Im a little late to the discussion, but feeling just as confused however on the other end of the spectrum . . .
I will state right up front that I don't mind dying. Its a natural part of the game. What I don't like (and as much as I have tried PvP in the MMO's I have played) is the bragging, the impression I get that the only value these pvpers give to themselves in life is directly related to their pvp skills or how high they rank on the leaderboards. There are always the exceptions, I say this in a general sense, not specific to any particular player.
I have tried pvp in Wow, EQ, EQ2, TOR, and some others I cant remember off the top of my head and could never get into it.
I like pve for the sense of working together with others towards a common goal. it has a positive feeling of cooperation and camaraderie. Pvp to me feels like your competing against the other players, thus an inherently detrimental feel, and to me a negative feeling. When it comes to my free time that I spend entertaining myself, I have no room for negativity and pointless competition. I prefer to compete against myself, not other players. I could care less how I rank on the leaderboards. it means nothing to me.
Perhaps this will help explain the mind or attitude of a strictly pve player who will most likely never touch a pvp game again in the context of MMO's.
I spend most of my time Rping on mmos. I do it because well its enjoyable to me and i know a lot of others who enjoy it as well. much like some enjoy pvp or pve, i do not PVP because i just do not see the need to nor do i care for those higher levels jumping lower lvls and such. We all play mmos differently but we all share the same goal and that is to have fun and forget about any troubles our day has brought.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
Youre going to hate me for this but this is based on my own experience:
PvP-players are cowards. You lurk around lower level players and kill them knowing they have no chance.
You never enter a balanced fight. You jump with a group on single player, or on a smaller group than yours.
You jump on them when they least expect it, so you have an upper hand, especialy players questing.
And, worst of all, youre bad winners, you mock and grief the ones you defeat.
Now, that said, not all of you are like that. Some of you are good sports and enjoy a massive battle where both sides have a fun time, regardless who wins. Kudos to you.
***Disclaimer*** I am not, have never been, and doubt I will ever be a roleplayer.
I play mmos to PvP. That's the entire purpose of the game for me. Sure other things are fine for biding my time, but PvP is the focus. I don't agree with PvE only players, but I can at least understand that they just want to fight mobs.
One thing I do not understand is the PvE only roleplayer. I know some RPers pvp, but from my experience, the vast majority do so very seldomly or not at all. Meanwhile, they stay completely in character and always adhere to the lore of the game........
Does anyone else see the glaring hole in that?
Most games have some sort of conflict embedded in the lore. Hell, most of the time it's the central point of the game. So how can a roleplayer who has chosen to roleplay a heroic knight for the "good guys", completely ignore fighting the "bad guys"?
How can he potentially see a fight break out between his faction and another, and just ignore it? Doesn't that kind of shatter the whole character they're playing?
Someone help me out here........
Roleplayers PvP mainly with other roleplayers I guess, and why shouldnt they? After all the normal PvE and PvP players are nothing but thin air to the roleplayer's character. Though, most roleplayers roleplay what they roleplay and do all kinds of PvE and PvP activities out of character the rest of time.
As a role player I can say pretty simply it is to avoid greifing. If everyone was a true role player guaranteed on a server open pvp would be awesome. But they're not. I don't need to get "ROFLstomped" while trying to Immerse myself. RPers will flag themselves or duel for RP purposes it they need to fight. Role players don't have a F you attitude towards each other it's about the story not competition.
Originally posted by Fendel84M As a role player I can say pretty simply it is to avoid greifing. If everyone was a true role player guaranteed on a server open pvp would be awesome. But they're not. I don't need to get "ROFLstomped" while trying to Immerse myself. RPers will flag themselves or duel for RP purposes it they need to fight. Role players don't have a F you attitude towards each other it's about the story not competition.
Thank you for this post. It is actually more or less how i feel. i do PVP but only amongst fellow RPers and it is mostly for a story or because we are sparing. I played on CH server on tera online and it use to be nice. ltos of good RP but then the nice free to play came along and it filled with those people who think anyone who does not pvp is a noob and should stop playing. But then it is the same crowed that crys when i finally get fed up and kick their butts in a duel.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
There are also a lot of trolls that intentionally try to inhibit RPers from doing their things. In addition, RPers will likely "fight" in emotes instead of using game mechanics. This usually entails turn based combat whereby each player writes up 10-15 paragraphs explaining an attack or defense or whatnot. Well, some of the more advanced ones. Though such could get excessive if there is more than two people involved.
Due to frequent travel in my youth, English isn't something I consider my primary language (and thus I obtained quirky ways of writing). German and French were always easier for me despite my family being U.S. citizens for over a century. Spanish I learned as a requirement in school, Japanese and Korean I acquired for my youthful desire of anime and gaming (and also work now). I only debate in English to help me work with it (and limit things). In addition, I'm not smart enough to remain fluent in everything and typically need exposure to get in the groove of things again if I haven't heard it in a while. If you understand Mandarin, I know a little, but it has actually been a challenge and could use some help.
