opinions?

[Pali]

not only that pali. i hate RPing the good guy.

As has been shown by past characters, a good can be actually one hell of a jerk and still meet the FL definition of "good". Racism, arrogance, elitism, intolerance, hatred, violent tendencies... a good char can have all of these and more.

RPing is a skill like any other. With greater practice, one can do much more with it, opening up new possibilities and leading to new places. You just need to be inventive enough.

[MadCowDisease]

thats the thing tho. "good" by FL standards is still "good"

there isnt much for scheming. There isnt much for power struggles. even the most violent of goods cant kill for what appears to be no reason at all. i like the slightly psychotic mindset found in a lot of evil characters.

[Pali]

I disagree completely. For instance, my current char is a good who may end up creating a power struggle between goods. I've also had goods in the past who were close friends with evils, as well as goods who killed for pleasure. Your lack of imagination is what is limiting you here, my friend, not the constraints of playing a good.

[Twinblades713]

I had a good, that got a rush out of causing pain, and liked to see corrupted souls suffer. He was rude, antisocial, and greedy, but wished to preserve the goodness in the world. He enjoyed the retribution he could serve to villains, and wanted to be the nightmare in their dreams.

This is basically as Pali said, but in example form. You really can play a good without the unnecessary limitations you might feel you are bound by. I still almost never do, but when I do I make it fun.

[MadCowDisease]

killing for pleasure is good...how?

i can understand if you enjoy killing. but killing solely because it pleases you.. not a very good trait.

theres a difference in good struggles and evil struggles. good struggles are more prominent in the case of overthrowing corruption, tyranny, or restoring what one believes to be an heir or whom one believes to be fit to lead. evil struggles tend to lean more towards wanting to rule something. wanting to destroy the system in place for the fun of watching the world scurry like ants, etc etc.

i would argue that your "good" was truly a nuetral.

[Pali]

I had a good' date=' that got a rush out of causing pain, and liked to see corrupted souls suffer. He was rude, antisocial, and greedy, but wished to preserve the goodness in the world. He enjoyed the retribution he could serve to villains, and wanted to be the nightmare in their dreams.[/quote']

Exactly. Think anti-heroes. If you've seen/read The Watchmen, think of Rorschach. If you've watched Dexter... well, think of Dexter. Think Blade. All of these characters would fit under the FL definition of good... they kill evil people and do not harm those who do not deserve it. They also happen to REALLY enjoy their work.

[MadCowDisease]

you're missing the fact that they all work towards some type of betterment, and are all bound to that belief. they all want to do what they do so that the world will benefit.

evils tend to say "f*** the world, i'll do whats best for me" evil has less limitations, in a sense, than good.

[Pali]

Uh... no, they do not. Dexter and Rorschach are both sociopaths - they very much enjoy killing and would be doing it regardless of external justification for the act. Blade just freaking hates vampires and kills them out of revenge for making him what he is.

That the world may benefit from their actions is not their motivation, it is simply the icing on the cake (and, frankly, it is what allows the audience to sympathize with them). I would hesitate to actually call them good people in reality... but under how FL defines good, they would fit.

[Mudder]

Yes, evil chars DO have less limitations.

However, you can pull off almost ANY goodie RP as long as you have these traits: 1) You do not harm goods.

2) You kill only those who deserve it. (Evils and sometimes neutrals)

As long as you stay within those limitations you can almost do whatever. To say goods are "good" by our definitions in life is silly. Think the Crusades, they slaughtered people on a massive scale. Crusaders are on par with Hitler.

Are they good? No way. Are they good in FL? You betchya. Goods are not any better than evils, they are just a different kind.

Think of Goods as Gang1. Evils as Gang2. Neutrals don't belong to a gang.

Gang1 and Gang2 have wars all the damn time. Neutrals do what they want, taking sides on occasion or whatever they feel necessary.

Gang1 tends to be nicer to the Neutrals, however Gang2 doesn't give a sh*t about anyone.

...I'm rambling.

[MadCowDisease]

yes mudder. and as ive said, those limitations are what makes goods not fun for me. ive said it, and im waiting for pali to catch on. evils have less limits, and are more fun for me. i dont see why the hell he's trying to tell me what my own outlook is.

[Pali]

I'm saying that you're misunderstanding how FL defines what a "good" person is, and that it is causing you to have a vastly limited concept of what you can do with one.

[-Totenkopf-]

Bitchin' about too much PK as an evil, and not enough as a good. What can ya do :|

I am finding myself thoroughly turned off by alot of the forum content. Its bull$(!#

Just play brother.

[I've Killed for Less]

I had a good, that got a rush out of causing pain, and liked to see corrupted souls suffer. He was rude, antisocial, and greedy, but wished to preserve the goodness in the world. He enjoyed the retribution he could serve to villains, and wanted to be the nightmare in their dreams.

This is basically as Pali said, but in example form. You really can play a good without the unnecessary limitations you might feel you are bound by. I still almost never do, but when I do I make it fun.

Twinblades, I like you. Not because you make awesome posts (which in most cases you do) but because you know the difference between their, they're, and there. Double plus good. ++ :)

[MadCowDisease]

i, for one am glad to see that mudder got rid of that absolutely horrid avatar and brought back the mage =D

[Nikodemus]

In Aabahran, a land where servants of the 'dark gods' are both a dominant force and a side that comes close to destroying the world roughly every three days or so, give or take the bank holidays, and someone declares their intention of bringing the 4325829th overlaying age of dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-dark-darkness equally often... I think it makes perfect sense for people who choose to battle on behalf of the virtuous to be extremely ruthless in their endeavours, and go by "most any means necessary" principles (with the exception of not causing harm to either of their allies) to create that breathing room for the people who adhere to moral standards.

In fact, I'd consider a goodie-Hitler in FL more than acceptable (desired in fact), so long as his crimes against humanity would be directed at evils. A merciless subjugator of evil is something I'd love to play, had I the abilities to back it up.

[Nikodemus]

On the actual topic, my suggestion would be to attempt to develop the character in a manner that will lead to your enjoyment of play.