Arelith: Shaking Up The In Game Landscape.

[OverTheSeaToSkye]

We will never be all on the same page. That's a given. Which is why EACH of us is tasked with trying to be the change we want to see. It may not work. You may never get your "way". But that's okay, because also

There is no winning this game.

Also if it worked really well on other servers, good for them. This is not those servers, and continually comparing them does a disservice to -us-.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

Lore should be an inspiration and a guideline, and there are some tenets that are generally accepted by everyone - Tyr is god of justice, Bane is god of tyranny, etc. But I'd be hesitant to ever say a selunite is obligated and "morally bound" to put an end to a Sharran threat.

I mean, I do agree with you, I'd just never say it like that. Or never say it so strongly.

I also think using lore as motivation risks a lot of depth for the sake of canon and consistency. Surely we can disregard lore as motivation if there are other more substantive reasons at play (i.e. the selunite and Sharran are brothers.)

[DaddysLE]

You should've spent more time IG than posting on this on the forums.

You are not going to change anything by posting this here, beyond inciting (largely useless) arguments.

And if you think 'lore elitism' isn't coming onto the forums to tell everyone the entire server is playing forgotten realms wrong, you are too far gone to have this conversation with.

This.

And when the same circular reasoning and ranting that I've seen in this forum topic are present in the way a character interacts ingame? Well.

Remember that people play arelith for fun. Listening to someone foam at the mouth in a circular argument is only entertaining until the popcorn runs out.

[Aodh Lazuli]

I think the first point is kinda daft when people can't decide on which cosmology is being used.

As to the rest... Well. I am also completely convinced of my own correctness.

[FrozenSolid]

Lore should be an inspiration and a guideline, and there are some tenets that are generally accepted by everyone - Tyr is god of justice, Bane is god of tyranny, etc. But I'd be hesitant to ever say a selunite is obligated and "morally bound" to put an end to a Sharran threat.

I mean, I do agree with you, I'd just never say it like that. Or never say it so strongly.

I also think using lore as motivation risks a lot of depth for the sake of canon and consistency. Surely we can disregard lore as motivation if there are other more substantive reasons at play (i.e. the selunite and Sharran are brothers.)

Yeah, I agree the last part could really be an interesting twist. But that is something that makes sense. The moral turmoil between following the demands of your god, and contesting and fighting your own blood brother? That's awesome!

What I'd disagree with is the moral obligation part, IG of course, I think that when you choose to follow a god, specifically being a cleric or someone that draws on power from that god then you are obligated to follow through with that gods stances or change in some way that would make it adhere to that god.

With the brother example, The Selunite would have to choose~ Oppose his brother? Or break away from his god? And that's the cross roads and drama of RP. There has to be that choice

And if you don't want that choice? then don't play a character that's built on following a god that presents a code of conduct or is against something like that.

[cptcuddlepants]

Saying that lore should dictate how a character acts and reacts suggests that all characters must act a certain way, without taking factors such as personality, ideals, quirks, and mannerisms into consideration.

A character is not their profession or their religion or their race.

Profession, religion, and race influence a character, but they do not define them.

[FrozenSolid]

I can see that, but I look at it like,

Lore helps define that characters ideals, quirks, and mannerisms.

Like my character hates half orcs. Why? Because Lore says they are half breed orcs who more often then not leaning towards Savage. This isn't always the case I just choose her to be racists, and lore says that is okay and something that makes sense.

[FrozenSolid]

We will never be all on the same page. That's a given. Which is why EACH of us is tasked with trying to be the change we want to see. It may not work. You may never get your "way". But that's okay, because also

There is no winning this game.

Also if it worked really well on other servers, good for them. This is not those servers, and continually comparing them does a disservice to -us-.

Arelith is made up of "Refugees" from all sorts of servers! And I think it's perfectly alright to say "This was a cool concept where I used to play I think it could work here."

[cptcuddlepants]

I can see that, but I look at it like,

Lore helps define that characters ideals, quirks, and mannerisms.

Like my character hates half orcs. Why? Because Lore says they are half breed orcs who more often then not leaning towards Savage. This isn't always the case I just choose her to be racists, and lore says that is okay and something that makes sense.

I'm dealing with a problem of not being awake enough to actually make sense but I'll try to explain where I'm coming from:

Why is your character racist against half-orcs? Simply because lore says they're usually savages? What about other races that tend towards savagery? Does she hate them as well? Does she hate them simply because they're savage, or was she wronged by half-orcs to give her a poor opinion of them...

Sure, you can have lore dictate your character - but that generally leads to a flat, two-dimensional character with flimsy motivations. I'll try to explain later, when I'm not so tired, but I've got a lot of thoughts on lore adherence and lore dictating characters and their behaviors over their personalities.

[FrozenSolid]

Well if I described a character like a recipe, I'd say it's like a "Spice" to their character. It's a platform for conflict. Not every trait is going to be major.

So the argument for why they do that kind of goes back to Lore~ in the example of being racists to half orcs, maybe the character just finds them disgusting? Believing they are more orc blood then human they sterotype them as all the same instead of having an open mind.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

What if you're from Thesk and not only accept half-orcs but orcs too?

[Obsidian]

How long has Arelith been around now? Have our number of players fluctuated over that span of years? Is our current player base on the high side of numbers including a large influx of new members and old returns?

The point? There is a reason our server has survived and done so well these many years. Coming in from 'other servers' and telling the player base 'they are doing things wrong' seems a large contradiction to all that we have here. And you may not believe that is what you are doing in your posts but I can promise you that from the other side that is what many of us are seeing.

People play a certain way because they either enjoy that way, have a concept that gives them a perfectly good reason to play that way, or perhaps a secret motivation that you can not see on surface of dealing with them. What if your Selunite is a Sharran but hiding it? You don't know that and fussing at them for 'doing it wrong' will not get you far. What if for example you have a NG dwarf that is motherly of all her kin, even the ones that she feels need a smack upside the head and make her furious on a daily basis, but still has been seen 'having tea (whiskey)' with the most evil on the server? Does that mean said dwarf is being played wrong because the player choses to interact with these most evil? Or is there a chance there is a motive there that can not be seen openly?

You do not know what all goes on just from the surface looks of something. You want it explained to you, then that seems like something you would need to take up with the individual player. And I have a feeling that most are not going to be willing to share information like that about their toon because, sadly, things like ooc information get metagamed even by people who don't mean to do it.

[The GrumpyCat]

To keep in mind is that Forgotten Realms Lore was not made for a Massive Game format, but rather for Pen and Paper format.

The difference between the two is staggering.

Pen and Paper
* Sessions take place in a handfull of hours, about once a week, or even just as a one off.
* Player group numbers in single didgets, often people who know each other
* A DM runs a campeign for this group of small players
* The Players have infiniate ways of effecting the world, with NPCs they can do what they want with.

Massive Games (NWN servers + some LARPS)
* take place over a course of days, or are readily available whenever.
* Player groups can number in the hundreds
* A handful of DMs dealing with vast numbers of players.
* Players have limited ways of effecting the world, to allow it to be relitivly stable for other players.

To use a simple example: If I want Bob the Banite to burn down an orphange and dance on the ruins - I can probably do that in PnP. My fellow players will likely be playing characters that at least vaugly mesh with mine. The DM can give me complete attention and may allow me to change the world in such a manner.

If I want to have an in depth conversation about why Bob the Banite worships Bane - it's harder to do that in PnP, because DM time is limited, there's likely to be a plot to follow, and it's likely that, frankly, most of the other characters don't really care.

There's more examples I can give, but I hope with just some thought, you can see where I'm coming from when I say that aspects of FR Lore simply do not, cannot, work in a MMO roleplaying environment.

[Cerk Evermoore]

Person you think is a lawful good Sunite is actually a chaotic evil Sharrian. Can't predict what people are doing because you are not actually in their heads.

[Jagel]

I sympathize with the op but I cannot see a way where any sort of required knowledge of lore/background could be implemented and enforced in a meaningful way. At all. Not least because there's a massive amount of FR material that's both vague and sometimes inconsistent.

The example of buddies from opposing faiths: you can call out the heresy and hope to spawn some good rp. Perhaps there might be a valid reason for the alliance? If it's an alliance based on OOC convenience and clique stuff the problem isn't that they lack in depth knowledge of the lore behind each faith. Either rp with other people or report them if you find they're detrimental to the rp community (and leave it to the DMs to determine if the claim holds ground).

[cptcuddlepants]

Okay, now that I'm actually awake and a lot more coherent:

There's nothing that's inherently bad with having a character whose actions are dicated by lore. However, the reason of "because lore states ____" (which usually translates into "all X are Y, that's just how they are!" or similar when discussed IC) doesn't always make for the most engaging character to interact with.

