A lot of people have responded to this in interesting ways. Â I see that the OP seems to have a very specific complaint: false advertising. Â (S)He joined a guild claiming to be heroes, then found out that the other people playing said guild are not heroic- they are anti-heros at best.
The thing is, and this is entirely speculation, what if the players of those characters are planning on taking their characters through the route of redemption? Â Maybe they're heartless mercs right now, or anti-heroes, or fallen heroes. Â One interesting possibility is that they are wanting these characters to fall, to hit rock bottom, then rise again to become the shining paragons.
Personally, I do find 'truly good guys' boring and unrealistic to play. Â Jedi I see as a religious organization that is rigid and unyielding, more concerned about whether their members are knocking boots or -caring about anything- than going out there and really making the world better. (The Jedi Code never mentions 'be a good person'.) Â The Enterprise crew was generally good but flawed- they gave in to rage, and lust, and fear and sometimes they did the wrong things for 'the right reasons'. Â That's what made them interesting to me. Â Characters that are completely selfless confuse me- because that selflessness -is- a form of self-interest, imo. Â Whether or not the characters themselves see it, they are receiving feedback from others to continue their actions- they are rewarded for being good.
This is not to say that I'm all about grim-dark either. Â Typically speaking, I play nominally good characters- Anais is a pirate and has very little conscience nor a strong moral compass, but she believes strongly in saving people and has dedicated her studies into the healing arts. Â C'rhisi is a naieve child that wants to do good but has a strong temper and a stronger fear of failure that can and will drive her to do things that may not be right. Â Former characters I've played were a demon trying desperately to atone for the evil of her race, a Sith Inquisitor who didn't want to rule the world- she just wanted a library the size of a planet- but was willing to do whatever it took to get what she wanted, etc, etc, etc.
The thing is, speaking in broad generalizations, people playing 'heroes' have fewer motivations and less characterization than people playing around in the shades of grey. Â They also, in my experience, tend to expect to be rewarded universally ICly for their actions and become very OOCly upset when the people they save or the fight they broke up or the black-marketeer they locked up isn't met with appreciation and praise.
When I think of 'truly good' heroes, I think of Disney characters- the heroes, imo, are far, far less interesting and less relatable than the villains. Â Not because I am a bad person but because the villains' stories, their motivations, are things I feel are universally understood.
I think 'shades of grey' heroes- Batman, Spidey, the Fellowship of the Ring, etc.- are more interesting, more relatable, and in the end, longer lasting archetypes/characters.
The thing is, and this is entirely speculation, what if the players of those characters are planning on taking their characters through the route of redemption? Â Maybe they're heartless mercs right now, or anti-heroes, or fallen heroes. Â One interesting possibility is that they are wanting these characters to fall, to hit rock bottom, then rise again to become the shining paragons.
Personally, I do find 'truly good guys' boring and unrealistic to play. Â Jedi I see as a religious organization that is rigid and unyielding, more concerned about whether their members are knocking boots or -caring about anything- than going out there and really making the world better. (The Jedi Code never mentions 'be a good person'.) Â The Enterprise crew was generally good but flawed- they gave in to rage, and lust, and fear and sometimes they did the wrong things for 'the right reasons'. Â That's what made them interesting to me. Â Characters that are completely selfless confuse me- because that selflessness -is- a form of self-interest, imo. Â Whether or not the characters themselves see it, they are receiving feedback from others to continue their actions- they are rewarded for being good.
This is not to say that I'm all about grim-dark either. Â Typically speaking, I play nominally good characters- Anais is a pirate and has very little conscience nor a strong moral compass, but she believes strongly in saving people and has dedicated her studies into the healing arts. Â C'rhisi is a naieve child that wants to do good but has a strong temper and a stronger fear of failure that can and will drive her to do things that may not be right. Â Former characters I've played were a demon trying desperately to atone for the evil of her race, a Sith Inquisitor who didn't want to rule the world- she just wanted a library the size of a planet- but was willing to do whatever it took to get what she wanted, etc, etc, etc.
The thing is, speaking in broad generalizations, people playing 'heroes' have fewer motivations and less characterization than people playing around in the shades of grey. Â They also, in my experience, tend to expect to be rewarded universally ICly for their actions and become very OOCly upset when the people they save or the fight they broke up or the black-marketeer they locked up isn't met with appreciation and praise.
When I think of 'truly good' heroes, I think of Disney characters- the heroes, imo, are far, far less interesting and less relatable than the villains. Â Not because I am a bad person but because the villains' stories, their motivations, are things I feel are universally understood.
I think 'shades of grey' heroes- Batman, Spidey, the Fellowship of the Ring, etc.- are more interesting, more relatable, and in the end, longer lasting archetypes/characters.