Also, I thoroughly enjoy debates and have accounts on over a dozen sites for this. If you wish to engage in such, please put effort in a post and provide sources -- I will then do the same with what I already wrote (if I didn't) as well as with my responses to your own. Expanding my information on a subject makes my stance either change or strengthen the next time I speak of it or write a thesis. Allow me to thank you sincerely for your time.
Originally posted by Dibdabs PvP in 99% of mmorpgs is the weakest aspect of the game for me. I PvP in Eve Online where at least there is a sense of real risk vs reward, but in mmorpgs it's carebear, "Tom and Jerry" PvP, where after a defeat you just pop back seconds later, good as new and with all your possessions intact. What reward you get for winning might amount to no more than a few points scored towards a leaderboard position or a few more points towards an overpriced bit of gear. Where's the point in that? It's boooooring.
I'm sure some people say the same thing about gamers. Escaping from real life by dominating in a fantasy world and all that. :-)
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
As someone who has dabbled in roleplaying, enjoyed it and would be willing to do it a lot more often under certain circumstances I can only say that I don't justify it. What I don't like as a roleplayer is other people/characters killing without motive. When I'm roleplaying it's immersion breaking to have so many psychopaths (I mean the characters not people behind them) running around killing people pointlessly. It's one of the many immersion breaking reasons that stops me from roleplaying more often. I'm all for a game that enforces proper roleplaying standards and I've actually supported such an attempt in the past but as far as I'm concerned enforcing those standards would mean putting an end to mindless, out of character (as far as motive is concerned) killing rampages.
Originally posted by ozmono As someone who has dabbled in role playing, enjoyed it and would be willing to do it a lot more often under certain circumstances I can only say that I don't justify it. What I don't like as a role player is other people/characters killing without motive. When I'm role playing it's immersion breaking to have so many psychopaths (I mean the characters not people behind them) running around killing people pointlessly. It's one of the many immersion breaking reasons that stops me from role playing more often. I'm all for a game that enforces proper role playing standards and I've actually supported such an attempt in the past but as far as I'm concerned enforcing those standards would mean putting an end to mindless, out of character (as far as motive is concerned) killing rampages.
avoid swtor siths then lol, seems like ALL OF THEM are like that >>. And I'm not sure if the reply under mine was directed at me but if it was tera is NOT my first mmo, Ultima online was back in the day. And funny thing is the game is still up and running and still on a subscription base. I have played more mmos then i care to remember from solid mmos like everquest (for its time of course) to the new ones we are all waiting for (ESO/Wildstar/Archage) heck i even got my hands on Blade and soul for a while and PSO2.
Now the above poster says something i understand and can relate to. Though another trend i have seen amongst "RPers" is killing off other peoples characters with a flick of their wrist. Rather annoying when they claim they killed you and demand you delete your toon. Needless to say i kindly tell them to shove it and move on but it's still annoying.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
You throw an interesting question there, OP. In my view RPG must be integrated in the very design, systems and mechanics of the game, the purpose is to feel a cohesive, consistent world with not much suspension of disbelieve. Hence, sandbox foundations and Open-PvP are a must, as well as player-driven economy and politics and, over all, a high degree of interaction with the other players, the world and the way you evolve and build your character, among other things. Of course, a good moral/criminal/consequence system is a requisite - UO did some good stuff in this regard, and EVE is almost a model in my opinion.
In order words and to simplify: Go back to the roots of the genre -this is the philosophy of the PnP model - and take it to the PC-Gaming genre. This is what was done at the beginning (UO, AC, SWG, AC, EVE) until WoW changed the game and set an standard, for the worst. Honestly these "apparent" Roleplayers that you see in the themeparks make me laugh despite their good intentions: They are not roleplayers, but theater players living in a bubble. You just cannot RPG in a restrictive model such as the themepark, arcadeish, on-rails, level-bracketed model with a global AH (ie: global commodities in a medieval fantasy environment? Don't make me laugh...) and a chat. There is just no fucking way (pardon my language).
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Same way that pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons role players get away without pvp....
Usually people in D&D have characters of similar alignment and its a small party of players working towards common goals. Why would they attack each other with PvP? It's completely different from MMOs which are set up where you're supposed to hate the oppposite faction but you never actually fight them except in little battlegrounds.
But MMOs aren't really good games for actual RPing anyway. Especially recently. This is only one of the smaller reasons.
Sure Iri, but see my post above. It's entirely possible to self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you encounter are mobs. Even if you select one that does have an opposition faction, you are only one person/character. You can leave fighting the opposition faction in PvP zones to other characters on your side while you concentrate your job of fighting threats to your faction in other (PvE) zones. After all one person can only be in one place at a time. It's also true that many conflicts (in the real world) have some sort of Rules of Engagement....if not formal then defacto such as where the fighting tends to occur.
