orikes: (kaleya)
[personal profile] 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]

(no subject)

Date: 2006-03-22 08:14 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] orikes13.livejournal.com
I ran into a situation like that early on in my tabletop career. The pcs were exploring a dungeon and came across a room with some giant otter like creatures. I started having my character (who was a mage or thief or something) trying to see if the critters were intelligent and if we could get around them without killing them. The other playres laughed at me and ran up and slaughtered the things.

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)
From: [identity profile] youngwilliam.livejournal.com
That's actually much like how 90% of my D&D characters turn out, behaviour-wise around dragons (..yes, a bit of a personal bias since I like dragons.. But it's not all my characters!!); they won't attack a dragon unless the dragon attacks them. And if the dragon is attacking out of the blue, they'll attempt to explain what's up to the dragon first, subdue and explain, and only leave lethal combat as a last resort.

Heck, I've even had characters jump in the way of other character's attacks to save the life of a sleeping dragon.

Profile

orikes: (Default)
orikes

June 2009

S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags