchants like Tykel, Surtey and Dakris are still busy even when Lylia isn't there to see them. I also imagine they're a hell of a lot less powerful in battle than adventurers like us, and Kenstrom's post backs that up. They erected defenses that weren't a tenth as effective as any one of the town's strongest adventurers. Dergoatean killed Walkar with a retaliatory strike from a defensive spell. Sure, Walkar got back up, but that's the kind of power we hold. It isn't that I don't imagine the soldiers and townspeople who also turn out to defend; it's that I imagine the player characters are an extraordinary, elite fighting force within that multitude. We don't need towers to defend; we are the towers.

I'm getting the impression the "go ahead and burn 'em" gambit was a little more effective than intended and bothered you, the player, as you felt it was an OOC rejection of your activities. That was certainly not my intent, and I feel pretty confident saying that about others who espoused that view as well. Roleplaying is more fun when both sides get to participate. That's the thing, though; participation was limited in this specific instance. It was a scenario with fairly sharply delineated roles, and my side's loss for the night was pre-ordained.

I'll reiterate my earlier question: What would you call an appropriate IC response, given that it was impossible to catch you, impossible to stop you and impossible to kill you as you and your very powerful, probably-Althedeus-backed leader went around burning the town's defenses? I'm thinking of that guy who plays a donkey. He's free to RP one if he likes, but he can't make my character believe she's seeing an honest-to-Arkati donkey before her. He gets to make his roleplay choice, but he doesn't govern how I respond. Your character chose to demolish the town's defenses, but he can't tell my character how she should react to that. I generally play well with others and go along with where they're leading me, but every once in a while, I reserve the right to act in a way that might not be entirely predictable. :)

Whatever jerks I was totally useful in those towers even if my arrows mostly landed in you guys.

---

A Taladorian knight dies from your shot!
>exp
Level: 11

<Also, I wanted to preemptively offer a semi-apology. I re-read my post and it kinda sounded like I was saying "Role-playing, you are doing it wrong." I didn't mean my post personally. I'm still on the tear about people not imagining what things are like in context for the character and incorporating way too much OOC knowledge into their character's beliefs. I just don't think that even the majority of adventurers would just shrug off sabotage of that magnitude. I don't think the adventurers should think the town doesn't need the defenses anyways.

Nah, I thought your post came off as impassioned, not as a personal jab. I hope mine read the same way because as a player, I am having an absolute blast with a storyline that isn't so black and white. I love that there's some room for subterfuge, uncertain alliances, sundered friendships and all that other good stuff that comes with a conflict that isn't sharply delineated. You presented a thoughtful glimpse into how you saw the assault on those towers, and I appreciate the new viewpoint. It's one I hadn't considered in as much depth and a view that'll inform my future directions.

As for using mechanics during conflicts, I've almost never done it, but as a player, I'm extremely well aware of some of the Cross followers' actions and know many don't share that view. Maybe it's letting my OOC knowledge bias my IC knowledge, but let's face it: Some characters have a reputation for casting first and asking questions later. My character's well aware of that reputation as she's seen one friend killed and more friends, plus a good two dozen acquaintances, pushed into a void and splashed all over Town Square Central. It doesn't make my character (or me, for that matter) respect them particularly, but it does change how I interact with them. To me, casting limits roleplay, and it's not the route I usually take. If I do, it's typically something I've worked out with the attacker/victim beforehand.

Whatever jerks I was totally useful in those towers even if my arrows mostly landed in you guys.

Ephya

---

Yes, I have had my character in those and on the roof tops and finally felt useful in invasions. They are a useful defense.

I like Gretchen's post very much. I have to admit, I will stop reading when someone starts waxing the past. I get it. Learn from it, it's useful to remember..but you gotta let it go and enjoy what you're doing now. I hear about Bleeds often from certain people. I'm sure he was great...(yes I met him too! WOW) but our fine cast of the here is now don't need history lessons(of the ooc, naming elite names kind). We need some fun with what's going down now!

I wasn't there but it seems like another wonderful opportunity seemed lost in the intelligent, strong opinions of the players. Sad panda. Lylia makes some very good points too. I can't stand against most things that invade let alone any of the Crosslings mechanically. I would be dead. Just dead. I have stopped playing my character as she would be around certain people because of it. That's makes me even more sad.

>>I can't stand against most things that invade let alone any of the Crosslings mechanically. I have stopped playing my character as she would be around certain people because of it. That's makes me even more sad.I would be dead. Just dead.

Play more evil woman so you can handle all the big baddies! Not playing because of those things is a bit counter productive. Just slog through it, you won't be the first or the last. Aiska and Ephya and others find ways to help although they are a lower level then you are. And if you feel you aren't really do anything to help, go off and hunt somewhere and work to improve yourself to the point where you feel you can be useful. You can even use the creatures to vent your feelings and frustrations out on.

<The night the logs were burned, the "good guys" took to the amulet claiming it was "no big deal, because it's not like we use those things" or "it's not like those things have defended the Landing well in the past".>

That upset me IC as well. Ephya was devastated at the loss of the logs. When she was voicing how upset she was.. One person on the steps told her "Well.. you have an axe, don't you"

Someone else took up for her and said "Can you just let her have a moment to be frustrated about it?"

8 mobile towers. 800 logs per tower.
4 gate towers. at least another 500 logs total there.

It takes anywhere from 45 seconds to two minutes of round time.. for ONE chop. It's a huge undertaking, with many man hours devoted.

AND.. I have spent hours in the towers. I have personally seen those towers make a difference in gate defense. Arrows and ballista use alike. That is what they were made for. So us younger folk can make a difference. When the Gryphon Hold was held by Davard.. Ephya never said at any point, "Well.. I don't go there.. what do I care?". She recognized that it needed to be taken back.. not just for the Gryphons (who she really holds no alliance to).. but at least to hinder Davard in his supplying his troops.

I was concerned that Ephya was concerned about the logs. I felt her anguish. I was looking for the perpetrators and would circle then return to the Orphanage. I want to say the intent of some of the amunet comments was "We'll persevere and rebuild." vs. "Pfft...logs", but it could have been portrayed better. It was 3am or so also.

-J of G

Honestly I have seen more rp outside gm npc times in the last year then I have the previos years. Countless times random people have stopped pup and asked him questions or debates/conversations have popped up. I tend to enjoys on a very personal level because it gets more detailed or heated since there isnt a wall of text generated by an army of people.

So while I do believe there are a portion that only 'turn on' cor gm npc in the past I find that a lot less now then before.

Or you could be the cobbler who has no intention of being the hero, but ends up wearing those shoes anyway!

~Taverkin