It's only if the Role-Player purposefully chooses and open world PvP game (which most do not) then refuses to engage the enemy when encountering them that any sort of cognititive dissonence is presented for the character....and that is hardly ever the case because most RP-ers who aren't interested in PvP simply don't put themselves in such situations in the first place, nor do they need to do so.
Wait a minute. You are saying that players on PvE servers, with the same game world and same game story do not have to PvP, but players on PvP servers do, otherwise they experience cognitive dissonance. Except the only difference is an aspect of game mechanics, not story or world. That would be like saying that since a game developer made hugging available as a game mechanic, and players earned points for hugging, all players on the same faction must now hug each other every time they see them or getting more in line with the game mechanics of combat, that players on the same faction must always help each other in combat, regardless of whether or not they like each other because they earn points for doing so.
Saying that role players on a PvP server must engage in combat disregards the story element and personal choices of the role player and their avatar. The personal choices of the role player and their avatar are kind of the whole point of role playing in the first place. I'm not a role player but it seems to me that the question posed by this thread lacks a fundamental understanding of what role players do.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Wow. It was an honest question and I was looking for a real answer. I wasn't "waving my pvp Epeen" around.
I was asking how it plays into their RP. If I was roleplaying, it would be a massive immersion killer to ignore something going on that my character should theoretically partake in. Too many of you anti-pvp guys just jump on people like me who play to pvp. You're making extremely sweeping generalizations about pvpers (Exploiters, Tea-baggers, immature teenagers, etc.).
Are you really going to sit there and complain about FOTM builds and people bashing you for not having the right spec when end game raid guilds are some of the strictest enforcers of FOTM and specific builds?
And please stop basing everything you know about PvP on WOW. It's about as far away from a PvP paradise as you can get.
Just because you don't like or agree with the reasons that have been given to you doesn't invalidate them. You've been given plenty of valid responses in this thread, what you do with them is up to you.
Same way that pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons role players get away without pvp....
Usually people in D&D have characters of similar alignment and its a small party of players working towards common goals. Why would they attack each other with PvP? It's completely different from MMOs which are set up where you're supposed to hate the oppposite faction but you never actually fight them except in little battlegrounds.
But MMOs aren't really good games for actual RPing anyway. Especially recently. This is only one of the smaller reasons.
Sure Iri, but see my post above. It's entirely possible to self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you encounter are mobs. Even if you select one that does have an opposition faction, you are only one person/character. You can leave fighting the opposition faction in PvP zones to other characters on your side while you concentrate your job of fighting threats to your faction in other (PvE) zones. After all one person can only be in one place at a time. It's also true that many conflicts (in the real world) have some sort of Rules of Engagement....if not formal then defacto such as where the fighting tends to occur.
It's only if the Role-Player purposefully chooses and open world PvP game (which most do not) then refuses to engage the enemy when encountering them that any sort of cognititive dissonence is presented for the character....and that is hardly ever the case because most RP-ers who aren't interested in PvP simply don't put themselves in such situations in the first place, nor do they need to do so.
Wait a minute. You are saying that players on PvE servers, with the same game world and same game story do not have to PvP, but players on PvP servers do, otherwise they experience cognitive dissonance. Except the only difference is an aspect of game mechanics, not story or world. That would be like saying that since a game developer made hugging available as a game mechanic, and players earned points for hugging, all players on the same faction must now hug each other every time they see them or getting more in line with the game mechanics of combat, that players on the same faction must always help each other in combat, regardless of whether or not they like each other because they earn points for doing so.
Saying that role players on a PvP server must engage in combat disregards the story element and personal choices of the role player and their avatar. The personal choices of the role player and their avatar are kind of the whole point of role playing in the first place. I'm not a role player but it seems to me that the question posed by this thread lacks a fundamental understanding of what role players do.
No I'm saying that role-players can self-select an MMO where the scenario presented is that every single antagonist you encounter will be a mob and not a player character. LOTRO is a pretty good example of this. Out in the main environment of the game, the only player characters you will encounter are members of the Free Peoples, hence Allies not enemies. All antagonists you encounter will be NPC's. Thus you could easly role-play a character who wants to kill every orc he see's and never need worry about PvP. PvP is tacked on and entirely restricted to one zone (the Moors) which one never need enter for anything and the hostile PC's (monster players) are restricted from ever leaving that zone.
If you played the same character, a PC that wanted to kill every orc they see, in an open world PvP MMO and encountered an orc that was played by another PC, the player would have to manufacture a reason why their character refused to engage that particular orc (if they wanted to avoid PvP) which could cause cognitive dissonence.
What you are misunderstanding that when I say, self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you will ever meet, I'm saying precisely one that refuses to allow players to select character types of different factions who are hostile to one another.....in the very same way that a DM in most PnP campaigns will restrict the character types players are able to select to play to ones that can work together. You never need to try to invent a reason to avoid fighting another player character when you logicaly should because none of the player characters you ever encounter will be of a hostile faction. Thus you could play a Paladin who's sole mission in life was to destroy undead and not have to worry about what you will do when you encounter a player character who is undead because undead are not a character type that players are allowed to select. Understood?
