August Event 2006

[GM_Chris]

Oh I am not saying the rules support 1 leader. The system supports multiple governmental models except a theocracy.

What I am saying is it is my opinion that the fantasy world supports 1 leader. It supports a king. The problem is no one likes serving in the real world and I think that cares over into the fantasy world.

As for the political system it has nothing to do with min maxing. If we completely and utterly removed the voting process and the resources and all that stuff and threw you all into the world we would still see what we are seeing today so mechanics are not a cause.

What the mechanics do is help bring people together since no 1 group can bring in all the resources needed. You are all forced to rely on each other for resources and that is the point of the mechanics

[General Maximus]

I would like to make 1 point, killing another PC does hurt because they loose all their support points. Support point = resources, resources = power. You need resources to upkeep all those cool items that give you the power!!
I realy don't care who comes in as what or what group they hang with. People gravitate towards people they preferr to hang with and have fun with.
But I can see this happening, all out war breaks out and the PC's who loose come in as the opposite of the winners (good/evil) etc. And then it start all over again becasue in a couple session everyone is pretty level on power and the killing start all over. The only way to stop this is to kill the new characters as they come in. How fun is that. That is my concern and I don't see how that could be curbed. Killing a couple PC's is fine, but killing whole groups becomes a problem.

[dier_cire]

Wait, the issue is that people work with the same people? That's the problem? So I could come back as character X in the Order (because I personally enjoy Vince and Aaron's company), but it would be bad because it prevents someone else from "winning"? Sorry, but if they are going to pee in my lemonade, I'm not going to feel bad if they get a little in return. Plus, the ability to come back actually encourages roleplaying as the 'easy' solution of crushing your enemies isn't a very valid option.

And ultimately playing with different people is all perspective. I'm playing with different people without even changing characters. To me, you and Temple are still interacting with the same people you have always been. Again, that's just my perspective. I'm just saying don't bash everyone else. That's the holier than thou thing. You can say "I've made an effort to do this", but saying "There are probably four exceptions that I can think of" is rude.

[Faerykin]

And ultimately playing with different people is all perspective. I'm playing with different people without even changing characters. To me, you and Temple are still interacting with the same people you have always been. Again, that's just my perspective. I'm just saying don't bash everyone else. That's the holier than thou thing. You can say "I've made an effort to do this", but saying "There are probably four exceptions that I can think of" is rude.

Have you ever thought that maybe some groups project an elitist attitude toward newcomers?

[GM_Chris]

I am totally cool with some groups having an elite attitude because I would hope it will raise the bar for other organizations. I still would love to see Brad really puish his arcane guild to where all arcanes are a member and you frankly will have a hard time with spells if you do not belong to his guild.

Eric and Aaron, if a group of PC's came in and killed another group then we would hold a meeting to discuss what to do.

We might write a neat story and fast forward the time line 5-10 years kinda like the jump in Star wars. Then the otehr group of PC's could try and over throw the 1st group. There would be cool plots and story and maybe the 1st group that started everything looses or maybe they win.

If they lost then I will go out on a limb and say we, as GM's would probably not take too kindly of then that group turning around and atatcking the second group.

Can we stop it? yes yes we can.

But it all depends on what happens. We will create a cool situation no matter what happens. I think players need to have faith in that. Having one group of PC's win would not be any different than if the NPC's killed off most every PC and then set up a kingdom and then you guys all created new characters to over throw us.

Cool Story! We can seriously create a cool story as long as players do not get all upset that maybe a player is killed by another player.

Heck one day we might have an evil empire arise and some jedi go crazy and kill all the "good folks" It happens, and it is what makes a good story.

[General Maximus]

I like what you are saying Chris. I works for me, let it be so. If ever the say comes, and I hope it doesn't, there is a plan.

[Peace420]

That's cause I interact with everyone except you and anyone that happens to be around you at the time...