Stereotypes/archetypes/"stock characters" are good for NPCs, or background characters. If you know the lore, you'll know what to expect, because lore dictates their actions and defines them. And for a background character, you don't really need to know more than that because they probably aren't going to wind up in situations that'll require more from them than "this character is a (insert race/religion/profession) so they will behave like (insert appropriate behavior.)"

It can work for a PC to some extent, but the moment they get into a situation that challenges their beliefs about some topic or another, their identity will start to fall apart because they're defined by lore, not their personality, ideals, beliefs, and feelings.

[FrozenSolid]

Hmm, I see that, I would still argue however that lore gives characters personality, ideals, and beliefs, as well as feelings. Or at least sets the ground work for them. Of course nothing is concrete, but this is a good guideline to stick near.

Maybe this makes sense, Ideals, beliefs, Feelings, etc, if you are not drawing those things from Lore based narratives, what are you drawing them from? OOC ideals, beliefs and feelings?

For example, Lolthites are evil. If you base your characters feelings off of an OOC influence, you might extend a Lolthite mercy, and understanding believing that a drow can be good and religion doesn't define them.

But it does. So you need to base your characters personality, ideals, beliefs, and feelings off of a lore accurate response.

Touching on that~ I played a drow once that was a Lolthite. Her entire back story, personality, beliefs, emotions, were all based off of lore. And the root of my characters conflict, also lore based, was the servers moderate player base of Elistraee based "Good" drow that were in stark contrast to the evil drow.

So there was a lot of cool conflict. I set the stage with lore based everything, then let the RP determine which way she went. Was it super unusuall? A Lolthite wanting to untangle herself from the "Web" of her faith? Yes. But everything fit in line with lore so it was easy for players to identify "Oh- this is what's happening" and issue my character a response that followed lore.

(Ultimately she was betrayed and brutally killed before ever fully shaking the Lolthite faith, go figure )

But the important thing is: The response from other people to my character was entirely Lore based. No one let none Lore affiliated emotions, feelings, ideals, or beliefs interfere with their reaction to my characters.

She surfaced with a companion stating she sought to change her ways. Guess what, Lolthites are evil back stabbing dirt bags. She received no "Oh oh you poor thing, come to us let us love you~" Which is good because that would have been blergh~ So all the RP followed a lore based guideline meaning despite a sort of wild plot for a drow, everyone could still understand the conflict and connect with the plot because it was based on common knowledge lore.

If Lore did not guide this interaction and feelings, emotions, personalities were based off of OOC influence I figure the moment she stepped onto the surface she would have been told she's perfect, loved, and she doesn't have to do evil and she can come and be freeee!

(That probably would have been overboard mush resulting in her annihilating everyone that spoke to her)

But that's what I'm getting at. Even if a character did have positive interactions with "Good" drow before. 99% of drow are still evil, even in Lore. So you were -always- treated with severe apprehension if you were drow even if you were "Good". Because if everyone had just accepted my character there wouldn't have been conflict. The entire plot would have been flat and blergh.

Also~ I think lore based guidelines help make things simpler and more clean cut. It doesn't take away from immersion, or characters interesting qualities etc, but it does help us cut through a lot of the extra details by being able to make assumptions based on general lore knowledge... If this makes sense... Trying to explain this idea is wierd

Like Book like characters can always be very in depth. You can really feel them, and become connected to them. They might have a lot of complexities, but all of those complexities fit in with the world that character lives in. So you don't have to wonder about that, and you don't have to untangle 100 million side questions you can cut it right to the main plot and right to the main story.

I think that it is a very real thing to take a 3 dimensional exciting character, and bend the lore is so many ways your character is so complex and turned that they cannot be figured out.

Just using Elves as an example because they are a race I consider that Lore adherence is very important.

" So... Goblins are evil right? You would help us kill goblins?"
Elf > "Well, goblins "Can" be evil. But are all goblins evil? Maybe these goblins are just on rough times?"

"There's a lone drow on the surface! Join us and help us kill him!"
Elf> "Well, maybe that drow is just seeking a better life? Maybe he's a free spirit ...."

There's so many characters that want to be philosophers when the response is really simple. 99% of goblins are evil. Unless goblin proves otherwise, then an accurate lore response is to be hostile to them (Not necessarily kill them but hostile.)

(Again just using an elf because they are a race I consider to be more simplistic in lore alignment nothing to do with your IG Character!)

[Thron]

If you're playing a character that cannot, through any means, be dissuaded from doing something, you're not really playing a character, you're playing a cardboard cutout with a frowny face written on it

I love how many threads I get that I can pull this quote out for. Lore, religion, all that? Great motivations, but theres more to a character than that. You dont know their history, that elf helping drow? Maybe Myon's screwed them over and the Drow have always given them work and shelter? That Sharrarn hanging with the Selunite? Maybe ones quietly trying to convert the other, or both? Then you add in that not everyone has a cleric or paladin-esque view of the gods...

[Cortex]

Your character, in turn, can think whatever they want of the sharrans/selunites hanging out together, call them traitors, heretics, or what have you.

[FrozenSolid]

To keep in mind is that Forgotten Realms Lore was not made for a Massive Game format, but rather for Pen and Paper format.

The difference between the two is staggering.

Pen and Paper
* Sessions take place in a handfull of hours, about once a week, or even just as a one off.
* Player group numbers in single didgets, often people who know each other
* A DM runs a campeign for this group of small players
* The Players have infiniate ways of effecting the world, with NPCs they can do what they want with.

Massive Games (NWN servers + some LARPS)
* take place over a course of days, or are readily available whenever.
* Player groups can number in the hundreds
* A handful of DMs dealing with vast numbers of players.
* Players have limited ways of effecting the world, to allow it to be relitivly stable for other players.

To use a simple example: If I want Bob the Banite to burn down an orphange and dance on the ruins - I can probably do that in PnP. My fellow players will likely be playing characters that at least vaugly mesh with mine. The DM can give me complete attention and may allow me to change the world in such a manner.

If I want to have an in depth conversation about why Bob the Banite worships Bane - it's harder to do that in PnP, because DM time is limited, there's likely to be a plot to follow, and it's likely that, frankly, most of the other characters don't really care.

There's more examples I can give, but I hope with just some thought, you can see where I'm coming from when I say that aspects of FR Lore simply do not, cannot, work in a MMO roleplaying environment.

I would disagree, I think that lore can easily be enforced specifically from DMs utilizing NPC characters to create In game situations that address lore, and make sure it remains relevant specifically in general formats. This is easier done when there is an established NPC Mindset that can be affected of course by RP

For an example scenario, in Cordor a well known necromancer is buying apples from the local fruit vendor for whatever reason... A Dm played commoner identifies this necromancer having seen him do his works before and goes "AHHH!!!" engaging the necromancer in a brief dialog. A few minutes later an angry mob has gathered to attempt to Lynch the necromancer! Meaning the guards need to step in, or the necromancer needs to run, or adventurers need to decide the necromancer is more valuable then the commoners.

What lore building would a scenario like this do?

It enforces that fact that being a necromancer is not a casual thing you just decide to pick up.

It also enforces the idea that even though you might be a "Good" (Hnngh) necromancer, you should expect to be treated with severe apprehension and disbelief unless the character has performed some great marvel that warrants an acceptance to the general rule.

Also~ It shows that Cordor's population might be alright with unsavory characters in the streets if it brings gold, but out right undead raising? That's a line Cordorians won't cross

This is all "Hypothetical" but I think serves as an agreeable example of how a DM might use the in game world to make sure lore IN THE GENERAL SENSE remains relevant and not overlooked.

I'd poke again at General. Hard line lore critic isn't what needs to be done, but universal generals I think are important to be maintained. It's again, keeping everyone at least somewhat on the same page.

I think that Lore can easily be maintained with "Micro events" maybe an hour, or two hour interaction that carries lasting implications but isn't crazy long. It can still get the blood pumping and heart racing

[Seven Sons of Sin]

There's so many characters that want to be philosophers when the response is really simple. 99% of goblins are evil. Unless goblin proves otherwise, then an accurate lore response is to be hostile to them (Not necessarily kill them but hostile.)

(Again just using an elf because they are a race I consider to be more simplistic in lore alignment nothing to do with your IG Character!)

... this argument sounds very familiar.

I just wanted to post my OOC perspective about evil deities and what it means to be a /good/ aligned character. I've learned that even if you serve an "Evil" god you don't have to be evil aligned but I feel like I see a lot of "I have these powers, or I serve these gods, but I just exclude the bad parts that don't suit the character" and I think that's not an accurate way to play given how active the deities are in the physical world of Faerun and how they influence characters for good or evil.

Just a word of advice, but you're going to burn out or lash out if you keep up the crusade.

[FrozenSolid]

If you're playing a character that cannot, through any means, be dissuaded from doing something, you're not really playing a character, you're playing a cardboard cutout with a frowny face written on it

I love how many threads I get that I can pull this quote out for. Lore, religion, all that? Great motivations, but theres more to a character than that. You dont know their history, that elf helping drow? Maybe Myon's screwed them over and the Drow have always given them work and shelter? That Sharrarn hanging with the Selunite? Maybe ones quietly trying to convert the other, or both? Then you add in that not everyone has a cleric or paladin-esque view of the gods...

I'd site my post referring Cpt Cuddle pants.

I don't think it matters if Myon has been rude to you. Elves and drow are blood enemies, this is a lore based blood feud that has more to do then personal feelings. It's a hate, and racisms that burns so deeply it overrides "logic"

Sharrans and selunites... Maybe if they weren't divine followers, but if they are they should be furthering their gods agenda. The motivations their gods demand they follow would almost instantly separate them. Not saying they have to try and kill each other every time they meet, but it's unreasonable to say a Sharran Clergy would find a Selunite clergy agreeable, and work together or with each other unless there's some wild threat both want to stop.

But like my post to Cpt cuddle, I think that constantly breaking the normal RP barriers and lore adherence can quickly throw a character so out of whack they cannot be understood.

But hey if the RP makes sense, and they have a strong lore reason for why they would break the norm? Go for it. It makes for good stories. But if the character is breaking all the norms and is just wild but still wants to be accepted as normal? I find that to be hard to think about.

So I guess i'd touch at too- if your elf is going to side with drow. Do not expect other elves to like you
Don't expect other surfacers to like you

If your selunite is pals with Sharrans. Expect the selunite response to outcast you or not be friendly. Don't expect them to break lore for your character.

[FrozenSolid]

There's so many characters that want to be philosophers when the response is really simple. 99% of goblins are evil. Unless goblin proves otherwise, then an accurate lore response is to be hostile to them (Not necessarily kill them but hostile.)

(Again just using an elf because they are a race I consider to be more simplistic in lore alignment nothing to do with your IG Character!)

... this argument sounds very familiar.

I just wanted to post my OOC perspective about evil deities and what it means to be a /good/ aligned character. I've learned that even if you serve an "Evil" god you don't have to be evil aligned but I feel like I see a lot of "I have these powers, or I serve these gods, but I just exclude the bad parts that don't suit the character" and I think that's not an accurate way to play given how active the deities are in the physical world of Faerun and how they influence characters for good or evil.

Just a word of advice, but you're going to burn out or lash out if you keep up the crusade.

I'm not going to burn out. I actually have a lot of fun on Arelith and have a lot of players who poke me saying they like the directions my threads have taken. It leads to a lot of good discussion about lore and character development etc. And I don't mind talking about it.

I'm also not sure if some people understand why i'm posting. I am not typing in frenzied rants desperately hoping people agree with me or I get angry. I'm legit posting my opinions on things and discussing different ideas. It's been productive and I like the arguments some people have made.

[One Two Three Five]

I would disagree, I think that lore can easily be enforced specifically from DMs utilizing NPC characters to create In game situations that address lore

Having DM'd pnp, and other servers: You are vastly overestimating how much your average dm, I really think, is going to want to basically make up rp 'traps' to play lore police in. Gonna echo a previous post: If you keep up this line of 'people are hypothetically doing things I don't like, they should be forced to change' ideal, you're going to end up hating the server. No matter what ends up changed.

[FrozenSolid]

I joined Arelith with my opinions premade and enjoy the server a lot. If I didn't like Arelith I wouldn't take the time to share my ideas that I think could improve it.

On The DM side. This is not about Lore policing or making Traps. If you're a known necromancer, why do you think commoners the common person, would just be okay with you buying fruit at their local fruit stand? A Dm wields the "World" and can set the stage for interactions affect how players perceive things. I think that if a DM began Rping NPCS as being angry towards known necromancers you would suddenly see a player organization formed that began to hunt these necromancers.

If RP is a boulder, the DM rolles the boulder up to the cliff. Then it's up to the players to decide to push the RP boulder down the cliff and follow whatever happens.