To Evil, or Not to Evil
Mar. 21st, 2006 09:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
orikes... That is the question.
What place do villains have in the community style roleplaying on a MU*? Everyone loves a good villain, but it’s very hard to get and keep good players for them. Too often the players who want to play them don’t have any understanding of the word subtlety. Or, conversely, your good players of villains end up burning out from dealing with the OOC grief they get for being bad.
I’ve played on games where anyone can create anything and what you are is what you are. I’ve played on games that specifically allowed players to apply for characters designed to be antagonists. I’ve played on games that declared villains would be NPCs and that’s that. Ultimately, I haven’t been happy with any one choice. I still can’t decide if having villain player characters is a good thing or a bad thing.
With players running your bad guys, you can get some amazingly inspired roleplay happening. With mature players behind the antagonists and the protagonists, the stories take on a whole new dynamic. Players realize they no longer have the safety net they act like they have when the bad guys are NPCs. The interaction between good, bad, and the gray stuff in the middle takes on a life of its own.
With that, though, you get all sorts of potential staffing headaches. There are the bad players who make everyone’s life miserable by playing a bad villain. I don’t mean a person who has evil in their hearts, but simply a poorly played character. If they don’t let the power go to their heads of being a bad guy, they start acting like they’re a good guy and get upset when people start plotting against them.
Then there are the players who can’t separate IC from OOC and start taking the insults of a character as insults against them instead of their own character. Combine that with the eternal ‘white hat’ and you burn out some very solid players trying to play antagonists. I’m sure anyone who played on Aether during the heyday remembers Altair. He went through what, two Princeps, three Khalids, and countless Praetorians and Agni Haidar.
Is there a happy medium where you can promote dynamic stories without having to run every single NPC to drive conflict, but avoid the worst of the OOC headaches that come from villain PCs?
I’ve wondered if perhaps a mix of NPC/PC would work for this type of thing. With NPCs, even if played with a character bit, players seem to know that the NPC is tied to the life of the plot they’re part of. They have a shelf life that will expire at some point, thereby making the danger less real. Perhaps making some ‘feature’ villains would solve the problem. The character itself would be ultimately owned by staff, but under the immediate control of the player behind the bit.
Someone I used to play with ages ago had written an essay on the art of playing a villain. One of the things he suggested is that when you play a bad guy, keep your RL and OOC identity quiet. This serves two purposes. It keeps the mystery of the character in tact, and lets the other players focus their enmity at the character rather than the player. I’ve always thought this was a wonderful idea and would love to see more people practice it.
So what do you think?
[Poll #695508]
What place do villains have in the community style roleplaying on a MU*? Everyone loves a good villain, but it’s very hard to get and keep good players for them. Too often the players who want to play them don’t have any understanding of the word subtlety. Or, conversely, your good players of villains end up burning out from dealing with the OOC grief they get for being bad.
I’ve played on games where anyone can create anything and what you are is what you are. I’ve played on games that specifically allowed players to apply for characters designed to be antagonists. I’ve played on games that declared villains would be NPCs and that’s that. Ultimately, I haven’t been happy with any one choice. I still can’t decide if having villain player characters is a good thing or a bad thing.
With players running your bad guys, you can get some amazingly inspired roleplay happening. With mature players behind the antagonists and the protagonists, the stories take on a whole new dynamic. Players realize they no longer have the safety net they act like they have when the bad guys are NPCs. The interaction between good, bad, and the gray stuff in the middle takes on a life of its own.
With that, though, you get all sorts of potential staffing headaches. There are the bad players who make everyone’s life miserable by playing a bad villain. I don’t mean a person who has evil in their hearts, but simply a poorly played character. If they don’t let the power go to their heads of being a bad guy, they start acting like they’re a good guy and get upset when people start plotting against them.
Then there are the players who can’t separate IC from OOC and start taking the insults of a character as insults against them instead of their own character. Combine that with the eternal ‘white hat’ and you burn out some very solid players trying to play antagonists. I’m sure anyone who played on Aether during the heyday remembers Altair. He went through what, two Princeps, three Khalids, and countless Praetorians and Agni Haidar.
Is there a happy medium where you can promote dynamic stories without having to run every single NPC to drive conflict, but avoid the worst of the OOC headaches that come from villain PCs?
I’ve wondered if perhaps a mix of NPC/PC would work for this type of thing. With NPCs, even if played with a character bit, players seem to know that the NPC is tied to the life of the plot they’re part of. They have a shelf life that will expire at some point, thereby making the danger less real. Perhaps making some ‘feature’ villains would solve the problem. The character itself would be ultimately owned by staff, but under the immediate control of the player behind the bit.
Someone I used to play with ages ago had written an essay on the art of playing a villain. One of the things he suggested is that when you play a bad guy, keep your RL and OOC identity quiet. This serves two purposes. It keeps the mystery of the character in tact, and lets the other players focus their enmity at the character rather than the player. I’ve always thought this was a wonderful idea and would love to see more people practice it.
So what do you think?
[Poll #695508]
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-22 08:07 pm (UTC)I never thought about that before until the following event took place in my AD&D group:
I was playing an over-the-top Neutral Good character, and we ran across some mutated goblins. (The six-armed kinds called Chiteen, I believe. Not really the point.) The party saw one, just saw one, and let loose the arrows and spells.
I was horrified. This is a strange humanoid creature that hadn't attacked us, and most of the group decided it was to be killed because it looked like a creature they didn't like.
Who were the Villains in this situation?
...
I suppose the allure to most people with Superhero or Fantasy games is the ability to not worry about this kind of thing. I'm going to have to guess I'm in the minority considering the continued popularity of the Superhero Mu*.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-22 08:14 pm (UTC)I was told, "We don't get xp if we don't kill them, dummy!"
I don't think you're necessarily alone in your desire to have at least a level of realistic interaction. There's a great attraction for being able to just hack-n-slash through a game, but I do believe there are plenty of people out there who actually do like a level of complexity to things.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-23 11:51 am (UTC)Heck, I've even had characters jump in the way of other character's attacks to save the life of a sleeping dragon.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-22 08:17 pm (UTC)It is mistake to assume that the superhero genre is restricted to White Hats, Black Hats, and corny dialogue. Contemporary superhero comics thrive on the moral quandry, the ethical gray area, and the best writers deliver this at the same time as they deliver exciting action sequences. Do not judge the potential of superhero gaming by "City of Heroes" and its ilk.
JT
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-22 09:23 pm (UTC)The mission content and field hunting are both easy to adapt into alternate versions which are far less clear cut than a mere hostage escort mission, and strung together in ways that serve an entirely different character-driven storyline. Temporary plot-related NPCs are just a costume change away.
So, just like you described above for D&D, it's more a function of who's GMing and who you play with.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-03-23 08:27 am (UTC)Thought that could do with some clearing up.
To me, Fantasy simply means there is an element of magic. (Wikipedia adds "supernatural" into this; I can't argue.) I don't see why a Fantasy game has to have monsters that are easily killed as the main source of villainy.
I'm perfectly aware that there's no prerequsite for Superheroes to be all angsty uber-powered two-dimensional white-hats, just as there's no reason for Fantasy players to hack a murlock, say "Me Good Wit' Axe" and call that roleplay. And yet, many on games do.
Since games is the focus of the discussion.
Part of what makes it work for comic books (et al.) is that the superhero has the opportunity to become, at any moment, the villain. On this theoretical "NPC Villains Only" Mu*, you don't have that. No matter how gray the character's morals are pushed they always, always snap back to white.
I admit that I'm assuming in that the villain is against the common good, while the hero is for it. Unless Ang clarifies, this is the one I'm going to use for a Superhero setting. (I'd define it differently for World of Darkness, for instance.)
In a superhero world where moral ambiguity is commonplace, even the norm, the concept of a villain is pretty moot. You're not longer portraying a superhero, but a superhuman. (That is, the term "superhero" would simply appliy to people with powers, supernatural or otherwise, above and beyond the common man.)
So, no, I'm not being simplistic at all.
God, I miss Aether.