YMA2's Outcast Suggestion

[Conversations With Your Car Alarm]

I am torn on this topic. I play mostly open characters these days. I like conflict, and PvP, and having a bunch of people wanting to kill, fight, argue, whatever with my characters. If it was not with a real problem I have with anyone but me writing anything in my character description I don't care if my characters have a brand or anything like it.

On the other hand I know that this would stifle low level spy rp. I think we have an issue on the server where the mentality is, "I am not doing anything to draw conflict till I get level 30" and I think this would further promote that attitude. I see a low level (read low Bluff of Preform) going into a surface settlement to do some information gathering, I see their disguise being broken, I see them getting chased out, killed, whatever, and then I see them not doing so again until they have higher numbers.

I know that some people play Outcasts without showing it, and that sucks. This is why I am torn. I just don't want to see a return to the old days of I am a surface player/I am a UD player. That was a problem, and I for one prefer our current problem with Outcasts to that one.

EDIT* I also hope that players making threads and complaining, commenting, whatever is not something that drived DEV attention too much. It all seems a bit hamfisted.

[Baron Saturday]

I honestly don't have strong feelings one way or the other when it comes to an IG tag for outcasts. I just like the idea of outcast background options.

[Mouthy Expert]

I thought the point of the outcast background was that yes, everyone does know who you are and they know that you're fantasy turbohitler. Hence why no self respecting settlement will let you become a citizen. If you wanna just be a smalltime criminal on the run, you don't need the outcast background for that.

I think it might help if there were a distinction between outcasts and, say, some guy who was born and raised in Skullport.

[Cybernet21]

I agree 100% with YMA2's posts on this topic,it definetly doesnt need to change but it makes sense some of us go "this is a bit odd"(like me). But i already talked about it in depth on the other thread so my views are already known on the topic but i'll keep on reading.

[Nitro]

The settlement officials make sense, they probably have neat lists of no-go people from their diplomatic contacts (hence why owning residence and shops is a no go, the guys with the lists know), but why would the average Arelithian know anything about heinous murderers in Sembia or Cormyr?

[Kuma]

Not a super huge fan of the specificity of these ideas. As said above, you start off on a boat, there's absolutely no reason whatsoever for people on Arelith to know why you were hurled into the Underdark from backstory. Secondly, being pigeonholed into one of five crimes against humanity or whatever I did to get Jack the RIpper'd into being a cave-dweller seems a little too railroady for me.

I also don't agree there's even really a problem to be fixed here tbh tho so im biased

The settlement officials make sense, they probably have neat lists of no-go people from their diplomatic contacts (hence why owning residence and shops is a no go, the guys with the lists know), but why would the average Arelithian know anything about heinous murderers in Sembia or Cormyr?

Eh, I can't really see Bendir or Guldorand having easy access to envoys from across the seas to figure out that BIlly from Mulhorand was excommunicated from his Temple for inappropriaate mummy touching and now lives twelve miles under the surface. The residence and shops thing always struck me as less "the NPCs know" and more "the outcast isn't that frigging stupid".

[rookie]

Outcast is kind of weird for a background in the first place in that it could apply for "I/my family did bad stuff on Arelith and was/were banished to Andunor" or "I/my family" did bad stuff 3000 miles away from Arelith and wound up in Andunor". Though the latter seems odd that the people of Andunor would let a human with 0 connection to the happenings within Arelith attune to their portal in the first place.

Having just enough infamy to be "welcomed" in Andunor and not be able to participate in politics on the surface but not quite enough to be known to the general populace above seems oddly specific. Maybe that's the way it is supposed to be. Would be nice to hear the DM's take on what the background should encompass (I realize there were quite a few DMs weighing in on becoming an Outcast in a different thread but that's a bit different than starting as one).

[Harasha]

Re. the "Why go to Andunor" thing, the reasons surfacers go to Cordor don't often hold up to too much scrutiny either. That's almost a hallmark of D&D, how many PnP campaigns have started with five random strangers from totally different races, classes and alignment meeting in a tavern and deciding to go on a long series of adventures together? You just got to start the campaign somewhere.

