Dragons, Gods and Demons: Why?

[TygerDarkstorm]

1 hour ago, TwoDee said:

I'd like to start off by saying that I'm not here to police @MHertz's language over what is fundamentally pretty clearly a vent thread.  I feel like his argument got very caught up in the aesthetic baggage of fantastical (invariably loosely Magic-Origin) character tropes, but in turn that meant that this thread likewise got caught up in those aesthetic trappings rather than what I feel is his most salient point, and what is closest to the core of the vent, from the second post:

 

 

This is a real problem that I feel keenly in Everlasting's casual-RP scene, but it's hardly exclusive to Everlasting roleplay; it's something that I was inundated with back when I was still doing forum play-by-post, for instance.  And it happens because there's no ground-level understanding - no "Session Zero" - between roleplayers about whether we're telling a shared story that follows narrative convention - as, say, Vampire: the Masquerade or FATE attempt to do - or whether we're playing escapist avatars to inhabit and live out a power fantasy, as older editions of Dungeons and Dragons and many video games do.

(And as Vampire: the Masquerade is often played in practice, but that's neither here nor there)

 

To the first group, melodrama and narrative conflict are very much the point, because the expectation is that these characters exist in collaborative pursuit of story beats: "Once my character is created, I divest their fate to the input of the group on what would make for good conflict."  To the second group, melodrama and narrative conflict are a betrayal of the appeal; "I play this game to have fun.  Is it so wrong to want to live out the fantasy of being a wizard who can ragdoll Lord Recluse? If I wanted to be a powerless, traumatized chucklefuck who struggles to pay his bills I would just go outside."

Obviously, these are hyperbolic exaggerations of the "camps," as it were, and there are definitely players who land in the in-between spaces (we see a lot of them in this thread!), but the different philosophies exist, and friction is inevitable.  Story-first players are going to get disappointed when they run up against characters who lack conflict because they're intended primarily to be standees for the author to hang out and vibe in a cool avatar.  Power-fantasy-first players are going to feel put-upon when they try to pursue what the game has promised them - getting to be a hero who saves people - and have their presumptive damsels in distress go "but that was a character flaw I didn't want resolved, why don't you understand my story?"

 

Certainly, what guidance City of Heroes itself provides directly caters to the power fantasy camp, not the collaborative-narrative camp..  At level 50+ Incarnate, you are the most powerful being in the game world, more powerful than the literal gods of the setting.  The natural counterpoint to the 'I can't take players who play Gods seriously when they struggle with Skulls' argument is that eventually that character, and all characters if played enough, become powerful enough to beat down Statesman and Lord Recluse, to beat down Cole, to beat down Mot, to save and/or destroy the world singlehandedly.  That's a ringing endorsement of "this is a game for you to live out that power fantasy," and while the game tells you in no uncertain terms that you can kick Lord Recluse's ass by blinking hard enough, it never once tells you "by the way, make room for other players and make sure you're not too powerful or else you'll piss people off."  That would be a betrayal of the very triumphant feeling that the game writing is shooting for.  People roleplaying as the game tells them to play aren't necessarily less valid than "Narrativist" roleplayers such as myself and the OP, and they're not inherently "roleplaying wrong."

 

That said, I'm going to concur with the following, but I'm also going to bounce off of it:

 

I agree with @McSpazz's take that high-powered and especially Magic characters are much easier to powergame in a way that trivializes other players' input. Although certainly a Tech-Origin super-scientist or Mutant or Natural Batman-alike can pull new capabilities out of their ass to defuse any narrative tension, it's a lot easier to write, and a lot more tempting to jump into as the first resort, if it's already preestablished that the character is a being of limitless or near-limitless power and agency.  Magic caters to that particular fantasy better and with less dissonance than the other Origins, because Magic is by its very nature indefinable and infinite.  Certainly, I think it's no accident that, as of Homecoming's polls a couple of years ago, Magic Origin dwarfs all other Origins in popularity, because there's so much more you can do with an Origin that's completely unfettered from mundane notions of scope and common sense.

