RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Mercurias · **05-27-2015, 01:54 PM**

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: This is fundamentally incorrect, in the fact that when you assume the role of Villainy, you are no longer a Player. And let me explain why.

Player Characters, especially in this game, are a function of the protagonist as perceived by Storytellers. Traditionally, in all forms of roleplay to play an antagonist, is to sit at the opposite side of that table. The concerns as a PC should not be the same as those playing an antagonist, because an Antagonist is, the moment he engages a protagonist, holds the weight of responsibility of delivering a good conflict story-line to that player - especially in free-form roleplay. You, are no longer a Player Character at that point - you are a Storyteller, or you are a glorified NPC working under a Storyteller, there's no room for a Player-Character antagonist cause it will boil down to Player vs Player mechanics, which requires a Storyteller to establish fair grounds, to which you've already claimed in your post should not happen.

I kinda don't know where you're getting all of that. The absolute literal definition of a player character is a character who is directly controlled by a player as opposed to the GM.Â

And I could, technically, go off onto lots and lots of paragraphs on why all wrong, but I kinda don't need to argue with you on the point of a definition.Â

The next point on this portion of your post I disagree with, is that a pure antagonist is incapable of being a PC because responsibility to drive plot and conflict turn the...Character...Into a glorified NPC? I kind of don't understand that. If you, as any kind of PC, aren't willing to drive plot and conflict, then what exactly are you doing? I can't think of any character I play who is incapable of doing that.Â

And I'm afraid that my post never stated that I believe fair grounds in combat should never happen. I wrote that, in order to establish fair grounds, I tend to play villains who are more powerful than those I would normally play.Â

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: Attempting to create a Villain PC fails to serve the primary function of an antagonist to begin with and assumes the stance of hiding behind the rights of a Player Character, while being dynamically opposed to the role of a Player Character.Â

Have you never played a tabletop game where the party turns on one another? It happens all the time. honestly, I'm sort of surprised and disappointed that two RP groups on Balmung haven't taken to getting into outright warfare IC while being friendly OOC. It's fun! You should try it sometime!

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: In free-form, in the absence of a storyteller, players collectively agree on the limits and extents of consequence between each other when crafting a storyline. This is easy to establish when groups all are invested on the same side of a conflict or have characters that work together. However taking a villainous approach on a player level means that you're actively an antagonist to said groups. Even with perfect OOC/IC separation there is an innate conflict of interest there on both an IC or OOC level.

So in other words, my points are flawed because my subconscious wants to win in a fantasy game if I establish my villain character as a PC rather than a "glorified NPC"? If I have characters on both sides of the conflict (which I do), then does this balance out my conflict of interest or do alts not count as PCs at this point?

And what if my whole interest is to tell a good story, regardless of which players win or lose? Where's the conflict there if I just want to make it all interesting?

And if your conflict of interest concept was really the case, wouldn't the storyteller, who decides how the stage is set for both parties, be able to curb that?

I've actually got a very good pair of storytellers I work with, by the way, and a significant part of their job is to take requests from both sides of the conflict and incorporate them into the overall story in order to satisfy all parties, since, as my storytellers believe, villainous PCs are still PCs.Â

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: They're playing something along the lines of a slice of life or adventurer storyline, you're specifically writing to disrupt that. Without a Storyteller to oversee that, all that it amounts to is an unsolvable conflict where you are assuming their consent for the sake if your own idea of a story, while hiding behind consent rules to enforce that story.Â This implies that if the other players don't play to your dance, then they can never progress. That sets a bad tone for what could be an interesting story.

Killing off the villain in the middle of the story kind of ends the story. What players normally want to do is automatically kill the villain and end the story. At that point...They've ended the story themselves. There is no interest. Boom. Over.Â

More to the point, there's actually a significant amount of OOC communication between the storyteller and both sides of the conflict. I still don't get the part where you assumed I don't work with a storyteller.

Also, you're speaking of assumed consent. Half of my posts were referencing the difficulties i'd had as a villain PC of protags attempting to force consent down my throat. That is sort of the problem I'm talking about. As a villain, I will never FORCE a player to interact or get injured, and all I'm asking in return is the same courtesy. I never stated that I was unwilling for my character to ever be harmed.