Besides Andunor has seen so many humans go through now I'm sure the word is out this is a cool and somewhat welcoming place to go if you're shady and want adventure. What actually doesn't hold up as much for me is the official description of outcast as a super villain forced underground-- in no small part because you have to start at level 2, so how infamous a villain can you be? But that can be explained creatively too.

But anyway, I've actually come around to the POV that outcasts may as well be left alone after all this discussion, where originally I thought there should be a way to identify them. So sometimes discussions work, on people whose opinions barely matter but still.

[PresidentCthulhu]

The surface vs underdark theme is there though. If you think it through from the monster races standpoint it makes things somewhat silly. I mean if someone takes the outcast background technically they are human monsters. Yet they can roam about freely and they don’t even have to try they just don’t mention they are outcasts. This is unfair to the monster races in a sense they are simply not able to do the same without any logic (as outcast are monsters) and it is unfair to the surface as they have no idea they are dealing with a monster. Not necessarily pvp situation but RP reaction at least.

I understand bluff and all comes with level, but it makes sense that a spy actually have to try. I’m not saying I know how to address this, but when a topic with an outcast theme generates hundreds of posts in days you know something is worth investigating.

[Tarkus the dog]

I am torn on this topic. I play mostly open characters these days. I like conflict, and PvP, and having a bunch of people wanting to kill, fight, argue, whatever with my characters. If it was not with a real problem I have with anyone but me writing anything in my character description I don't care if my characters have a brand or anything like it.

On the other hand I know that this would stifle low level spy rp. I think we have an issue on the server where the mentality is, "I am not doing anything to draw conflict till I get level 30" and I think this would further promote that attitude. I see a low level (read low Bluff of Preform) going into a surface settlement to do some information gathering, I see their disguise being broken, I see them getting chased out, killed, whatever, and then I see them not doing so again until they have higher numbers.

I know that some people play Outcasts without showing it, and that sucks. This is why I am torn. I just don't want to see a return to the old days of I am a surface player/I am a UD player. That was a problem, and I for one prefer our current problem with Outcasts to that one.

EDIT* I also hope that players making threads and complaining, commenting, whatever is not something that drived DEV attention too much. It all seems a bit hamfisted.

im just going to quote this for the sake of it being shown twice, because i feel like this should be indeed shown several times

[FrozenSolid]

The quoted post seems to suggest the action of making the outcast status no longer buyable is hamfisted? I don't really understand how, nothing about the outcast has changed except for the fact you cannot just throw coins and someone and receive the status. I guess it's sort of a way to monitor who is taking it and who is not (Of course unless you choose it as a background at the start) But it seems that this move is doing exactly what most people are talking about, making sure actual outcasts are playing as outcasts before becoming one.

I can sort of see where others are coming from because if you read the Wiki is says the outcast is notorious, and obviously NPCs can identify that and react there fore PCs should have the same ability to know and react.

But what changes if you know this information? Every time you see an outcast near a surface event twenty people with swords move around and stare at them until they leave? Every outcast is different in how they RP and arguably in their notorious status. I think an OOC tag would just become a general tool used to pick out players and without any past RP make automatic assumptions based on a line of OOC available text. Where as the reputation of an outcast should be made IC by IC actions and then be identified that way. Not identified by an OOC tag.

I also think this issue is sort of... Odd, because no one knows who the actual outcasts are. And because they don't know who they are, no one actually knows if the system is even being abused. All you have to work with are suspicions and that is perfect IC knowledge that can be acted upon. And if you DO know the the system is being abused then you can report it, just like any other issue.

[PresidentCthulhu]

The problem has more causes on how everything is RPed though. Being an outcast should exactly mean you choose between under dark and surface. In essence we in the UD don’t even react to humans anymore. Once a surfacer learns undercommon they are indistinguishable from those who picked the background. It is worse even backwards. So while a tag could be abused now you also can rob the choice of the world to choose how to react to this. The IC notorius infamy is not even close to what being an outcast supposed to mean. It is in fact used to avoid choosing a side and interact with both the surface and the underdark, a choice that most races doesn’t even have. And this is not an assumption it is enough to read the posts. I’m not campaigning to add a tag though as I don’t see its effects.

[Cybernet21]

The topic is a IC tag not a OOC tag like (slave) on the side of a name,the suggestion being spoken about specifically states it's a IC brand...

Also,i'm going to share this small part of my opinion again(i just cant stay silent on discussions thet interest me so much ):Yes RP is paramount,and acting like Outcasts with RP is good,problem is for players who might simply not RP hints of the character being an Outcast and simply live like a normal surfacer for example.

The suggestion (or any other form of IC tag) would make so that exploitability of the system gets lower(i mean its good to have safety measures on a posible exploit on a system before it gets out of control,even if it might not happen,right?) and rise immersion for Outcasts who already RP the way it is expected.

Yes the example of 20 people getting swords and staring at the outcast until he leaves might happen and it would be kinda silly/RP disruptive,but that's what would give more immersion,Outcasts knowing they should try to reach settlements only when they are confident of their disguise/hiding/bluff ability or they might get discovered and be hunted down by the society that cast him out.

Imagine something like this:Human Outcasts are basically what drow are to the elves(on a smaller scale but they are seen as monsters),so let's take the example of how the drow currently are,they know they arent welcome on the surface and would be hunted down and chased away if they try to enter a settlement alone yet i've seen inumerous cases of Drow walking around settlements with really good disguises for example and trying to spy on (like during this Queen event a few weeks back when the ladies were being asked questions and a drow was
in the midst of cordor citizens disguised,but was found out unfortunately..for her) ,they wouldnt be mad or foolish enough (the characters) to try and sneak in when they arent confident enough of their hiding/disguise abilities.

Now from a mechanical view,while it may suck that means high levels remember that you dont need very high numbers to disguise sucefully,since most characters dont invest on spot,the Outcasts(Drow on the example) just need to be careful of who they run into,spying should be considered a high risk anyways shouldnt it?

[Durvayas]

But what changes if you know this information? Every time you see an outcast near a surface event twenty people with swords move around and stare at them until they leave? Every outcast is different in how they RP and arguably in their notorious status. I think an OOC tag would just become a general tool used to pick out players and without any past RP make automatic assumptions based on a line of OOC available text. Where as the reputation of an outcast should be made IC by IC actions and then be identified that way. Not identified by an OOC tag.

Not to call you out or anything, but are you suggesting that outcasts should not have to deal with the RP of being stigmatized and possibly cast out of a town if discovered?

This is exactly the kind of thing we can hope for if an outcast, an actual outcast, is trying to hide in a surface town and isn't good enough at disguising or hiding themselves. Preferably hiding a brand marking themselves as such. Thats not an automatic assumption based on OOC info, but an automatic assumption made IC based on IC info. Something entirely rational for people seeing those markings.

Just like how people would make assumptions automatically on seeing a dude on the street with teardrop tattoos(which can signify the person has killed someone or spent time in prison), so too is it entirely reasonable for PCs to make assumptions on seeing someone with brands.

The locals should not be like
"Oh hey its Jeff. How ya doin' buddy?".

They should be like.
"Hey... that guy was cast out. I wonder what he did."
"Who cares, you get those brands by doing something heinous."
"We shouldn't trust him."
"Trust him? Screw that. Grab your torch and pitchforks boys. We don't like their kind around here."

Right now, we get a lot more of the former, because there is no way for a surface PC to know another PC is an outcast, so there are definitely outcasts who have the background, use the UD portals, speak undercommon, and don't spend a lot of time in the UD except to grind.

[One Two Three Five]

I mean, there's people running around with the blood of elemental evil in them, like, what are outcasts supposed to have done that makes it so they're worse, and also identifiable on sight, presumably at level 2 or so?

This is unrelated I guess, it's just something I'm wondering since everyone seems to think outcasts all did something like, Doctor Doom scale

[Iceborn]

That is the concept, isn't it?
The Outcast are supposed to be great criminals that were accused of terrible deeds.

I still go by what Iron said. That's my stance for all this matter.

[FrozenSolid]

But what changes if you know this information? Every time you see an outcast near a surface event twenty people with swords move around and stare at them until they leave? Every outcast is different in how they RP and arguably in their notorious status. I think an OOC tag would just become a general tool used to pick out players and without any past RP make automatic assumptions based on a line of OOC available text. Where as the reputation of an outcast should be made IC by IC actions and then be identified that way. Not identified by an OOC tag.

Not to call you out or anything, but are you suggesting that outcasts should not have to deal with the RP of being stigmatized and possibly cast out of a town if discovered?

This is exactly the kind of thing we can hope for if an outcast, an actual outcast, is trying to hide in a surface town and isn't good enough at disguising or hiding themselves. Preferably hiding a brand marking themselves as such. Thats not an automatic assumption based on OOC info, but an automatic assumption made IC based on IC info. Something entirely rational for people seeing those markings.

Just like how people would make assumptions automatically on seeing a dude on the street with teardrop tattoos(which can signify the person has killed someone or spent time in prison), so too is it entirely reasonable for PCs to make assumptions on seeing someone with brands.

The locals should not be like
"Oh hey its Jeff. How ya doin' buddy?".

They should be like.
"Hey... that guy was cast out. I wonder what he did."
"Who cares, you get those brands by doing something heinous."
"We shouldn't trust him."
"Trust him? Screw that. Grab your torch and pitchforks boys. We don't like their kind around here."

Right now, we get a lot more of the former, because there is no way for a surface PC to know another PC is an outcast, so there are definitely outcasts who have the background, use the UD portals, speak undercommon, and don't spend a lot of time in the UD except to grind.

I am all about playing out the consequences of character choices. But not when those consequences come as a result of OOC info. Like a brand would he IC but where would that even be where it wasn't hidden? The forehead? (Just being silly but legit :3 )

Regardless of the specifics, I just don't like the idea of a tag that says "look a bad guy!" I think it cheapens it, no one has to know your back story or your character. If it says outcast you're a bad guy. Not because of what you've done, but because the text on the description says so. And I think that is lame.

I want people to hate my character cause they deserve to be hated. Not because of a line of text on my description that gets me thrown out without any chance to make a story

[WinkinBlinkin]

I think it would be possible to have a choice of different marks, and perhaps make them so a very small amount of bluff is needed to make them undetectable. For example: a scar around the wrist could indicate a background of theft. A note burn, murder. Skin lesions: disease. Burns: pitchforks and flame sounds. What's more, anyone could optionally perhaps take these, even without last status.

[Mirw]

Dear Every Outcast and non-Outcast!
MIRW statement:
First of all i would like to state this is not against the any player who is any way related to this forum subject. Its no based on any specific IG events or characters however it a general view on the servers gameplay.
1. What is an Outcast?
The outcast is a villian, thats why its casted out from normal society.
2. Why is the character casted out?
A well known crime, why the cities cannot let you vote or own properties, than it is well known to the authorities. If this crime is not well known, you are not an outcast, because the whole subrace is based on a crime which makes it outcasted, with benefits and disadvantages.
3. Whats the benefits/disadvantages?
Outcasts have a wide more open space than normal surface or underdark ones. They can interact with both place defaulty unharmed, since they are hardly tell from a normal surfacer on surface. And in the Ud is hardly tell any human who learnt undercommon who is outcast or not. They can own (as i know) property in the UD and vote aswell. On disadvantage scale, there is not much except the mentioned restriction in ownership.
4. The problem with the outcast... (personal view)
I have read this thread over, and there are many good points both pro and contra this subject. i say there should be no gain where is no pain. Outcast is like an orog who act as half orc on surface, did not say a word in undercommond or act any different than a surface counterpart (can say any race whos model likewise visisble unrecognisable). However they cannot enter towns. Outcast have the jolly joker card to do this, rp there, spy etc.. without hostile npc guards or alarm massive epic hunting parties. The problem is they are an Underdark race without the restriction of an underdark race. The most of UDers i know dont even care the outcasts or surfacers around in the underdark because they cannot tell who is who anymore. (Thats is another topic which i dont wants to summon what this amount of outcast human do with race ratio in the underdark. I know the reasons i have seen worst times during my almost ten years here)
The other problem with this Outcast tag if its not visible, it is not exist. If only IC matters counts than an Outcast is no more than any other evil character who is doing some evil things. But most IC knowledge not spread around all cities and not disbamd your rights to own, maybe got an exile from one town but not the whole society. Outcast is not outcast if no one knows he done something terrible.
About lvl 2 outcasts; your reputation will be stained, by the crimes/actions of your family, former organization, faction ...etc regardless if the allegiations are true or false. They (should be) are hunted by the soceity on the surface if they find them.
5. (my) Solution...
As a hybrid Underdark race it should be handle as one. There is a disguise for reason in this game, and as many stated you dont risk to go into cities (where you are hunted criminal) if you arent feel prepared to being not exposed. My suggestion:
- 1, TAG: the character could get some tag or trigger hostilities from npc's in towns if its disguise roll havent succeed. Disguise could hide its (Outcast) tag (missing fingers, posters around the barracks of the cities, tattoos).
- 2, NO TAG: the character have no tag after its name however trigger the same actions as any other underdarkien race would do in a surface setllement (same rules applies). Local npc hostile, autodrop etc.. Disguise also would help in this to counter it.
- 3, 5%, Major Gift, TOKEN etc: prevent the overflow of the server of the outcast, make it special and unique, or need apply for a token from DM team.
I sincerely hope we can reach an aggreement that will make the game more enjoyable for all of us and this outcast issue will be solved in the way of the every participants benefit.
Thanks.

--

[WinkinBlinkin]

I think it would be possible to have a choice of different marks, and perhaps make them so a very small amount of bluff is needed to make them undetectable. For example: a scar around the wrist could indicate a background of theft. A note burn, murder. Skin lesions: disease. Burns: pitchforks and flame sounds. What's more, anyone could optionally perhaps take these, even without last status.

Corrected from phone: I think it would be possible to have a choice of different marks, and perhaps make them so a very small amount of bluff is needed to make them undetectable, (edit: to reflect the fact they could be covered up relatively easily). For example: a scar around the wrist could indicate a background of theft. A noose burn, murder. Skin lesions: disease. Burns: pitchforks and flame wounds. What's more, anyone could optionally perhaps take these, even without exile status.

I'm imagining a system where any one can choose to take a permanent mark at creation, but outcasts are forced to take one from a restricted list. That way, having such a mark wouldn't be a definite indicator, only a strong signal. It would also move the idea of outcasts away from every one of them being like Hitler. As a previous poster mentioned, this seems unrealistic. They could be more like the kind of outcast thrown out of town and forced into banditry on the roads. Those earning the status through actual in game infamy would not need a mark to be recognised.

[Cybernet21]

I can get behind either solution 1 or 2 Mirw proposed,i dont think 3 is needed. But in the end it's up to the devs if they want change(i know this might sound like i'm trying to push this on the devs but i really am not)i'm fine either way,just sharing my opinion on the topic

[Cybernet21]

Also outcasts are terrible people,they are serial killers,mass torturers,mass murderers,etc.. it's the definition of a Outcast on FR and on Arelith,the example of a guy being thrown our of town and forced into banditry on the roads is not of an Outcast but of a simple bandit/highwayman

[azrael_athing]

Also outcasts are terrible people,they are serial killers,mass torturers,mass murderers,etc.. it's the definition of a Outcast on FR and on Arelith,the example of a guy being thrown our of town and forced into banditry on the roads is not of an Outcast but of a simple bandit/highwayman

This individual has a degree of notoriety among the populace, whether through actions of their own, family connections, disfigurement, or being falsely accused, their identity is wildly known and rumours about them persists to this day.

Our own Wiki actually includes wrongly-accused individuals. So they are not ALL henious people.

Given the description on the forum I suppose for example, one could roleplay a falsly accused individual forced to pretend to be a mass-murdurer in order to fit into the new society where it is now forced to live.

That said, their notority would still be well-spread.

[Yma23]

On the other hand I know that this would stifle low level spy rp. I think we have an issue on the server where the mentality is, "I am not doing anything to draw conflict till I get level 30" and I think this would further promote that attitude. I see a low level (read low Bluff of Preform) going into a surface settlement to do some information gathering, I see their disguise being broken, I see them getting chased out, killed, whatever, and then I see them not doing so again until they have higher numbers.

I know that some people play Outcasts without showing it, and that sucks. This is why I am torn. I just don't want to see a return to the old days of I am a surface player/I am a UD player. That was a problem, and I for one prefer our current problem with Outcasts to that one.

Yeah, this is a really good point. And definatly a reason for not bringing this in, also there's the simple fact that some people won't care if you're an outcast anyway! So it might all be a bit of a waste of time.

Corrected from phone: I think it would be possible to have a choice of different marks, and perhaps make them so a very small amount of bluff is needed to make them undetectable, (edit: to reflect the fact they could be covered up relatively easily). For example: a scar around the wrist could indicate a background of theft. A noose burn, murder. Skin lesions: disease. Burns: pitchforks and flame wounds. What's more, anyone could optionally perhaps take these, even without exile status.

Interesting ideas! I like the idea of it being only a small amount of bluff too. I'd say though that it'd be best not to be too specific as to the sort of 'marks' if they are recognisable? So that people would have freedom to roleplay what they wanted there. What I mean is - instead of saying 'this man is missing his little finger, which is indicative that he is a murderer!' It could be 'This man is marked as a murderer' so that one can rp the mark as a missing finger, or a tattoo, or a brand, or whatever reall.

I want people to hate my character cause they deserve to be hated. Not because of a line of text on my description that gets me thrown out without any chance to make a story

So I see a lot of where you're coming from, Frozen, and even if I'm not sure I 100% agree with it, I at least 'get' it. But this sentence here is something that I can't quite comprehend.

What you say is that you want to play a character who is judged for their In Game actions, not anything else about them?

That's fine. That makes a lot of sense. In principle I support it entirely.

But surely the way to do this is... not to play an outcast?

I mean all outcast really gets you is easy access to the hub, undercommon, and the ability to vote in UD elections. Two of these are pretty minor in the grand scheme of things, and undercommon can be learned. And you can still -earn- the trust of underdarkers through vile and evil deeds, it's just a bit more work. But that's fine, as it's what you're after.

But if you want a character who is going to be judged as 'Evil' right off the boat then... surely... outcast is the way to go? And having that tag makes sense?

Again I can sort of see the argument - especialy as the 'spy' angle. And I tottaly think if we do introduce a 'tag' for outcast it should be in someone's description (and thus not immedatly jumping out at folk) and also that it should be possible - even easy - to hide. But the argument of, 'I don't want outcasts to be marked because I don't want to be cast out from places.' Is a little odd to me.

[WinkinBlinkin]

Interesting ideas! I like the idea of it being only a small amount of bluff too. I'd say though that it'd be best not to be too specific as to the sort of 'marks' if they are recognisable? So that people would have freedom to roleplay what they wanted there. What I mean is - instead of saying 'this man is missing his little finger, which is indicative that he is a murderer!' It could be 'This man is marked as a murderer' so that one can rp the mark as a missing finger, or a tattoo, or a brand, or whatever really.

I like the idea of it being open to people as to what mark they have, but I was thinking more from the perspective of having there being a variety of marks available, some vague, some specific, and letting people choose, and choose how to interpret them. Most people are going to make the assumption that permanent markings are a sign of being an outcast, but it needn't be that way. You could have a list of about twenty permanent markings that you could choose from at creation (having to take at least one if you were an outcast). If you were missing a finger, it could mean anything you want. It could mean you had sworn vengeance against the evil villain who took it to taunt your mother as he pillaged your village (non-outcast), or it could mean you had stolen from a thieves guild and were no longer welcome anywhere on the surface where they operated, and that any who associated with you risked death (outcast).

Heck, you could choose a whole range of unalterable things at creation that could go straight into your description: height, eye colour, body type. All the stuff people moan about not seeing in a description.

I'm just kicking out ideas here for the hell of it though!