You throw an interesting question there, OP. In my view RPG must be integrated in the very design, systems and mechanics of the game, the purpose is to feel a cohesive, consistent world with not much suspension of disbelieve. Hence, sandbox foundations and Open-PvP are a must, as well as player-driven economy and politics and, over all, a high degree of interaction with the other players, the world and the way you evolve and build your character, among other things. Of course, a good moral/criminal/consequence system is a requisite - UO did some good stuff in this regard, and EVE is almost a model in my opinion.
In order words and to simplify: Go back to the roots of the genre -this is the philosophy of the PnP model - and take it to the PC-Gaming genre. This is what was done at the beginning (UO, AC, SWG, AC, EVE) until WoW changed the game and set an standard, for the worst. Honestly these "apparent" Roleplayers that you see in the themeparks make me laugh despite their good intentions: They are not roleplayers, but theater players living in a bubble. You just cannot RPG in a restrictive model such as the themepark, arcadeish, on-rails, level-bracketed model with a global AH (ie: global commodities in a medieval fantasy environment? Don't make me laugh...) and a chat. There is just no fucking way (pardon my language).
Except in most PnP Campaigns... the GM will only allow players to select to play character types which are not hostile to one another. Thus open PvP or even PvP at all is completely uneccesary for a role-playing MMO.... in fact it's rather anthetical to the PnP experience. Sandbox, yes....but PvP no. In fact, if we were to do for example a Star Wars MMO in a vein most similar to table-top PnP all Player Characters would have to be of the Rebel Alliance, you would not be able to select to play a character who was of the Imperial Faction.
You CAN do PvP in a RP oriented MMO.....though it's quite difficult since most PvP'ers have little to no interest in Role-Play... and the pacing of and controls for combat tend to interfere with any RP. For example, in PnP combat I can have my character scream out "Die Orc, Die!" in the middle of a melee, no problem. In most MMO's, I can't since I need to use my keyboard to enter movement and other commands in combat, I can't use it to type out anything in chat while I'm fighting.
My most extensive roleplay experience in a MMORPG of all time was back in UO, and we definitely PvP'd but part of our code was that we wouldn't gank/grief and would always offer an alternative to fighting.
Generally people came after us though, they always knew where to find us, we didn't try and hide, as we were Reds (PK) so we'd usually be on the defensive rather than going out hunting.
Same way that pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons role players get away without pvp....
Usually people in D&D have characters of similar alignment and its a small party of players working towards common goals. Why would they attack each other with PvP? It's completely different from MMOs which are set up where you're supposed to hate the oppposite faction but you never actually fight them except in little battlegrounds.
But MMOs aren't really good games for actual RPing anyway. Especially recently. This is only one of the smaller reasons.
Sure Iri, but see my post above. It's entirely possible to self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you encounter are mobs. Even if you select one that does have an opposition faction, you are only one person/character. You can leave fighting the opposition faction in PvP zones to other characters on your side while you concentrate your job of fighting threats to your faction in other (PvE) zones. After all one person can only be in one place at a time. It's also true that many conflicts (in the real world) have some sort of Rules of Engagement....if not formal then defacto such as where the fighting tends to occur.
It's only if the Role-Player purposefully chooses and open world PvP game (which most do not) then refuses to engage the enemy when encountering them that any sort of cognititive dissonence is presented for the character....and that is hardly ever the case because most RP-ers who aren't interested in PvP simply don't put themselves in such situations in the first place, nor do they need to do so.
Wait a minute. You are saying that players on PvE servers, with the same game world and same game story do not have to PvP, but players on PvP servers do, otherwise they experience cognitive dissonance. Except the only difference is an aspect of game mechanics, not story or world. That would be like saying that since a game developer made hugging available as a game mechanic, and players earned points for hugging, all players on the same faction must now hug each other every time they see them or getting more in line with the game mechanics of combat, that players on the same faction must always help each other in combat, regardless of whether or not they like each other because they earn points for doing so.
Saying that role players on a PvP server must engage in combat disregards the story element and personal choices of the role player and their avatar. The personal choices of the role player and their avatar are kind of the whole point of role playing in the first place. I'm not a role player but it seems to me that the question posed by this thread lacks a fundamental understanding of what role players do.
No I'm saying that role-players can self-select an MMO where the scenario presented is that every single antagonist you encounter will be a mob and not a player character. LOTRO is a pretty good example of this. Out in the main environment of the game, the only player characters you will encounter are members of the Free Peoples, hence Allies not enemies. All antagonists you encounter will be NPC's. Thus you could easly role-play a character who wants to kill every orc he see's and never need worry about PvP. PvP is tacked on and entirely restricted to one zone (the Moors) which one never need enter for anything and the hostile PC's (monster players) are restricted from ever leaving that zone.
If you played the same character, a PC that wanted to kill every orc they see, in an open world PvP MMO and encountered an orc that was played by another PC, the player would have to manufacture a reason why their character refused to engage that particular orc (if they wanted to avoid PvP) which could cause cognitive dissonence.
What you are misunderstanding that when I say, self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you will ever meet, I'm saying precisely one that refuses to allow players to select character types of different factions who are hostile to one another.....in the very same way that a DM in most PnP campaigns will restrict the character types players are able to select to play to ones that can work together. You never need to try to invent a reason to avoid fighting another player character when you logicaly should because none of the player characters you ever encounter will be of a hostile faction. Thus you could play a Paladin who's sole mission in life was to destroy undead and not have to worry about what you will do when you encounter a player character who is undead because undead are not a character type that players are allowed to select. Understood?
Well, in the specific case where someone locks themselves into a specific role, and then chooses a game where that role isn't going to work, yes, there are going to be some mental gymnastics. It doesn't matter what the specifics are. I would wonder how realistic the scenario is though. Pick a back story and role for a character, and then put them in a game where it's not going to be possible to actually do it because of the preferences of the person driving the character or the game's mechanics. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it doesn't seem likely.
The more likely scenario is that the person driving the character has built a slightly more complex back story and the character has a little more going on than "kill all orcs", so not killing the player orc may look odd to the player orc, but it's not odd to the person doing the role playing. Not only that, they've decided on a game and a type of server in that game that supports what they are doing, either because they can do it in spite of the game's rules or mechanics or because what they are doing is expected. For instance, role playing on a role play server.
We still haven't gotten to the point where the expectation that role players on a PvP server must engage in PvP is justified. We especially haven't gotten to the point where the role player must engage in PvP every chance they get. One of the main components of role playing in an MMORPG is that the role player(s) are using a rule set that takes precedence over the server or the game's rule set(s) and mechanics. It doesn't matter that the mechanics under question are the PvP mechanics, the role players' rule set takes precedence.
For instance, if the players have decided that the town that nobody visits is a meeting place, and the empty building to the East is a bar, and that players can go to the bar, get a drink and dance, then that is what is happening. It doesn't matter that the game doesn't think of those empty buildings as a town and that the game doesn't think of the building to the East as a bar. So if one player sees another player and that other player is "Red", it's not relevant unless it's relevant to the role play.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Same way that pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons role players get away without pvp....
Usually people in D&D have characters of similar alignment and its a small party of players working towards common goals. Why would they attack each other with PvP? It's completely different from MMOs which are set up where you're supposed to hate the oppposite faction but you never actually fight them except in little battlegrounds.
But MMOs aren't really good games for actual RPing anyway. Especially recently. This is only one of the smaller reasons.
Sure Iri, but see my post above. It's entirely possible to self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you encounter are mobs. Even if you select one that does have an opposition faction, you are only one person/character. You can leave fighting the opposition faction in PvP zones to other characters on your side while you concentrate your job of fighting threats to your faction in other (PvE) zones. After all one person can only be in one place at a time. It's also true that many conflicts (in the real world) have some sort of Rules of Engagement....if not formal then defacto such as where the fighting tends to occur.
It's only if the Role-Player purposefully chooses and open world PvP game (which most do not) then refuses to engage the enemy when encountering them that any sort of cognititive dissonence is presented for the character....and that is hardly ever the case because most RP-ers who aren't interested in PvP simply don't put themselves in such situations in the first place, nor do they need to do so.
Wait a minute. You are saying that players on PvE servers, with the same game world and same game story do not have to PvP, but players on PvP servers do, otherwise they experience cognitive dissonance. Except the only difference is an aspect of game mechanics, not story or world. That would be like saying that since a game developer made hugging available as a game mechanic, and players earned points for hugging, all players on the same faction must now hug each other every time they see them or getting more in line with the game mechanics of combat, that players on the same faction must always help each other in combat, regardless of whether or not they like each other because they earn points for doing so.
Saying that role players on a PvP server must engage in combat disregards the story element and personal choices of the role player and their avatar. The personal choices of the role player and their avatar are kind of the whole point of role playing in the first place. I'm not a role player but it seems to me that the question posed by this thread lacks a fundamental understanding of what role players do.
No I'm saying that role-players can self-select an MMO where the scenario presented is that every single antagonist you encounter will be a mob and not a player character. LOTRO is a pretty good example of this. Out in the main environment of the game, the only player characters you will encounter are members of the Free Peoples, hence Allies not enemies. All antagonists you encounter will be NPC's. Thus you could easly role-play a character who wants to kill every orc he see's and never need worry about PvP. PvP is tacked on and entirely restricted to one zone (the Moors) which one never need enter for anything and the hostile PC's (monster players) are restricted from ever leaving that zone.
If you played the same character, a PC that wanted to kill every orc they see, in an open world PvP MMO and encountered an orc that was played by another PC, the player would have to manufacture a reason why their character refused to engage that particular orc (if they wanted to avoid PvP) which could cause cognitive dissonence.
What you are misunderstanding that when I say, self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you will ever meet, I'm saying precisely one that refuses to allow players to select character types of different factions who are hostile to one another.....in the very same way that a DM in most PnP campaigns will restrict the character types players are able to select to play to ones that can work together. You never need to try to invent a reason to avoid fighting another player character when you logicaly should because none of the player characters you ever encounter will be of a hostile faction. Thus you could play a Paladin who's sole mission in life was to destroy undead and not have to worry about what you will do when you encounter a player character who is undead because undead are not a character type that players are allowed to select. Understood?
Well, in the specific case where someone locks themselves into a specific role, and then chooses a game where that role isn't going to work, yes, there are going to be some mental gymnastics. It doesn't matter what the specifics are. I would wonder how realistic the scenario is though. Pick a back story and role for a character, and then put them in a game where it's not going to be possible to actually do it because of the preferences of the person driving the character or the game's mechanics. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it doesn't seem likely.
The more likely scenario is that the person driving the character has built a slightly more complex back story and the character has a little more going on than "kill all orcs", so not killing the player orc may look odd to the player orc, but it's not odd to the person doing the role playing. Not only that, they've decided on a game and a type of server in that game that supports what they are doing, either because they can do it in spite of the game's rules or mechanics or because what they are doing is expected. For instance, role playing on a role play server.
We still haven't gotten to the point where the expectation that role players on a PvP server must engage in PvP is justified. We especially haven't gotten to the point where the role player must engage in PvP every chance they get. One of the main components of role playing in an MMORPG is that the role player(s) are using a rule set that takes precedence over the server or the game's rule set(s) and mechanics. It doesn't matter that the mechanics under question are the PvP mechanics, the role players' rule set takes precedence.
For instance, if the players have decided that the town that nobody visits is a meeting place, and the empty building to the East is a bar, and that players can go to the bar, get a drink and dance, then that is what is happening. It doesn't matter that the game doesn't think of those empty buildings as a town and that the game doesn't think of the building to the East as a bar. So if one player sees another player and that other player is "Red", it's not relevant unless it's relevant to the role play.
Of course, I'm not trying to dictate what a RP-er MUST do. My prime interest in MMO's IS RP-ing. However, I'm explaining to the OP different approach's a RP-er might take and thier advantages and disadvantages.
Generaly, I prefer NOT to do much if any PvP in MMO's where I want to RP. Generaly, I find this easiest to do where the MMO either limits players to selecting characters of the same or Allied factions or cordones off opposing factions to specific areas of the game world where one need never go. I find this gives me greater latitude in creating the types of characters I want to play and creates less potential for cognitive dissonence. I never need worry about having to rationalize reasons why a character I'm playing wouldn't engage a potential antagonist because I never need encounter a player character who is a potential antagonist. With so many different games availble out there to choose from these days, I don't see any particular reason why one would need to choose one that would put the role-player into a situation where they have to figure out a way to work around PvP or encountering players of hostile factions. One can simply choose a game where one is never likely to encounter antagonists who are player characters and pretty much eliminate any need to worry about it or work thier characters around such concerns.
Comments
Im a little late to the discussion, but feeling just as confused however on the other end of the spectrum . . .
I will state right up front that I don't mind dying. Its a natural part of the game. What I don't like (and as much as I have tried PvP in the MMO's I have played) is the bragging, the impression I get that the only value these pvpers give to themselves in life is directly related to their pvp skills or how high they rank on the leaderboards. There are always the exceptions, I say this in a general sense, not specific to any particular player.
I have tried pvp in Wow, EQ, EQ2, TOR, and some others I cant remember off the top of my head and could never get into it.
I like pve for the sense of working together with others towards a common goal. it has a positive feeling of cooperation and camaraderie. Pvp to me feels like your competing against the other players, thus an inherently detrimental feel, and to me a negative feeling. When it comes to my free time that I spend entertaining myself, I have no room for negativity and pointless competition. I prefer to compete against myself, not other players. I could care less how I rank on the leaderboards. it means nothing to me.
Perhaps this will help explain the mind or attitude of a strictly pve player who will most likely never touch a pvp game again in the context of MMO's.
Now racing games on the other hand, hehe.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
Click here for trove referral, bonuses to both!
Youre going to hate me for this but this is based on my own experience:
PvP-players are cowards. You lurk around lower level players and kill them knowing they have no chance.
You never enter a balanced fight. You jump with a group on single player, or on a smaller group than yours.
You jump on them when they least expect it, so you have an upper hand, especialy players questing.
And, worst of all, youre bad winners, you mock and grief the ones you defeat.
Now, that said, not all of you are like that. Some of you are good sports and enjoy a massive battle where both sides have a fun time, regardless who wins. Kudos to you.
so let me understand this a self proclaimed hardcore PvPer who states he is not a RPer dose not understand why or how a RPer thinks.
and wants to know why we dont do something.
well the answer is simple because we dont want to.
not eveyone who enjoys RP enjoys PvP and vise versa i fail to understadn why the two have to go togther.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
Roleplayers PvP mainly with other roleplayers I guess, and why shouldnt they? After all the normal PvE and PvP players are nothing but thin air to the roleplayer's character. Though, most roleplayers roleplay what they roleplay and do all kinds of PvE and PvP activities out of character the rest of time.
Thank you for this post. It is actually more or less how i feel. i do PVP but only amongst fellow RPers and it is mostly for a story or because we are sparing. I played on CH server on tera online and it use to be nice. ltos of good RP but then the nice free to play came along and it filled with those people who think anyone who does not pvp is a noob and should stop playing. But then it is the same crowed that crys when i finally get fed up and kick their butts in a duel.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
Click here for trove referral, bonuses to both!
I roleplay a knight that must free the game world from stupid AI that simply stands around and waits to die.
It's been working well so far!
There are also a lot of trolls that intentionally try to inhibit RPers from doing their things. In addition, RPers will likely "fight" in emotes instead of using game mechanics. This usually entails turn based combat whereby each player writes up 10-15 paragraphs explaining an attack or defense or whatnot. Well, some of the more advanced ones. Though such could get excessive if there is more than two people involved.
I'm sure some people say the same thing about gamers. Escaping from real life by dominating in a fantasy world and all that. :-)
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
avoid swtor siths then lol, seems like ALL OF THEM are like that >>. And I'm not sure if the reply under mine was directed at me but if it was tera is NOT my first mmo, Ultima online was back in the day. And funny thing is the game is still up and running and still on a subscription base. I have played more mmos then i care to remember from solid mmos like everquest (for its time of course) to the new ones we are all waiting for (ESO/Wildstar/Archage) heck i even got my hands on Blade and soul for a while and PSO2.
Now the above poster says something i understand and can relate to. Though another trend i have seen amongst "RPers" is killing off other peoples characters with a flick of their wrist. Rather annoying when they claim they killed you and demand you delete your toon. Needless to say i kindly tell them to shove it and move on but it's still annoying.
free 7 day sub and unlocks for swtor new accounts and 90+ day inactive subs click here to get it!
Click here for trove referral, bonuses to both!
You throw an interesting question there, OP. In my view RPG must be integrated in the very design, systems and mechanics of the game, the purpose is to feel a cohesive, consistent world with not much suspension of disbelieve. Hence, sandbox foundations and Open-PvP are a must, as well as player-driven economy and politics and, over all, a high degree of interaction with the other players, the world and the way you evolve and build your character, among other things. Of course, a good moral/criminal/consequence system is a requisite - UO did some good stuff in this regard, and EVE is almost a model in my opinion.
In order words and to simplify: Go back to the roots of the genre -this is the philosophy of the PnP model - and take it to the PC-Gaming genre. This is what was done at the beginning (UO, AC, SWG, AC, EVE) until WoW changed the game and set an standard, for the worst. Honestly these "apparent" Roleplayers that you see in the themeparks make me laugh despite their good intentions: They are not roleplayers, but theater players living in a bubble. You just cannot RPG in a restrictive model such as the themepark, arcadeish, on-rails, level-bracketed model with a global AH (ie: global commodities in a medieval fantasy environment? Don't make me laugh...) and a chat. There is just no fucking way (pardon my language).
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
Wait a minute. You are saying that players on PvE servers, with the same game world and same game story do not have to PvP, but players on PvP servers do, otherwise they experience cognitive dissonance. Except the only difference is an aspect of game mechanics, not story or world. That would be like saying that since a game developer made hugging available as a game mechanic, and players earned points for hugging, all players on the same faction must now hug each other every time they see them or getting more in line with the game mechanics of combat, that players on the same faction must always help each other in combat, regardless of whether or not they like each other because they earn points for doing so.
Saying that role players on a PvP server must engage in combat disregards the story element and personal choices of the role player and their avatar. The personal choices of the role player and their avatar are kind of the whole point of role playing in the first place. I'm not a role player but it seems to me that the question posed by this thread lacks a fundamental understanding of what role players do.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Just because you don't like or agree with the reasons that have been given to you doesn't invalidate them. You've been given plenty of valid responses in this thread, what you do with them is up to you.
No I'm saying that role-players can self-select an MMO where the scenario presented is that every single antagonist you encounter will be a mob and not a player character. LOTRO is a pretty good example of this. Out in the main environment of the game, the only player characters you will encounter are members of the Free Peoples, hence Allies not enemies. All antagonists you encounter will be NPC's. Thus you could easly role-play a character who wants to kill every orc he see's and never need worry about PvP. PvP is tacked on and entirely restricted to one zone (the Moors) which one never need enter for anything and the hostile PC's (monster players) are restricted from ever leaving that zone.
If you played the same character, a PC that wanted to kill every orc they see, in an open world PvP MMO and encountered an orc that was played by another PC, the player would have to manufacture a reason why their character refused to engage that particular orc (if they wanted to avoid PvP) which could cause cognitive dissonence.
What you are misunderstanding that when I say, self-select an MMO where the only antagonists you will ever meet, I'm saying precisely one that refuses to allow players to select character types of different factions who are hostile to one another.....in the very same way that a DM in most PnP campaigns will restrict the character types players are able to select to play to ones that can work together. You never need to try to invent a reason to avoid fighting another player character when you logicaly should because none of the player characters you ever encounter will be of a hostile faction. Thus you could play a Paladin who's sole mission in life was to destroy undead and not have to worry about what you will do when you encounter a player character who is undead because undead are not a character type that players are allowed to select. Understood?
Err they don't need to justify anything.
/thread
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Except in most PnP Campaigns... the GM will only allow players to select to play character types which are not hostile to one another. Thus open PvP or even PvP at all is completely uneccesary for a role-playing MMO.... in fact it's rather anthetical to the PnP experience. Sandbox, yes....but PvP no. In fact, if we were to do for example a Star Wars MMO in a vein most similar to table-top PnP all Player Characters would have to be of the Rebel Alliance, you would not be able to select to play a character who was of the Imperial Faction.
You CAN do PvP in a RP oriented MMO.....though it's quite difficult since most PvP'ers have little to no interest in Role-Play... and the pacing of and controls for combat tend to interfere with any RP. For example, in PnP combat I can have my character scream out "Die Orc, Die!" in the middle of a melee, no problem. In most MMO's, I can't since I need to use my keyboard to enter movement and other commands in combat, I can't use it to type out anything in chat while I'm fighting.
Pcgamingvet
My most extensive roleplay experience in a MMORPG of all time was back in UO, and we definitely PvP'd but part of our code was that we wouldn't gank/grief and would always offer an alternative to fighting.
Generally people came after us though, they always knew where to find us, we didn't try and hide, as we were Reds (PK) so we'd usually be on the defensive rather than going out hunting.
Well, in the specific case where someone locks themselves into a specific role, and then chooses a game where that role isn't going to work, yes, there are going to be some mental gymnastics. It doesn't matter what the specifics are. I would wonder how realistic the scenario is though. Pick a back story and role for a character, and then put them in a game where it's not going to be possible to actually do it because of the preferences of the person driving the character or the game's mechanics. I'm not saying it can't happen, but it doesn't seem likely.
The more likely scenario is that the person driving the character has built a slightly more complex back story and the character has a little more going on than "kill all orcs", so not killing the player orc may look odd to the player orc, but it's not odd to the person doing the role playing. Not only that, they've decided on a game and a type of server in that game that supports what they are doing, either because they can do it in spite of the game's rules or mechanics or because what they are doing is expected. For instance, role playing on a role play server.
We still haven't gotten to the point where the expectation that role players on a PvP server must engage in PvP is justified. We especially haven't gotten to the point where the role player must engage in PvP every chance they get. One of the main components of role playing in an MMORPG is that the role player(s) are using a rule set that takes precedence over the server or the game's rule set(s) and mechanics. It doesn't matter that the mechanics under question are the PvP mechanics, the role players' rule set takes precedence.
For instance, if the players have decided that the town that nobody visits is a meeting place, and the empty building to the East is a bar, and that players can go to the bar, get a drink and dance, then that is what is happening. It doesn't matter that the game doesn't think of those empty buildings as a town and that the game doesn't think of the building to the East as a bar. So if one player sees another player and that other player is "Red", it's not relevant unless it's relevant to the role play.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Of course, I'm not trying to dictate what a RP-er MUST do. My prime interest in MMO's IS RP-ing. However, I'm explaining to the OP different approach's a RP-er might take and thier advantages and disadvantages.
Generaly, I prefer NOT to do much if any PvP in MMO's where I want to RP. Generaly, I find this easiest to do where the MMO either limits players to selecting characters of the same or Allied factions or cordones off opposing factions to specific areas of the game world where one need never go. I find this gives me greater latitude in creating the types of characters I want to play and creates less potential for cognitive dissonence. I never need worry about having to rationalize reasons why a character I'm playing wouldn't engage a potential antagonist because I never need encounter a player character who is a potential antagonist. With so many different games availble out there to choose from these days, I don't see any particular reason why one would need to choose one that would put the role-player into a situation where they have to figure out a way to work around PvP or encountering players of hostile factions. One can simply choose a game where one is never likely to encounter antagonists who are player characters and pretty much eliminate any need to worry about it or work thier characters around such concerns.