Onyx only interacts with a few of the same people because when he was born he was bound to them (according to the GM's who ran the event he was born at) but he's very independant and he likes hanging with Sethreal and Kels most of all, since there is ALWAYS food around them.

Faerykin makes a good point too, IG I've tried to come and talk with people in the Elder's order when Ka wasn't around and basically have felt unwelcome except for by a couple of people. I'm sure other people have felt the same way about other cliques IG.

Personally I don't have a problem with people gravitating toward the people they like and avoidiong the people they don't, I know I would not enjoy an event if I spent the entire time around Ka and I doubt Ried would enjoy an entiore event around me so...

[GM_Chris]

Cliques are good

Nothing wrong with ingame cliques. It is a thing that makes LARPS cool. I think LARPS where you just have 1 giant group is a kin to a pen and paper game.

[Faerykin]

I wasn't saying cliques were good or bad. I was only stating that as the reason why some people always seem to roleplay with the same people instead of venturing out and meeting others.

[GM_Chris]

That is a good point

[Amagus]

Yes, Ravinal and Tullus have entirely different personalities, and Tullus is strongly anti-establishment – any establishment. He’s a loose cannon that must be reined in, brought under control, and used to further… Oh. OOG discussion, right?

And I hope for a time when Erik and I are finally playing compatible PCs. He’s a great RPer, but I never get a chance to role-play with him because we’re NEVER in the same camp!

And I think a Theocracy would do very well in Final Haven. How many groups spout rhetoric about ‘the Way of the Light’ or some such – to great rallying effect? People are always looking for a Greater Purpose to give their lives meaning. Providing such meaning has inspired greater loyalty and obedience than any other method.

And referring to posts WAY back in the thread:

Amagus is an experiment. I had a theory that you could play and prosper as a thoroughly evil PC IF your goals lay in sync with the rest of the player base (or more importantly, if you weren’t focused on screwing them over). Simple survival is an easy goal for both good and evil PCs to share. The good guys want to protect everyone and keep as many alive as possible, while the evil folk work hard to keep everyone alive, because they need them for protection.

So from day one I’ve been promoting that Amagus works to see Haven prosper (so he can prosper with it, attain more power, blah, blah, blah). He helps Haven… using the most evil methods I can think of. But since he’s perceived more as an asset than a liability by most, and as the PCs need all the help they can get, many have put aside their moral objections and let him live. That’s why I believe he’s still alive.

[Faerykin]

But since he’s perceived more as an asset than a liability by most, and as the PCs need all the help they can get, many have put aside their moral objections and let him live. That’s why I believe he’s still alive.

That and the fact that it'd look bad to kill your PC on his first or second event.

[Amagus]

Admittedly I was kinda counting on that leeway for time to establish Amagus's intentions.

[General Maximus]

As Doug did his experminet, I conducted mine. Amagus came in right around the time Corbyn stepped down. I wanted to see how long it would take the other PC's to deal with Amagus. I just watched amazed as Doug ramped up his efforts to be blantly obvious what he was about and doing. I was going to do nothing becuase the concile was running the town and it was upto them to say what was right for the town. It took Doug sleeping with his dead, casting magics in the open, and one corner of the Inn covered with the dead before anything was done.
Each to there own, but the PC's hating undead, saying they are good and pure should rethink what they have let live with them. Think about it, most the PC's where sleeping and eating with rotting corpses in the same room for moons. I'm surprised the NPC's did say people sleeping in the Inn started to get sick and become diseased from the roting bodies. To me thats just wrong. But this is my own opinion and a applaud Doug for such a great job.

[GM_Chris]

Well Doug it is a good thing I was not playing. I probably would not kill you but I would have been very vocal about you and would shun you completely all the time.

If I found the entire town as for you and I was alone in my good ness I would create a movement to topple the evil establishment.

I have never in D&D or elsewhere cared about if my character lived or died.

So lucky you I say! But you just wait!