Are good guys boring to play?

[Naunet]

I'm just gonna leave this here, and it may mean nothing or it may mean everything. Who knows!

 

Roleplay people, not characters.

[Magellan]

I'm just gonna leave this here, and it may mean nothing or it may mean everything. Who knows!

 

Roleplay people, not characters.

 

I am so firmly on the fence on this I almost don't know what to say, but I'll try.

 

On the one hand, I completely agree, and understand what you are saying; a character's actions, beliefs, and mannerisms should be believable, founded on past experiences, and limited to what they know, not what you the player know. I'm fairly certain I have achieved this, and have never received complaints (but have received compliments!) about my RP. Breathing, living, fleshed out people, not character archetypes.

 

On the other hand, there are so many different RP styles and tastes, that I feel as an RPer, you should have a degree of detachment from your character, so that you can try and find the right story for them. The one that fits who they are best.

 

I find a lot of grim dark out there, and I'm not much of a grim dark fan, particularly not on my hero character. It is not the theme nor the story I am trying to explore. The whole purpose of RP is to have fun, and when characters are no longer fun to play, its usually because something has gone wrong in the telling of their tale.

 

As a writer, if I wanted to RP Peter Pan in his natural setting, I'm obviously not going to stick him in a dark mercenary themed guild, that would defeat the purpose of what I'm trying to achieve. If, however, I want to explore Peter Pan thrown from his comfort zone into a gritty, realistic setting, a dark merc guild would be the perfect platform to explore this with.

 

I guess my point is that I do role characters, with a specific aim towards finding and telling specific types of stories; I have a comedic relief airheaded Miqo'te who does best in 'slice of life' settings. I have a grim-dark BLM crafted for exploring darker themes, and I have my hero.

 

Of these three types, the one I struggle to find a home for the most is the hero, hence my post. When I join a hero/good guy themed guild, I expect to explore heroic tales and adventure stories. Instead, people seem to join with characters that don't fit. They are perfectly fine rpers, but they don't seem to understand the theme they have signed up for, and an inevitable implosion/clash of ideals occurs.

 

Each character has a range of what they can effectively contribute to. To put this into a people setting; if my hero is surbaban housewife, to thrust her into a gang-ravaged ghetto is not what I'm going for, so I'm not going to subject her to that brand of RP. If I wanted to tell that story, then yes I would absolutely plunk her down in the middle of that.

 

I try to flesh my little toons out to be as believable and realistic as possible, but in the end they are characters to me, whom I have specific goals for, hence I seek out like minded individuals in the guilds I choose.

 

((As a side note, I am a pretty inclusive rper who will at least attempt to rp with anyone, so don't misread that! ))

[IncubusManatee]

I love playing a goodguy in badguy's clothing. (Much akin to a Sheep in wolves clothing)

 

This is how I have been able to move within the gray zone where I can do good things, and strive to do the best for others-but confuse the baddies in question that I have submerged myself with. 

 

It's not an Anti-Hero. (I.E. Batman.)

 

It's not a Fallen Angel Trope. 

 

But like a undercover cop. That's more of how I have to play my characters when being a good guy. Makes it so I don't step on toes to hard (For those who are like "DON MESS MAI RP AUP!") and allows me to do good behind the scenes. Alter RP through slight pushes and nudges in the right direction.

 

And it also is fun to completely ruin a badguy orginizations plans from the inside.  Can't help it. And it has lead to some extremely AWESOME Rp for everyone involved.

[Gideon Aryeh]

I've always found the alignment system rather stilted... it's too black and white, when life is more chaotic good/evil with maybe a bit of neutral tossed in to confuse people.

 

People look at the alignment system and see True Good as being an untouchable saint, which is how I have always thought they were represented. You don't drink, don't swear, don't bang hookers (lol), you don't take rewards for good deeds and on and on and all. It's more of a caricature of good than anything else. Just like True Evil has always been portrayed as moustache-twirling men in tophats and black capes... or raspy robotic voices with a fetish for choking people.

 

In that sense, both sides of the coin are boring and unimaginative. But if you allow the pure-as-the-driven-snow True Good person to have something... broken with them, like they have a psychological flaw, or they secretly like poking nymphs (in *that* way) at night... in barns; then you have a more interesting character. Vader's back story in the prequels made him an interesting villain, instead of the rather 2D villain he was in the original trilogy. He had a spark of good in him smoldering away for 20 years (?) that ultimately led him to save his son in ROTJ.

 

tl;dr: True Good - generic and boring; true evil - never played well enough and also generic and boring.

 

Personally I am more of a fan of Palladium's alignment system than the one for D&D. I think it allows for more flexibility and it has alignments like Abberant Evil which would rather hang out with good characters than evil ones due to their personal code.

[Fen]

So, to directly answer the original question based on prior responses:

 

Yes, there are plenty of good characters out there, scattered about. I have three, myself, between the games I play (Fen, the more-or-less chaotic good, Yayaan, the "pragmatic hero" archetype [goodness debatable for him], and Itansha in Rift, who pretty much just wants to make sure people are safe.)

 

And no, "Good Guys" are not boring to play. Good Guys CAN be boring to play, but that's generally a problem with how they're played, not their alignment. A Bad Guy CAN be boring to play, as well. OR a Neutral character. From swtor, I knew plenty of Jedi characters who didn't break the rules, but were still interesting characters to be around.Good characters tend to be some of my favourite to rp as or with (Itan and some of his friends in Rift, Fen here, Siobhain, several Jedi/Republic characters in swtor, etc)

[Swift Nightclaw]

I prefer to play good guys, honestly.  As others have pointed out, even good guys can stray into the morally gray at times.

 

But my hunter in WoW, and now this thieving miqo'te here in Eorzea is stealing it from him, came up with an all encompassing statement that applies to how I try to play my "good guys."

 

"There is good and evil in this world, but it's up to each of us to find the black and white within the gray."

 

Basically, the world isn't black and white, but it's up to the individual to sift through and find what's right and what's wrong.

 

There are a lot of ways to play the "good guy" without being boring.

 

Batman is seen as a darker good guy.  You just can't argue that Batman is morally gray or evil. He's driven by justice, he wants to stop crime, he wants to protect citizens, he's arguably obsessed with protecting his city from crime.  He will beat a criminal silly, he'll break bones, he'll scare the poo out of them, but he won't kill them. He also alienates those close to him and pretty much forsakes any chance at a stable, normal life or any form of relationship.

 

Spider-Man's another example of playing a good guy but still having flaws.  Spidey does ANYTHING to do what's right.  He's the type of character the OP is talking about, the white knight, the Jedi, the hero.  But here's the thing that made Spider-Man endearing over the years....he suffers for it.  That's definitely something you could play up when playing a heroic character; it's not an easy life.

 

Peter has money problems, he's had relationship problems, he's disappointed people who care about him, he's sacrificed a better life for himself, and he's been publicly hated in the papers and by half the population of the city he strives to protect. But he keeps doing it without any benefit or "thank you" simply because it's the right thing to do. I thought they made a good move a couple years ago when they added in Pete hitting a breaking point and vowing "nobody dies when I'm around. No civilians, no allies, no villains. NOBODY DIES." Working that into Eorzea.....very difficult. >_>

 

So you can definitely look at how your character sacrifices in being a good guy as well.

 

Going further back, there's Robin Hood.  Without a doubt, he's a criminal. He was a traitor to his kingdom by breaking the laws of the ruling king (arguable as King Richard wasn't declared dead and John was just steward of the kingdom in the tales of course, but you get the point).  But he was a hero because he was a criminal in order to do what's right.

 

So no...I don't think playing good guys is boring. I think they can be very interesting. Just don't forget they have their flaws and their weaknesses as well.

 

 

I need to really finish putting together the details on Wardens of Light and start recruiting to the IC Linkshell and the Free Company. They're meant to be good guys with shades of gray that can cause debate and questions amongst themselves.

[Dravus]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

[Swift Nightclaw]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

 

That's not really anything to do with roleplaying "good guys" so much as just simply bad roleplayers, which yields the same reaction as any other:

 

:frustrated:

 

True Good - generic and boring; true evil - never played well enough and also generic and boring.

 

 

I dunno... I'd classify Vash the Stampede as true good, but wouldn't say he's a boring character.

[Magellan]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

 

Heheh, I've actually had run-ins with this, and find it annoying myself. I believe guilds should never force their views ICly upon others like that, without clear OOC communication beforehand.

 

I'm talking more about within the framework of the guild itself; characters not following the guidelines of the group/theme they are in, and not being held accountable ICly.

[Raccoon]

Eh, the only problem is that the examples that the OP keeps suggesting are only heroes when you look at them from the outside. The Jedi can be thought of as a religious organization that teaches their members to carry out their tasks without emotion, which can and often does include the murder of sentient lifeforms that range from those simply protecting their homes to those who, in their own mind, believe themselves to be doing what is right. The crew of the Enterprise is exactly the same. How often do they spare their enemies? I'm not an avid Star Trek fan, but in those I've seen, it's pretty rare.

 

I've just never seen a hero that's truly heroic, and the ones that play at it, I end up hating for doing things that you cannot begin to imagine as "good". Sparing a group that has just finished raping and murdering an entire village just so they can be taken to trial? Uh, no. But if you do execute them, oops, anti-hero.

 

Of course, if you want to play Silver/Golden age comic book heroes who only ever encounter the silly evils of those eras, I can see you avoiding such scenarios, but you're just not going to find it when everyone else is playing in the modern era. It's no longer a time when people believe or even really want to believe that everyone is inherently good.

[Swift Nightclaw]

I'm talking more about within the framework of the guild itself; characters not following the guidelines of the group/theme they are in, and not being held accountable ICly.

 

That's what's taking me so long to start looking for others to join my FC/LS for RP purposes. I'm trying to hammer out what's expected and the rules.

 

I think that's the biggest part is having a strong foundation and structure for the group to know what's expected and what's to be adhered to.

 

There's a blood elf guild on Wyrmrest over on WoW called Selama Ashalanore and a Forsaken one called Scythe of Sylvanas that, just looking over their websites, are very detailed and established as to what they expect from their members and what guidelines you would have to adhere to.

 

You can agree or disagree with them, of course, but then you know quite well if you'd fit in.  I think more guilds should really lay out the details expected from a RP perspective.

---

I've just never seen a hero that's truly heroic, and the ones that play at it, I end up hating for doing things that you cannot begin to imagine as "good". Sparing a group that has just finished raping and murdering an entire village just so they can be taken to trial? Uh, no. But if you do execute them, oops, anti-hero.

 

Of course, if you want to play Silver/Golden age comic book heroes who only ever encounter the silly evils of those eras, I can see you avoiding such scenarios, but you're just not going to find it when everyone else is playing in the modern era. It's no longer a time when people believe or even really want to believe that everyone is inherently good.

 

Um...yeah, taking them in is exactly what sets the hero apart from the anti-hero.  That's the difference between Batman vs Judge Dredd, plain and simple.  That doesn't make the hero boring.  Ignoring the impact, the struggle, and the overwhelming desire to butcher them is what would make them boring. Addressing those feelings is where the heroic character is interesting in that scenario; not their refusal to be a murderer themselves.

 

To me, it's more boring when the character does go all rage and kills them all off and then goes on about their business without a care. Nobody seems to want to delve into the impact all this murder and blood shed their characters are surrounded by has on them. Truthfully and realistically, a lot of the characters in games/stories/movies are likely pretty messed up in the head after everything they go through.

 

Marvel has long done a fantastic job of portraying heroes who aren't anti-hero and deal with moral gray, but their larger struggles are their own internal ones. Stark's a good guy, he's a hero archetype. He's also kind of an arrogant jerk and an alcoholic.

 

That's kind of a huge boon to playing any character well; dealing with their own personal struggles/demons with more difficulty than the external ones set before them.

[Fates Skein]

A lot of people have responded to this in interesting ways.  I see that the OP seems to have a very specific complaint: false advertising.  (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?  Maybe they're heartless mercs right now, or anti-heroes, or fallen heroes.  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.  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'.)  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'.  That's what made them interesting to me.  Characters that are completely selfless confuse me- because that selflessness -is- a form of self-interest, imo.  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.  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.  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.  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.  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.  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.

[Faye]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

 

Isn't that something that "good guys" often do in real life, though? Of course, there is a point when that goes from a realistic and interesting character to just being bad RPing--and that's based solely on the RPers OOC intentions. Did he mean to make his character a well-intentioned but self-righteous hypocrite? Or does he think his character is the best thing since sliced bread and for that reason is entirely blind to his character's faults and keeps going on about how his character is always good and always right (Yeah... I've run into people doing this before in a past MMO)? If it's the latter, it's just bad RP, which affects all characters and tropes, so it's not necessarily an aspect of RPing "good guys."

[Swift Nightclaw]

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.  Not because I am a bad person but because the villains' stories, their motivations, are things I feel are universally understood.

 

Except for my chocobo's name inspiration.

 

Kuzco was an awesome protagonist. 

And K'uzco is an awesome chocobo.

 

Pacha was a good guy too and totally relatable.  And Lilo & Stitch weren't goody two shoes either.

 

Okay, I'll stop and be good now.

 

>_>

<_<

(K'uzco is an awesome chocobo)

/runs away

[LiadansWhisper]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

 

Isn't that something that "good guys" often do in real life, though? Of course, there is a point when that goes from a realistic and interesting character to just being bad RPing--and that's based solely on the RPers OOC intentions. Did he mean to make his character a well-intentioned but self-righteous hypocrite? Or does he think his character is the best thing since sliced bread and for that reason is entirely blind to his character's faults and keeps going on about how his character is always good and always right (Yeah... I've run into people doing this before in a past MMO)? If it's the latter, it's just bad RP, which affects all characters and tropes, so it's not necessarily an aspect of RPing "good guys."

 

I think that it tends to occur more often with nominally good-aligned characters, at least in my experience.  Whether that's because they end up getting more attention because they are openly good-aligned, or whether there just actually is a higher rate of this occurring among good-aligned characters, I honestly don't know.

[Faye]

One of the main issues I have with 'good guys' is that they often push to hold the 'bad guys' accountable for every little thing they do, yet then ignore any consequences associated with their own shady actions.

 

That's pretty much been my experience is the vast majority of 'good guy' role-players and 'justice' orientated guilds across a fair few MMO's. They're not above the law, though they often act as though they are and tend to be backed up by a network of close friends and allies who will crow on and on about how 'awesome' they are and make excuses as to why they shouldn't be held accountable for what they do.

 

Isn't that something that "good guys" often do in real life, though? Of course, there is a point when that goes from a realistic and interesting character to just being bad RPing--and that's based solely on the RPers OOC intentions. Did he mean to make his character a well-intentioned but self-righteous hypocrite? Or does he think his character is the best thing since sliced bread and for that reason is entirely blind to his character's faults and keeps going on about how his character is always good and always right (Yeah... I've run into people doing this before in a past MMO)? If it's the latter, it's just bad RP, which affects all characters and tropes, so it's not necessarily an aspect of RPing "good guys."

 

I think that it tends to occur more often with nominally good-aligned characters, at least in my experience.  Whether that's because they end up getting more attention because they are openly good-aligned, or whether there just actually is a higher rate of this occurring among good-aligned characters, I honestly don't know.

 

This specific scenario would obviously apply more to "good" characters--in fact, I can't see how it could ever apply to bad characters. There are bad characters who charade as (or perhaps genuinely think themselves) "good guys" and parade around bullying other people who don't align to what they claim is law, but I can't imagine that sort of hypocrisy, if the character is intentionally an antagonist, could be accidental, since the character is supposed to be a bad character. That's not bad RPing, that's just someone RPing a bad person. And if self-righteous hypocrites exist in real life, why can't they in RP? In my experience, they're amazingly fun to play.

 

What I meant to say is that there are "bad" RPers playing characters of each and every alignment. If any alignment has more bad RPers than any others, I honestly think it would be anything in the evil spectrum. That may not be true, but most bad RPers I seeing playing good guys tend to just make boring, one-dimensional hero characters, and I would rather deal with that than the evil "I walk in and stab you and set the tavern on fire because i r ebil mwahaha" characters that bad RPers make.

[LiadansWhisper]

This specific scenario would obviously apply more to "good" characters--in fact, I can't see how it could ever apply to bad characters. There are bad characters who charade as (or perhaps genuinely think themselves) "good guys" and parade around bullying other people who don't align to what they claim is law, but I can't imagine that sort of hypocrisy, if the character is intentionally an antagonist, could be accidental, since the character is supposed to be a bad character. That's not bad RPing, that's just someone RPing a bad person. And if self-righteous hypocrites exist in real life, why can't they in RP? In my experience, they're amazingly fun to play.

 

What I meant to say is that there are "bad" RPers playing characters of each and every alignment. If any alignment has more bad RPers than any others, I honestly think it would be anything in the evil spectrum. That may not be true, but most bad RPers I seeing playing good guys tend to just make boring, one-dimensional hero characters, and I would rather deal with that than the evil "I walk in and stab you and set the tavern on fire because i r ebil mwahaha" characters that bad RPers make.

 

I never said it would apply to bad-aligned characters.  I'm talking about D&D Paladins, Bladedancers, Clerics/Favored Souls, WoW Paladins, etc.

[Faye]

This specific scenario would obviously apply more to "good" characters--in fact, I can't see how it could ever apply to bad characters. There are bad characters who charade as (or perhaps genuinely think themselves) "good guys" and parade around bullying other people who don't align to what they claim is law, but I can't imagine that sort of hypocrisy, if the character is intentionally an antagonist, could be accidental, since the character is supposed to be a bad character. That's not bad RPing, that's just someone RPing a bad person. And if self-righteous hypocrites exist in real life, why can't they in RP? In my experience, they're amazingly fun to play.

 

What I meant to say is that there are "bad" RPers playing characters of each and every alignment. If any alignment has more bad RPers than any others, I honestly think it would be anything in the evil spectrum. That may not be true, but most bad RPers I seeing playing good guys tend to just make boring, one-dimensional hero characters, and I would rather deal with that than the evil "I walk in and stab you and set the tavern on fire because i r ebil mwahaha" characters that bad RPers make.

 

I never said it would apply to bad-aligned characters.  I'm talking about D&D Paladins, Bladedancers, Clerics/Favored Souls, WoW Paladins, etc.

 

Wouldn't those also be generally considered "good" characters? I'm just confused what the "more often" could be comparing it to, since it seems to be a problem exclusive to characters that are supposedly good-aligned.

[LiadansWhisper]

Wouldn't those also be generally considered "good" characters? I'm just confused what the "more often" could be comparing it to, since it seems to be a problem exclusive to characters that are supposedly good-aligned.

 

There are openly, blatantly good characters, there are openly, blatantly evil characters, and then there are characters who are neither of those.  Either they're "nominally good" (i.e. the concept is not for an evil character, but neither are they especially good), or they run under the radar, rarely drawing attention to themselves (whether by accident or design).

 

In my experience, the tendency for characters to jump all over an evil character's actions, while ignoring their own behavior, tends to occur more on the part of those who are openly, blatantly good and make sure everyone knows it, than it does on the part of those who are openly, blatantly evil.

 

Now, this could be due to several factors. Off the top of my head, openly, blatantly evil characters tend not to have a long shelf-life, as it were. Additionally, there are many more loopholes for evil characters than there are for good characters. The ends can completely justify the means for an evil character - up to and including an evil character committing good acts in pursuit of an overall evil agenda. That doesn't work so well for good-aligned characters.

[Faye]

Wouldn't those also be generally considered "good" characters? I'm just confused what the "more often" could be comparing it to, since it seems to be a problem exclusive to characters that are supposedly good-aligned.

 

There are openly, blatantly good characters, there are openly, blatantly evil characters, and then there are characters who are neither of those.  Either they're "nominally good" (i.e. the concept is not for an evil character, but neither are they especially good), or they run under the radar, rarely drawing attention to themselves (whether by accident or design).

 

In my experience, the tendency for characters to jump all over an evil character's actions, while ignoring their own behavior, tends to occur more on the part of those who are openly, blatantly good and make sure everyone knows it, than it does on the part of those who are openly, blatantly evil.

 

Now, this could be due to several factors.  Off the top of my head, openly, blatantly evil characters tend not to have a long shelf-life, as it were.  Additionally, there are many more loopholes for  evil characters than there are for good characters.  The ends can completely justify the means for an evil character - up to and including an evil character committing good acts in pursuit of an overall evil agenda.  That doesn't work so well for good-aligned characters.

 

I think we're talking about two different things. Maybe I'm interpreting this completely wrong, but it seems sort of... asinine not to expect good characters to butt into the business of evil characters? I don't really know why most "evil" characters would get onto someone's case about their actions to begin with, so of course "good" characters are more likely to do that.

[LiadansWhisper]

I think we're talking about two different things. Maybe I'm interpreting this completely wrong, but it seems sort of... asinine not to expect good characters to butt into the business of evil characters? I don't really know why most "evil" characters would get onto someone's case about their actions to begin with, so of course "good" characters are more likely to do that.

 

Of course they should.  But there has to be a balance between what they should do and what works best for the story. Additionally, it's less about them ignoring their own character flaws in-character, and more about them getting upset out of character when they're called on their behavior.

 

i.e. I once saw a Paladin of Sune's player pitch the biggest bitch fit because the DMs gave her a Fallen token because she actually advised another character to hire a hit man to murder a third character the Paladin felt was evil.  The player could not understand why this was an issue, and OOCly got upset.

 

I'm 99% sure that's the kind of thing Theo was talking about, anyway.

[LandStander]

I normally play evil aligned characters, but I do like the good ones sometimes. My only problem with some people who play good guys is because they seem to usually think that because they are the "good guys" that it means that they always win and that always upsets me.

 

I normally play villains because I enjoy good conflict. I just hate when conflict is broken down because your good guy is super beautiful and strong and cannot be defeated because the power of light is more stronger than the power of evil.

[Erik Mynhier]

I believe truly good characters (such as Erik) are not only exciting to play, they are rewarding because the anti-hero is so prevalent that to be true and good is unusual and stands out.

 

The difference between the neutral and anti-heroes, and a true hero is while all have some form of a tragic past, the neutral and anti-heroes allow it to define them, where as a hero uses the energy of it to push on and reinforce his values. He/she is like a devout religious person, they see everything as a sign that they are right, in the case of a hero they see everything as a sign that they are making a difference.

 

I love heroes. While the anti-hero is a tragic hero, the true hero rises above.

[Magellan]

Hmm, to address some comments in brief;

 

My hero almost never won . That was part of the problem I guess. No one ever seems to want to concede in combat RP

 

Someone used the example of a hero coming across a band that was raping and pillaging a village, and allowing them to live in order to face justice. My hero actual was not lawful good, and probably would have shot down those a-holes right where they stood. Vanquishing quote/unquote 'evil' was very much in her moral dna.

 

My hero was pushed to question her beliefs often. She had a lack of self-confidence, but simply could not stand to see people suffer, and sought to right wrongs wherever they occurred. She never struck me as one-dimensional.

 

Someone mentioned false advertising in an FC/guild as being the problem. Sometimes this is the case! Sometimes, however, the advertising is correct, but the people joining it aren't paying attention.

 

And finally, I'd like to reiterate that I am extremely happy where I am, both in the FC I've ended up in, and with the larger community as a whole. This post was merely meant to elicit the viewpoints of my peers on pratfalls I had experienced on a specific type of character I like to play. My other characters are flourishing, thanks to my lovely FC, and some great friends I've made along the way.

 

Thank you all for you insights andcontributions. You've been a big help!

[Swift Nightclaw]

Hmm, to address some comments in brief;

 

My hero almost never won . That was part of the problem I guess. No one ever seems to want to concede in combat RP

 

Super over-used now, I'm sure, but I like it, so I'm going to use it again....

 

"The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It's a very mean and nasty place and I don't care how tough you are it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't about how hard you're hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward. "

 

I think that definitely goes towards the hero's character.