RP and power/strength/capability 'level' of participating characters

[Volki]

Since in this game leveling is so grueling and people can't be bothered to do it for every character, I like to ignore other characters' levels. Rather, I go by my own observations of the character and the player. Such as, does the player want his character's abilities to match the skills he earned mechanically? Or has he not had the time to level up, and should I assume his character is stronger than the game tells me he is? Usually a good player will make this obvious. I also estimate the character's abilities based on the player's knowledge of combat.

When a player relies solely on mechanics, fights might be in the form of duels (/challenge), as they might not feel comfortable roleplaying a fight. I actually prefer this when a player isn't so knowledgeable regarding real combat. It's an insult to me, as a player, when someone tries to fight my character and pulls unrealistic moves on mine.

I appreciate when other players take the time to learn about their characters before throwing them into combat. The roleplay in this game is very detailed, and you have to play smart to win (unless you want to lose or don't care). You have to know your character's abilities, their weaknesses, and you need to know at least a few basic things about fighting.

I used to get this a lot: "You can't swing a longsword with one hand." There is so much false information floating around about medieval weapons that most people jump on what they see as incorrect and ruin the flow of roleplay with their ignorance. Longswords, even claymores, could be handled with one hand (don't assume I mean you could wield two at once--that would be awkward). The idea that swords were cumbersome is a misconception spawned from overly heroic depictions of knights and warriors and incorrect (boring) handling in movies and TV shows.

My point is, there is so much the common modern person doesn't know about how fighting was or is that, in order to have fun roleplaying, we should educate ourselves before pretending to be what we're not.

And then there's common sense. Your character is not invincible (unless that's part of the plot). Your character, even if a master of whatever, still has a chance of being bested by someone with less skill. In fact, your character should make a few mistakes, at least one catastrophic. There is a character out there whose player claims she is defeatable, but only if you are able to discover her one weakness. If I remember correctly, it's something like... if you surround her and attack her all at once, you'll defeat her. Obviously, since that applies to everyone. But that's her Achilles' heel. So, her invincibility is excused one-on-one. Makes no sense, right?

Mariana mentioned my character Sarras (and referred to her as an "it", luls). Sarras has been a martial artist for most of her life. Yet, most of the times she's in a fight, she completely messes up, and someone else is horribly injured or killed. I go in to most fights thinking she's going to get killed herself, and somehow it's never happened (probably because she's utterly ridiculous). The reason for all of this is I like to keep people entertained, and it's easy to do with a flawed character. Sarras is on the extreme end of flawed, though. Other players don't need to go that far. ;P

[Mariana Xiechai]

Mariana mentioned my character Sarras (and referred to her as an "it", luls).

Yeeeaaaah...I didn't word that very well. But I was trying not to get "Sarras" she mixed up with "Volki" she since I was talking about something you were doing well, not the character.  Sorry.

[yourcharname]

no

[bloodedIrishman]

I voted for medium strength. Here's why.

This is not proscription, just observation based on years of play. This is the balance I think works best to keep Mary Suedom in check but let us have tons of fun. Also, when I say expert, or master, or average, I'm noting discernible levels of experience, skill, ability and talent among the various aspects of life in the game.

New characters should usually start out as average with potential. Usually, not always. Why? Because 90% of the fun lies in the journey. Take my first character. His first combat experience was against Unar. If you don't know who Unar is, let's just say that she was the greatest bounty hunter ever seen in the game. Hands down. I am not exaggerating. Although it was a different play-style then, I'll admit. My Ylian was obliterated. I learned. I became her apprentice, of sorts. It built gradually from there. And it was a blast. Scraping for trias, building skills, fighting as a mercenary, and doing tavern RP for a couple hours a day sometimes. Amazing gaming experience. There's my anecdotal evidence.

There ought to be masters, but they should only be a small proportion of the population. Mastery is lifelong, and becomes an art form almost always. It consumes vast amounts of time, so much so that other skills, talents and aspects of life are left wanting. That is the sacrifice. Unless your character is blessed by the gods with exceptionally long life or supreme talent, then this remains the way it is. Let me say, for a second, that you might think this a 'realism' argument -- but its not. I am using a fact of our lives, and noting its usefulness and importance in a role-playing community as a measure of fun in achievement and keeping a lid on Mary Sue explosions. These explosions happen, and they ruin fun. (See argument: extremes suck).

I used to believe matching mechanics (i.e an actual 100 dagger) with RP stats was the best most balanced route. Then I realized I had a life, and so did everyone else -- thus it doesn't work that way usually. Although I used to enjoy building skills, now I don't do it at all, almost entirely because of how much time my studies consume. I want to login, role-play, have a bunch of fun, and bounce out. I believe this is the case for most of us.

I swear, I'm not making a realism argument. I am taking realism and applying it here for the purpose of balance. There is a distinction. Oh, and I take no issue with making a super powerful character as long as its earned to a large extent and consented by those around you. A villain whose schemes sweep across the world would be an example where this could be fine.

P.S. Kull was my second character. He is three, possibly four haha, years old IRL. He started out average with potential, a fresh adult, and has become a powerful fighter. He earned that -- through role-play. He loses, and wins, and will likely die a true death within a year given his path. I'm not planning that -- it's just likely. So there you have it -- you can play a villain, who earns his power, have tons of fun, and be fine with him or her losing and eventually dying off.