Goods: The new endangered species

[English lad]

Precisley - a ressurected death before didn't count against your 61

[killalou]

And I'm sorry if showing that an uncaballed paladin can, even in a challenge, beat NEUTRAL cabal elders who are better equipped (Merle and Valadis were decked to the teeth when we fought) does not make you rethink your claim that paladins are weak. But I'm going to work off of my experience here, not yours. And in my experience, paladins are not weak at all and never have been.

*chuckle* That not quite an accurate statement. Valadis was/never decked to the teeth. Now what he is decked with is saves eq.

[Twinblades713]

*chuckle* That not quite an accurate statement. Valadis was/never decked to the teeth. Now what he is decked with is saves eq.

>.> Cheater.

...

[killalou]

>.> Cheater.

...

Not really, you always seem to get your nasty spells on me in the end.

[killalou]

So I read all 8 pages of this thread and I think L-A summed it the best. From my experience people usually play said alignment/class/cabal after they see a powerhouse come in and shift the tide. In essence most of the pbase are followers waiting. For me I just play what I feel like playing and thats that. I dont know how people can rank from 1-50 and master skills and just delete and start over. To me it just seems like a waste of time. L-A said it best, you have 60 lives, chances are you will find a way to best said opponent in the end. People need to stop with the quitting of a character after they lose said "good eq".

[Oog]

I keep my characters till they hit bout 50 deaths, Then I decide I do not want to give that great player who keeps getting me, like a certain shaman in Savant when I had a Warmaster, the glory of taking my last death. So thats when I move on. Except recently I had decided that There is not a lot of things I have played, or different cabals, so even though I have been here for 8 years, its time to learn what everything has to offer and expand my knowledge. Well, my newest pinned character (who is good) will stay till condeath, or so I keep telling myself that. (I do that with all my characters). But anywho, if someone is wanting someone to roll up a good, trust me, they can be fun, its all I like to roll up.

[Pali]

*chuckle* That not quite an accurate statement. Valadis was/never decked to the teeth. Now what he is decked with is saves eq.

*shrugs* I don't have a log of that fight, so I can't really pull it up and check... either way, my statement remains accurate regarding Merle, as I DO have that log.

[killalou]

yeah you were a nuisance with the charge. I need more paladin exp. *sigh*

[Anume]

Re LA: signed. Last couple times I tried there was some goody jerk who got on my nerves so much I stopped playing the character.

[KRins]

I know just how you feel. I lose a PK, and lose a certain semi-vital rare that has very few replacements (that I know of...which means there are millions in existance just not on my Miruvhor-Val Miran beaten path) and then I come across a good that I have a couple ranks on and I'm confident I could pretty well whomp. Then I start a conversation with said person and they are just a complete and total asshat...condescending, stuck up, the works. I really would like to be able to just crack their skull one time...teach them some manners. Maybe a system to put up an item or a couple items as a "purse" for a challenge would be cool. I guess I could just put a bounty on the offending person's head...but that seems a lot more deceitful, underhanded, and generally evil then teaching some manners by my own hand with the intention of mercying and then taking a "donation" for the greater good...greater as in stronger...but whatev.

[Ex-D&Der]

Newbies are attracted to goodies because of request and since you have allies in all the other goods. As you learn the lands more and feel you can hold your own, playing evils becomes more attractive. Also I personally find the abuse you get from people when playing a good to be unpleasant. That and having to stand up for what's right against evils can be kind of a burden.

[mya]

Perhaps your problems with goods are not in the attitude of the other good players but on your attitude.

Getting upset because, another good player has a Rare you need and you cannot take from them, is a reason to keep playing evils.

I dont want more goods that silent PK, mercy, then gloat, kill and sac all.

"I really would like to be able to just crack their skull one time...teach them some manners." (not directed at you KRins.)

You can challenge them, beat them up and mercy them. That is why mercy is a perk.

I never had a problem with another good. Some can be strange, but if you leave them alone they also tend to leave you alone.

[KRins]

I meant the item being held by a goodie and the fact that a lot of goodies use the ban on good v good Pkilling as an excuse to behave in a manner unbecoming of a goodie as seperate things. I tend to play goods that would give up whatever piece of equipment a higher ranked player might need if they are actively fighting an evil. As a good you could technically hole up somewhere discrete and actively avoid getting in a fight without it being considered shysty RP. An evil could do the same, but a goodie would stay off the poor RP radar easier.

I only brought up the "purse" concept because I had a character that I was trying to develop a sort of prizefighter RP (he's deleted now so I don't care who knows about the RP angle), but I realized that outside of having some sort of judge hold the purse and then give it to the winner there isn't any easily feasible way to do this. And considering that the judge could easily pocket the purse and run while the winner is resting up...it just isn't a very well thought out RP for a character now that I think really hard about it.

Returning to my previous post. Just because someone is "good" by the terms of our alignment decision, doesn't make them good to everyone. I've been told to sod off, not in so many words but thats the just of it, by goods who I was just trying to strike up a bit of a conversation with. Considering my character is a bit of a racial elitist, and generally influenced by a military mindset, he wouldn't accept mouthing off from a lower ranked mixed-blooded prat (my char firmly believes that all the races sprang from his race, and just developed differently. He assumes being of the Elder race that he is owed respect) I could easily see a good who is particularly devout in their evil-smashing interpreting generalized, unprovoked rudeness as a person in need of a cleansing. I know that the emotions of the player will always seep into the character, and if I'm having a bad day I generally am not going to give 2 cents about what you have to say...eh, I guess I am just grasping at theoretical straws.

[Anume]

Wanting the armor from antoher good has never been so much of an issue for me. It's some goody being a jerk, as I said. Someone who keeps insulting and annoying you ONLY because they know they have a pk shield.

[KRins]

Hmmm...I wonder if documentation of a person being unnecessarily nasty to a fellow good would influence a possible outcasting. I mean obviously a nasty reaction to someone who led you into a deathtrap would be expected, but frequent and unwarranted nasty behavior is a different animal in my opinion.

[a-guitarist]

Does mean that the staff is saying the system is broken? I'm confused.

a-g

[killalou]

Wanting the armor from antoher good has never been so much of an issue for me. It's some goody being a jerk' date=' as I said. Someone who keeps insulting and annoying you ONLY because they know they have a pk shield.[/quote']

Isn't this what DEFINES being good? Ignoring and forgiving such trival matters? Pking someone because they are annoying you seems like a childish thing to do for me. The truth of the matter is people play evils because they want to keep the fire giant mentality ME SMASH, ME BASH, ARRRRGGGHHH!

[Aulian]

Anyway there is no reason for people to maintain the goody goody attitude.

I know when I played a good I just told everyone who pissed me off to stick it. And if forced to I would assualt them. Fear of being outcasted should not jeaprodise(sp?) your RP.

Or you could make up some RP in relation to what they had done, explaining why they had offended you and So forth.

[Iconz]

Isn't this what DEFINES being good? Ignoring and forgiving such trival matters? Pking someone because they are annoying you seems like a childish thing to do for me. The truth of the matter is people play evils because they want to keep the fire giant mentality ME SMASH' date=' ME BASH, ARRRRGGGHHH![/quote']

Just like what i said... people dont have fun RPin a good cuz there are limitations to what goods can do... and most people dont like to play games where they cant do whatever they want... its why sandbox games like GTA are so popular... you want to shoot a hooker... go for it. You want to do the missions... go right ahead. I like to roleplay cuz i like to put myself into the mind of a character and just go w/ it... know what their code is... what they would do... what they wouldnt do. The restrictions they put on themselves... that sort of thing. Its one of the reasons why i like playing... along w/ the adrenaline rush of pk. Thats just what floats my boat... other people want to be able to do what they want when they want... thats what floats their boat... so they play (aggro) neutrals and evils.

__________________

Captain Iconz - Avas matey!

[a-guitarist]

Isn't this what DEFINES being good? Ignoring and forgiving such trival matters? Pking someone because they are annoying you seems like a childish thing to do for me. The truth of the matter is people play evils because they want to keep the fire giant mentality ME SMASH' date=' ME BASH, ARRRRGGGHHH![/quote']

*golfclap* Well said.

[goldbond]

okay i'm quite sure a group of competent goods can easily get past these minor issues. but then again, i guess that would just be transferring the current evil/neutral crowd mentality to goods. either way, at the very least a good crowd domination would be a paradigm shift in this game. make evils actually work for something again. that's what it's about.

[HouselessRogue]

Backing to a comment that a healer/cleric should own a vampire... um, no. As Wellaby (elder knight -decked- halfling healer).. I had all kinds of trouble with Uhril. One certain skill is not savable despite the wicked saves I had on Wellaby. Another skill would take away my above 50 lvl. charmie easily. Divine Ret did little against him and landing a mastered turn undead was all but impossible. The constant night makes Vampires, REALLY, REALLY tough.

[Quigt]

Nobody cares if they get full looted once. Nobody cares if they had no chance to beat someone one time. It's the repetitive assault that makes most good-aligned characters want to play evils instead. The OOC dread of getting your crap stomped time after time is what makes goodies want to play evils. And no evil will ever let a goodie win once in a while because golly, who wants to lose at a game?

[English lad]

But thats it - lots of people are afraid of playing goods because they get stomped all the time - the question is why the people doing the stomping refuse to play good. Thats where the real imbalance is that most of the really skilled pk vets don't or won't play good most of the time. They either play Evils, or Neutrals that are so bloodthirsty they might as well be. I certainly don't want to tell anybody what they should or shouldn't play - but it seems to be becoming a real problem.

[Quigt]

It's because there seems to be the consensus that when two skilled players are both playing evils, then they share an upper hand, but when one of them is playing a good, then the playing field is level, which increases the chances of one of them losing. Nobody wants to sacrifice the probability of victory for the enjoyment of others, or moreso the fun of the game.