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: Conversely, doing so from the Storyteller perspective re-asserts and re-aligns all intents in roleplay. Instead of disrupting, you are providing plot for said Slice of Life and Adventurer style roleplays, by playing the Villian role. Playing a continual and Repeat villian means you never really leave the Storyteller perspective and you must focus first on what story you are bringing others, rather than simply pursuing 'your own' story. Otherwise, it boils down to the level of being antagonistic rather than being an antagonist/villian. And that comes with its own IC/OOC problems. Which leads into the next problem playing a "PC" Level.

Honestly, I treat 'my own' stories purely and entirely as side stories. What I always concern myself with, on either side of the table, is always going to be the story as a whole. You don't have to be a Storyteller to want to make the story better. The point of the story isn't to win. It's to make people respond and have fun. We're entertaining one another.Â

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: Law enforcement is an active and real element within most worlds - especially in Eorzea. A Villain who's openly a villain to the point where a PC can report their actions, must have a means of dealing with persecution that is acceptable to their constituents. This is especially true seeming many adventurer type PCs will be holding a rank of some sort in one of the Grand Companies. And when that happens, you MUST have the rank of Storyteller in that situation or you must concede to another storyteller's call. "I escape because I said so." pushes the borders of consent, because no party, on the player-character level can rightly claim ownership of the greater law-enforcement entity in a roleplay - that is a role of a storyteller.

That's why I talk with the storyteller and establish what goes down at that point. Also, most of my roleplay tends to happen in a group where people don't like talking to the authorities. I've always been willing to have my characters captured if the story demands it, and in other games (not this one yet), it's actually happened.

You're right, if the storyteller tells me that a bunch of NPCs catch my villain, then my villain is caught. Hurray!

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: Playing any character at all with a certain level of power or authority in the game world, if we're going to be totally honest about this,Â without first assuming the role of a Storyteller or working directly with one amounts to simply playing a power-fantasy, intentional or otherwise - it cannot be done correctly without first putting all included charactersÂ to the forefront of your consideration. To be a roaming player characterÂ is to be a Storyteller with a story waiting to happen, and should be presented to other Players as such before the story happens to prevent OOC conflicts of interest.

Fixed that for you.Â

(05-27-2015, 12:05 PM)Hyrist Wrote: This is why I see so many attempts at Villainy in Roleplay failing so frequently. Collectively, we are playing a game, and no matter how you perceive it Villainy is a linchpin role in that game. A Villain is a source of conflict, a source of story. And as such, that comes with a bit more responsibility than your typical PC role. Even a Player Character, who's running an independent story-line for their character's personal plot, assumes the role and responsibility of Storyteller while doing so, for Villains, unless you're 'in hiding' or assuming the role of an Anti-Hero for a plot other than yours, you never step away from that Storyteller role. You are a walking plot-line. You can't assume that you are a Player Character. Player Character comes with limitations and assumptions a Villain can't concede to.

Every player is a potential storyteller, and let's be honest, if you can't put your character's importance away and respect the stories of others, then you shouldn't be roleplaying with them. You should be writing a novel.

There are a massive amount of bad villains out there who want to power trip, do evil things, and never, ever reap any of the consequences of any of their actions.

There are also a massive amount of bad heroes out there who want to power trip, perform violent and/or risky actions, and never, ever reap the consequences of any of their actions.

Consequences are part of RP. If you can't accept them, then why bother?

That goes for all PCs.

(05-27-2015, 12:22 PM)Hyrist Wrote:
(05-27-2015, 12:08 PM)Mercurias Wrote: Exactly.

This is the problem you run into as a villain.Â EveryoneÂ wants to show thatÂ theyÂ are heroes...And the end result is that villain characters end up being some kind of evil doppleganger of John McClane who has to fight through the really, truly impossible odds.

Remember boys and girls, respect your villains. They're rarer than gold.
Other way around.

Villains are dime a dozen. Storytellers can shell them out like there's no tomorrow, at no consequence to themselves. Roaming Villains need pitch their story in a way that's interesting, believable, and respectful to both Characters and Players alike. Otherwise, it's just another ooc person on a power trip.

I'll agree that bad villains or GM-controlled villains are a dime a dozen.

GOOD villain PCs are rarer than gold. I don't think that they should have to make a pitch. The way roleplay works, any player can always say they don't want to interact.

I've never really had anyone say that about my villains, though. Almost as if I'm not 'fundamentally incorrect'.Â

I'll be damned.

Roleplaying the bad guy

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes