Roleplayers: Would You Take This Option?

[Mooncalf]

Pretty much that too. I mean the cliques are already bad enough as it is.

>.>

I always say I'm willing to rp with anyone and everyone but seems that only 5-6 of the same people take the actual offer.

-shrugs-

I feel like if the community wasn't quite as grid-centric, there'd be far less 'us-vs-them' and 'win at all costs' attitudes. Roleplay encourages collaboration, grid play encourages OOC rivalries, as RBC has shown.

[Atabei Narcisse]

I see Becca's point
and to use the recent territory developments of some of the territory holders wanting to collect 'tolls' as an example;
if one was to avoid the grid all together then they also can able to avoid ALL territories.

That's part of the idea. Fighting for them would be optional, rather than forced on them. They wouldn't be able to be hit without accepting the challenge, but denying the challenge paints them as a coward, and they bow out of any roleplay thread in which the challenge was issued (written as them fleeing like a yellow belly).

So basically this idea was created due to the new conflicts on grid? When it's npc it's fine, but when it's player to player, not so fine?

[Mooncalf]

So basically this idea was created due to the new conflicts on grid? When it's npc it's fine, but when it's player to player, not so fine?

"Part" of the idea I said, not the whole of it. I've had this idea for over a year, and Natasha can confirm that.

Besides which, I have other updates planned that will make the new on-grid conflicts less of an issue, so this concept isn't as tied to that as you think.

[Alexandrea]

I see Becca's point
and to use the recent territory developments of some of the territory holders wanting to collect 'tolls' as an example;
if one was to avoid the grid all together then they also can able to avoid ALL territories.

That's part of the idea. Fighting for them would be optional, rather than forced on them. They wouldn't be able to be hit without accepting the challenge, but denying the challenge paints them as a coward, and they bow out of any roleplay thread in which the challenge was issued (written as them fleeing like a yellow belly).

But they would exist in their own little bubble where nothing goes wrong in their view as they don't interact with others besides the ones that agree with their 'world view'. So they wouldn't care that characters they don't ever deal with think. They wouldn't even know ic. So without even 'god moding' (in the sense of being an 'all powerful' 'always right' charry) they can write themselves a charry that can do or be anything if they wanted to, so long as no die rolls (if they even use the NRG) are unlucky.

[Atabei Narcisse]

Pretty much that too. I mean the cliques are already bad enough as it is.

>.>

I always say I'm willing to rp with anyone and everyone but seems that only 5-6 of the same people take the actual offer.

-shrugs-

I feel like if the community wasn't quite as grid-centric, there'd be far less 'us-vs-them' and 'win at all costs' attitudes. Roleplay encourages collaboration, grid play encourages OOC rivalries, as RBC has shown.

I'm surprised we're comparing path to rbc. We always say please don't do that in other posts and now we are?

I also feel like in a sense, to my last post, that it feels more like you (admin, mods) are trying to determine how my characters are playing and what they are doing if everything is always going to be NPC oriented/preferred first on grid things.

[Alexandrea]

Some players might just stick with rping with just the few they know will further their own agendas without outside variables introducing any unforeseen complications.

Pretty much that too. I mean the cliques are already bad enough as it is.

So Much This.

[Atabei Narcisse]

I guess I don't get what the point of levels are. Or do levels mean anything? I mean levels as in crafting and such?

I mean what would be the point to putting anything in crafting as an rp only character if I'm not crafting anything? So do stats in general mean anything to roleplayers anymore? I guess I'm having a difficult time seeing the bigger picture in terms of leveling and stats for rpers who just rp?

[Alexandrea]

I feel like if the community wasn't quite as grid-centric, there'd be far less 'us-vs-them' and 'win at all costs' attitudes. Roleplay encourages collaboration, grid play encourages OOC rivalries, as RBC has shown.

Respectfully I disagree. I'm not an active rp'r atm but when I was a LOT of the interactions in roleplay were completely grid driven. And that's what led me to interact with new (to me) players first and foremost.

[Mooncalf]

But they would exist in their own little bubble where nothing goes wrong in their view as they don't interact with others besides the ones that agree with their 'world view'. So they wouldn't care that characters they don't ever deal with think. They wouldn't even know ic. So without even 'god moding' (in the sense of being an 'all powerful' 'always right' charry) they can write themselves a charry that can do or be anything if they wanted to, so long as no die rolls (if they even use the NRG) are unlucky.

I don't think that's true about most of the hardcore roleplayers here at all. I think they are just more interested in roleplay than they are waking up to find their characters dead. Many gamers seem to me to be the ones interested primarily in winning, and anyone standing against them becomes the enemy OOC. That to me is a far more insular bubble than the one the hardcore roleplayers limit themselves to.

It boils down to what kind of game do I want this to be? RBC? WoW? Or a roleplay-centric game where collaboration and contributing to an overall grand story is encouraged, rather than OOC drama? I've said for a long time now that Path will be going more roleplay-centric, and this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. When I first made the game I set it up to be half and half, but I've seen that doesn't marry too well. The nature of Path is that it's a roleplay-centric game which attracts more roleplayers than gamers (see the stats page), and so it simply makes sense to make it more roleplay-centric.

The unique feature of the game is really the chapters and similar story events, and that, again, lends itself to roleplay more than it does grinding. Some gamer-centric players play out the chapters with things such as XP optimisation and power growth in mind. That's not the intention of Path's core feature.

[Atabei Narcisse]

I see Becca's point
and to use the recent territory developments of some of the territory holders wanting to collect 'tolls' as an example;
if one was to avoid the grid all together then they also can able to avoid ALL territories.

That's part of the idea. Fighting for them would be optional, rather than forced on them. They wouldn't be able to be hit without accepting the challenge, but denying the challenge paints them as a coward, and they bow out of any roleplay thread in which the challenge was issued (written as them fleeing like a yellow belly).

Isn't that kinda god modding my character? I'm not sure how I would feel about being written in that aspect, when in reality maybe my charrie ran away because stupid me got challenged and had no ammo. Or no weapon or anything, really.