The grand balance of good vs evil

[sardit]

Actually my source is roman writings i studied latin and had to translate that stuff.

[Zan]

You make a good point, Zanzi ... being ignored is something which good characters have to live with just as well. I've especially noticed this with my guard character. It's his job to uphold the law but he can't do anything but beg someone's ears off to stop breaking it, if the other one won't co-operate at all.

I think a second problem is the quick returns from the death realm and usually when two characters have had their differences 'settled' by sending one of them to that place, the fight continues as soon as the loser returns from the land of the dead. I'm confident that this problem will become less and less apparent when the Death Realm is expanded and becomes even harder to get out of.

Personally I always stay away from the area where I was defeated for a while or at least admit my defeat and leave the other one alone unless he doesn't want to be left alone. Even when I've been defeated in an unfair way or through sheer bad luck and I know I could easily go back and kill the other one. I don't like it when others act like death is nothing but an unasked for teleportation, so I make a point not to do it with others either.

[Pestilence]

hmm so the experts from the discovery channel are all wrong? Now that is interesting.

Anyhow we are getting awfully of topic as the roman empire isn't the main topic here. Point is with their militaristic character they aren't a good template to build planeshift on unless the history would be made a lot more violent. So further discusion on how violent exactly it was wouldn't help

I know ignoring is a problem. Thats why I am afraid of misuse of gamemechanics. Like for example the picking up. If it's roleplayed well and you give them a chance to get it back it wouldm't be to bad, but there are plenty who just go like "Muhahaha" and run away ignoring the person. Thats also part of what I mam saying with the guards. The gamemechanics aren't so far that the guards do anything so evil persons sometimes just ignore they are standing next to one when wanting to kill someone.

Ofcourse good or neutral people are guilty of this aswell and in the beginning it was one of my biggest frustration that there wasn't a DM telling people they were being silly. Like for example Meriner at one point believed a fenki was spawn from the deathrealm and had to be vanquished. The roleplaying was very nice till we roleplayed a fight. She claimed to dodge every single of my attacks with ease and this was before the last wipe and so I was fully maxed back then. I didn't think it was enough to make a deal out of it but that is kinda annoying becuase unless of godly intervention or anything that would just not be realistic.

[zanzibar]

Anyhow we are getting awfully of topic as the roman empire isn't the main topic here. Point is with their militaristic character they aren't a good template to build planeshift on unless the history would be made a lot more violent. So further discusion on how violent exactly it was wouldn't help

The Romans were one violent civilization among many.  Just look at the past 100 years of war, or colonialism, or the inquisitions, or the crusades, or this that and the other thing.

[Hatchnet]

Zanzibar is right the Romans were mearly one violent civilization among many. They were also the least violent of the ancient world. Hell there are few civilizations in todays world that have a less violent society than the Romans. So they make an execelent template (especialy since we already have an arena). Look this is a fantasy world; we can leave out the stuff we don't like such as slavery (it wasn't seen as an evil during Roman times it was simply the norm).

As for ignoreing another player because you don't want to roleplay with someone who plays an evil charecter. Well guess what Zanzibar was right when he said that those who roleplay good were often the first to speak out of character. Of course this does not mean that they were the first to be out of character. Many less than scrupulus players have preformed some less than scrupulus acts simply because the people they were trying to roleplay with chose to ignore them.

[Pestilence]

They were also the least violent of the ancient world. Hell there are few civilizations in todays world that have a less violent society than the Romans

Exuse me? They razed entire cities for oposing them and conquered the whole mediteranean and imposed their rule on people. Not to mention that making career in Rome useally ment going into the army first. Just think of how Caesar started. This ment a war every time someone ambitious wanted to gain power.

Now not saying everything is fine and dandy right now and that democracy is perfect but to say it's more violent then the roman culture is simply not true. That are wars are more destuctive is true but that doesn't mean there is more violence, just that it has more influence becuase of it's devastating effects.

[Zan]

I'm sure you're all right one way or another, Rome was a huge empire with many many different people living under it's rule. They have been there for many decades so I'm certain that there were very peaceful years as well as violent years filled with war. It's hard to pinpoint a single trait onto an empire that large and that old, besides I don't really get the relevance with Yliakum.

Yliakum will develope its own culture depending on how we, the players, act.

[Hatchnet]

Pestilence stop colouring your perceptions with modern concepts. Then go and compare Rome with some of the groops from the same general time period. Before we have Egypt, Persia, Macedonia, Greece. After you have The Hunic empire, Persia (again) the Holy Roman empire, The Mongol Empire. Groups that existed at the same time (and were often conqured by) Rome were the Visigoths and Ostrogoths, The Germanians, The Anglos, The Saxons, the Galls. In truth the two primary reasons for Roman expansion were defence and wealth. O and Julias Ceaser started out as a Priest of Jupiter and even attained the rank of High Priest before his ambitions took him to the army.

Next lets compare Rome to modern and relativly modern civilizations such as the former Soviet Union, early comunist China, the many nations of central and south Africa, Cuba, the many nations of central and south America. "Rome was certainly barbaric by modern standards" (sarcasm)

Yes Zan; Yliakum will develop it's own unique civilization over time. However when comparing to real world civilzations Rome is by far the closest candidate. I think we all need to learn to take into acount that this is our world and it will deveolpe acording to how we behave within it. We also need to take into acount that as of yet we have nothing of what it will be except for a very great deal of preconcived notions.

[zanzibar]

Zanzibar is right the Romans were mearly one violent civilization among many. They were also the least violent of the ancient world. Hell there are few civilizations in todays world that have a less violent society than the Romans. So they make an execelent template (especialy since we already have an arena). Look this is a fantasy world; we can leave out the stuff we don't like such as slavery (it wasn't seen as an evil during Roman times it was simply the norm).

As for ignoreing another player because you don't want to roleplay with someone who plays an evil charecter. Well guess what Zanzibar was right when he said that those who roleplay good were often the first to speak out of character. Of course this does not mean that they were the first to be out of character. Many less than scrupulus players have preformed some less than scrupulus acts simply because the people they were trying to roleplay with chose to ignore them.

I have a theory on why it happens:

People who roleplay good characters tend to be self righteous.

People who roleplay evil characters tend to be openminded.

[Pestilence]

Hatchnet first of don't tell me what to do. I respect that it's your opinion even if I don't agree with it and I would hope you would do the same.

I don't believe violence has anything to do with "modern concept". Was that timepriod a very violent time? Thats not a very good argument to say the romans were not. Anyhow looking at those other civilizations I think the romans definately aren't coming out better. The macedonians for example did conquer but they absorbed the cultures of the conquered terrotories making the battles a lot more political of who was the ruler then with the romans as they imposed not only themselves as rulers but also imposed their culture in many areas.

And Julius Ceasar was a priest? Like I didn't know that, but who is coloring this with modern concepts now? the priesthood he had was a title and a way to get power just as his fame as a general was. If anything it proves that the roman culture was more violent becuase there were no eyebrows lifted for a priest to lead armies to war where in most civilizations that you named it would have.

But tell me this. What reason is there for the Yliakum civilization to be as violent as the romans? In the romans case there was the fact of how they started out and the fact politicians had to have served in the military to have any weight and the many other violent civilizations in that timeperiod and the constant risk of uprisings against them.

But in Yliakum there is no other civilization. There is no strife between the races so uprisings like that don't happen either so where would the strife be coming frm then? The monsters outside the city? Well if they were a thread I would imagineto turn against eachother to be even more of a crime as communities tend to became more tight in hardships instead of turning on eachother

[Hatchnet]

Pestilence you realy should stop posting about Rome and Roman culture as it is made painfully obvious by your last post that you actualy know very little about it. And yes you are colouring your perceptions of Rome with your own perceptions of right and wrong.

This statement proves both points quite dramaticly

And Julius Ceasar was a priest? Like I didn't know that, but who is coloring this with modern concepts now? the priesthood he had was a title and a way to get power just as his fame as a general was. If anything it proves that the roman culture was more violent becuase there were no eyebrows lifted for a priest to lead armies to war where in most civilizations that you named it would have.

[Suno_Regin]

He has a point...he wasn't a priest in any way. I don't know much about this at all, but I can tell you right now he wasn't a priest.

[Hatchnet]

He has a point...he wasn't a priest in any way. I don't know much about this at all, but I can tell you right now he wasn't a priest.

Actualy he was. In fact Ceaser's father paid a hefty sum of money so that he could enter the priesthood early on instead of have to imediatly join the army for two years when he came of age. Ceaser was in his thirtys when he moved from the Priesthood of Jupiter to the army and lost almost everything his position within the priesthood had afforded him; includeing his recognition as a Priest of Jupiter.

[sardit]

* sardit grins "i agree that the roman empire would be a nice template, but if you go back enough in time ANY civilisation sprouted from a militaristic violent period."

Hence imho Planeshift might be a bit more violent without people thinking it unrealistic aswell.

But back to the topic, Playing evil isn't easy, and since people can always ignore / roleplay badly / refuse to cooperate at all. It won't get any easier. A good thing would be if all mediocre to decent players would participate even if they are busy with something else. Proglin and his guild have been trying to put up a tournament for a while now, but everytime one of those dwarves meets Dwarvesbane members they are dragged into a roleplay or a duel wich interferes with their business. Proglin told me it begins to annoy them, but my point in this is, that even though they DONT have the time or the interest in a roleplay going that direction. Almost every single one of them FOLLOWS the lead and gets involved. I know its hard to do and keep doing but i thank them for it. If every half decent player would follow their example then the community would benefit greatly from it.

Hell i know its annoying to be training some skill in the arena when someone walks up to you and starts a roleplay. Especially if it ends in you getting killed and having to walk all the way back there. But i think that that is exactely what the developement team had in mind when creating this game. If you are any decent roleplayer you can usually roleplay your way right out of it anyhow. And if the other fellow is persistent then usually they aren't that far trained anyhow wich means you'll probably kill them in a duel without much effort. In my experience anyone that has played PS some time will respect your wishes and leave you alone if you indicate that you are busy. But the simple ignoring people makes it a lot more difficult for anyone to roleplay in this game. It doesn't take much time to have a quick IC chat anyway. So if everyone just starts to behave more IC even when their mind is not set in that direction i think that the whole problem would be a lot less of a problem.

[Suno_Regin]

He has a point...he wasn't a priest in any way. I don't know much about this at all, but I can tell you right now he wasn't a priest.

Actualy he was. In fact Ceaser's father paid a hefty sum of money so that he could enter the priesthood early on instead of have to imediatly join the army for two years when he came of age. Ceaser was in his thirtys when he moved from the Priesthood of Jupiter to the army and lost almost everything his position within the priesthood had afforded him; includeing his recognition as a Priest of Jupiter.

Well I thought the pope was the only priest around that time, due to heavy catholism and muslims. But, maybe I'm thinking of the wrong years...anyway, like I said, I don't know much about Rome, but I never thought he was a priest, just more of a leader.