 

So, to take that one step further, I see a lot of the "woah there, aren't you painting with a broad brush there, @MHertz?  You're catching us innocent dragons and gods and demons and vampire lords in the crossfire" rhetoric in this thread as a little bit forest-for-the-trees.

 

These are character concepts that, although they can be roleplayed well - ❤️ and indeed are unilaterally roleplayed well by all of the lovely people in this thread who I wouldn't dare to impugn in a million, billion years ❤️ - are popular and powerful tools in the hands of godmoding roleplayers because of the greater utility that such a character concept naturally offers in the pursuit of godmoding.  I don't think it's an accident that the OP latched on to high-powered magical creatures for his hypothetical godmoding bugbear, and "well, but can't a player godmode with any concept?" is begging the question in bad faith.

 

I don't think it invalidates anybody's dragon, or vampire, or God, to acknowledge that just by the basic logistics of how godmoding works, you're going to meet a lot more godmoding Literal Gods in the roleplay community than you're going to meet godmoding Street-Level Mutants With a Day Job, and that does lead to an increased wariness when dealing with those character tropes among roleplayers like the OP but, also, myself: a sort of "Schrödinger's Godmoder" if you will.  OP is pulling emotively from that paralytic paranoia-of-intent that I often feel when a character introduces themselves to me as "Hello, I'm Coolname Cooler'Surname, I'm a half-god half-god (both my parents were gods) who is also an archmage; please tell me about your character conflicts."

This was a beautifully written and thought-provoking post. I definitely fall somewhere in the middle of the two types of "camps" you discuss in the first half. Not every character I create is intended to be roleplayed; some are just fun fantasies, but this post gives me lots of juicy things to think about. Some characters have sort of a general concept/idea and get created because I got inspired by one thing or another, but they may not really end up with any sort of story. Other characters get a proper bio, and are a bit more thought out in who they are and what their purpose in the world of CoH/V is. Though I have not participated in much roleplay yet in game or on the forums here since I have gotten really nervous/shy about my ability to RP, lol.

 

Your second half of the post really got me. I used to want to make almost every character a magic origin character when I played this game as a teen. As you point out, it's a very easy way to write off a lot of little details about the character and what they can do. And as I have gotten older, I have definitely come to find that a quite boring strategy and not interesting to play or read about. I've actually found tech/science origins to be quite fun for concepts lately; why does my character have the ability to manipulate gravitational forces? Well, this nifty suit/gadget/etc. was carefully developed to allow them to do this (thus giving them a weakness as well that if the suit, gadget, etc. gets damaged, they are then powerless).

 

Thank you for such a beautifully written post and for all of the points to think about. Idk about others, but for me who has been sort of on the fringe of the RP community here (by choice because of my own fear/nerves), this will help guide how I think about the characters I have who I would want to RP with. I love my dragons, creatures, aliens, vampires, etc., but even before this, I have never wanted to portray them in a way that is "god-mode," but again, that comes from growing. I had a borderline Mary Sue character in my beginning RP days and yeah, it's not fun. And as much as I have learned since then, I know there is always still more I can learn. 🙂

[PeregrineFalcon]

55 minutes ago, Crasical said:

I asked why you post in the roleplay subforums if you don't roleplay.

No you didn't. What you actually wrote was:

 

On 3/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, Crasical said:

So you don't roleplay in City of Heroes.... but you DID come to the roleplay section of the forums, to tell us you don't roleplay, because everyone is 15 year olds power tripping... but you're not sure they're actually doing that, because you don't roleplay.

Okay.

 

Anyway those power-tripping 15 year olds are 25 years old now, post-shutdown.

Doesn't seem to me like you asked a question. It appears to me that you were mocking the fact that I'd dared to post in the roleplay section of the forums. Which is basically what I wrote. I wrote that post without naming you specifically because I wasn't trying to "name and shame", I was merely commenting on the event.

 

In answer to your question though, I posted because I am interested in roleplaying and offered an example of my experience with it.

 

I'm not sure why you decided to become so defensive about my posting in the roleplaying section of the forums. I will tell you though that I will continue to post in this, or any other, section of the forums whether you like it or not. At least until the moderators perma-ban me.

[Crasical]

48 minutes ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

I'm not sure why you decided to become so defensive about my posting in the roleplaying section of the forums. I will tell you though that I will continue to post in this, or any other, section of the forums whether you like it or not. At least until the moderators perma-ban me.

 Sorry if my point did not come across. 
 

When you post something like "Everyone is galactic levels of power, everyone is 15 year olds power tripping", it comes across as kind of a rude generalization, you know? 

When you post something like "I don't roleplay in City of Heroes, because everyone is power tripping. But I don't know if people are power tripping, because I don't roleplay", it's kind of circular reasoning, and flawed. It makes me ask 'Why are you here? Just to complain?'

 

You can post where you like, you can say what you like. But I feel like I can point these things out to you as well.

[PeregrineFalcon]

26 minutes ago, Crasical said:

You can post where you like, you can say what you like. But I feel like I can point these things out to you as well.

Fair enough. The only problem that I have is that you fundamentally misunderstood my post.

 

I did not write "Everyone is galactic levels of power, everyone is 15 year olds power tripping", as you claimed. What I actually wrote was "The only real problem that I've had with roleplayers and and roleplaying in City of Heroes is that everyone that I've encountered is of Galactus levels of power."

 

So it seems that you took it as me attacking all roleplayers in City of Heroes, whereas what I actually wrote referred ONLY to people that I was trying to roleplay with. So unless you were one of those people that I was attempting to roleplay with on the retail servers, back in 2007, there's no reason for you to get defensive as I wasn't even talking about you.

 

It came across as a rude generalization because you didn't actually read the words that I wrote. You read what you wanted to read and then attacked me because of what you thought I wrote.

[Crasical]

You have a nice day, sir.

[TwoDee]

23 hours ago, TygerDarkstorm said:

This was a beautifully written and thought-provoking post. I definitely fall somewhere in the middle of the two types of "camps" you discuss in the first half. Not every character I create is intended to be roleplayed; some are just fun fantasies, but this post gives me lots of juicy things to think about. Some characters have sort of a general concept/idea and get created because I got inspired by one thing or another, but they may not really end up with any sort of story. Other characters get a proper bio, and are a bit more thought out in who they are and what their purpose in the world of CoH/V is. Though I have not participated in much roleplay yet in game or on the forums here since I have gotten really nervous/shy about my ability to RP, lol.

 

Your second half of the post really got me. I used to want to make almost every character a magic origin character when I played this game as a teen. As you point out, it's a very easy way to write off a lot of little details about the character and what they can do. And as I have gotten older, I have definitely come to find that a quite boring strategy and not interesting to play or read about. I've actually found tech/science origins to be quite fun for concepts lately; why does my character have the ability to manipulate gravitational forces? Well, this nifty suit/gadget/etc. was carefully developed to allow them to do this (thus giving them a weakness as well that if the suit, gadget, etc. gets damaged, they are then powerless).

 

Thank you for such a beautifully written post and for all of the points to think about. Idk about others, but for me who has been sort of on the fringe of the RP community here (by choice because of my own fear/nerves), this will help guide how I think about the characters I have who I would want to RP with. I love my dragons, creatures, aliens, vampires, etc., but even before this, I have never wanted to portray them in a way that is "god-mode," but again, that comes from growing. I had a borderline Mary Sue character in my beginning RP days and yeah, it's not fun. And as much as I have learned since then, I know there is always still more I can learn. 🙂

 

I think if you as a player are proactively asking yourself, "am I making room for other people to be in the spotlight right now?" at all, you're probably well and truly in the clear.  Introspection is important in roleplay, and soliciting constructive critique is - at least in my opinion - also a must.  You can never improve unless you know what you're doing wrong.  Looking at dissatisfying roleplay stories that don't have the oomph you want them to, dissecting them, and going "why didn't this work?" is a fruitful and rewarding practice.

 

To expand on the previous point that high-Magic character concepts in roleplay tend to be those most prone to providing unsatisfying, poorly-written "handwave" conclusions to conflicts, I'd also observe that this phenomenon is hardly unique to roleplay, and originated long before it.  It's actually spread across all of the genre fiction from which City of Heroes derives its inspiration.  An absolutely fabulous breakdown of why this occurs was provided by prolific fantasy author Brandon Sanderson, of Mistborn and Stormlight fame:

 

Quote

SANDERSON’S FIRST LAW OF MAGICS: AN AUTHOR’S ABILITY TO SOLVE CONFLICT WITH MAGIC IS DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL TO HOW WELL THE READER UNDERSTANDS SAID MAGIC.

 

In short, if magic has clearly delineated, well-telegraphed rules and limitations that are known and understood well in advance, your audience is going to be a lot more receptive to the idea of a character waggling magic at a problem to make it go away.  If magic is powerful and limitless, then it's wildly unsatisfying as a conclusion to a narrative arc, because there's no dramatic setup nor payoff to a wizard/dragon/fey queen/whatever going "abloogie woo, problem solved forever."  If the exact rules by which the fey queen can resurrect the dead are not established well in advance, then when the hero dies at the end and the fey queen resurrects him, it's not a well-foreshadowed, interwoven narrative beat; it's a Deus Ex Machina.

 

You may notice that going "to be dramatically satisfying, Magic needs to be strictly defined, limited in its application, and mechanistically explained so that there's no mystery to it" makes it a lot closer to, well, Tech or Science tonally.  And that's not an accident.  To quote Sanderson, himself quoting the legendary genre-fiction editor John Campbell,

 

Quote

"THE MAJOR DISTINCTION BETWEEN FANTASY AND SCIENCE FICTION IS, SIMPLY, THAT SCIENCE FICTION USES ONE, OR A VERY, VERY FEW NEW POSTULATES, AND DEVELOPS THE RIGIDLY CONSISTENT LOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THESE LIMITED POSTULATES. FANTASY MAKES ITS RULES AS IT GOES ALONG . . . THE BASIC NATURE OF FANTASY IS “THE ONLY RULE IS, MAKE UP A NEW RULE ANY TIME YOU NEED ONE!”"

 

You may notice that Campbell's description of what makes "Fantasy" distinct, makes Fantasy sound like unbelievably lazy, sloppy writing, but that's because Sturgeon's Law was in full force for midcentury fantasy lit.  JRR Tolkien was an exception, not the rule, and a lot of his imitators learned terrible lessons from him; that magic could be all-powerful, completely undefined and still be used to handwave away conflicts, that worldbuilding is more important than writing compelling characters, that fantasy needs innately evil, racially-coded antagonist species, and so forth.  Gandalf would be a disastrous character to play in City of Heroes, because the Gandalf presented in The Lord of the Rings presumptively has the ability to just fly the ring into Mount Doom himself the whole time, inexplicably doesn't, and then handily pulls that power right out of his asshole when he needs to get the protagonists home safely.

 

A roleplayer-character wizard in the model of Gandalf has no such compunctions not to leverage his limitless and ill-defined power to its natural conclusion of Always Winning At Everything, and I don't think that I need to explain to anyone in this thread how unbelievably lame it is to have one's supergroup or personal roleplay derailed by an "oh, don't bother, I'll just summon the giant eagles to solve the entire plot for us" moment.

 

It is, again, not a phenomenon unique to Magic conceptually, but the pervasive notion of -

 

 

-is baked-in to the history and DNA of fantasy literature from at least Tolkien on, in a way that is not as true of other contemporary genre fiction from which City of Heroes draws its themes.  Thus, why I do tend to hold roleplay characters with the  next to their name to a higher standard of scrutiny when they're posing solutions to roleplay plotline conflicts, especially when I don't know them well.  Sanderson's First Law is hardly an inviolate mandate-from-heaven, but it's a good guideline to keep in mind when dissecting why powerful magic frequently ruins stories.

[TigerEmperor]

2 hours ago, TwoDee said:

 

I think if you as a player are proactively asking yourself, "am I making room for other people to be in the spotlight right now?" at all, you're probably well and truly in the clear.  Introspection is important in roleplay, and soliciting constructive critique is - at least in my opinion - also a must.  You can never improve unless you know what you're doing wrong.  Looking at dissatisfying roleplay stories that don't have the oomph you want them to, dissecting them, and going "why didn't this work?" is a fruitful and rewarding practice.

 

To expand on the previous point that high-Magic character concepts in roleplay tend to be those most prone to providing unsatisfying, poorly-written "handwave" conclusions to conflicts, I'd also observe that this phenomenon is hardly unique to roleplay, and originated long before it.  It's actually spread across all of the genre fiction from which City of Heroes derives its inspiration.  An absolutely fabulous breakdown of why this occurs was provided by prolific fantasy author Brandon Sanderson, of Mistborn and Stormlight fame:

 

 

In short, if magic has clearly delineated, well-telegraphed rules and limitations that are known and understood well in advance, your audience is going to be a lot more receptive to the idea of a character waggling magic at a problem to make it go away.  If magic is powerful and limitless, then it's wildly unsatisfying as a conclusion to a narrative arc, because there's no dramatic setup nor payoff to a wizard/dragon/fey queen/whatever going "abloogie woo, problem solved forever."  If the exact rules by which the fey queen can resurrect the dead are not established well in advance, then when the hero dies at the end and the fey queen resurrects him, it's not a well-foreshadowed, interwoven narrative beat; it's a Deus Ex Machina.

 

You may notice that going "to be dramatically satisfying, Magic needs to be strictly defined, limited in its application, and mechanistically explained so that there's no mystery to it" makes it a lot closer to, well, Tech or Science tonally.  And that's not an accident.  To quote Sanderson, himself quoting the legendary genre-fiction editor John Campbell,

 

 

You may notice that Campbell's description of what makes "Fantasy" distinct, makes Fantasy sound like unbelievably lazy, sloppy writing, but that's because Sturgeon's Law was in full force for midcentury fantasy lit.  JRR Tolkien was an exception, not the rule, and a lot of his imitators learned terrible lessons from him; that magic could be all-powerful, completely undefined and still be used to handwave away conflicts, that worldbuilding is more important than writing compelling characters, that fantasy needs innately evil, racially-coded antagonist species, and so forth.  Gandalf would be a disastrous character to play in City of Heroes, because the Gandalf presented in The Lord of the Rings presumptively has the ability to just fly the ring into Mount Doom himself the whole time, inexplicably doesn't, and then handily pulls that power right out of his asshole when he needs to get the protagonists home safely.

 

A roleplayer-character wizard in the model of Gandalf has no such compunctions not to leverage his limitless and ill-defined power to its natural conclusion of Always Winning At Everything, and I don't think that I need to explain to anyone in this thread how unbelievably lame it is to have one's supergroup or personal roleplay derailed by an "oh, don't bother, I'll just summon the giant eagles to solve the entire plot for us" moment.

 

It is, again, not a phenomenon unique to Magic conceptually, but the pervasive notion of -

 

 

-is baked-in to the history and DNA of fantasy literature from at least Tolkien on, in a way that is not as true of other contemporary genre fiction from which City of Heroes draws its themes.  Thus, why I do tend to hold roleplay characters with the  next to their name to a higher standard of scrutiny when they're posing solutions to roleplay plotline conflicts, especially when I don't know them well.  Sanderson's First Law is hardly an inviolate mandate-from-heaven, but it's a good guideline to keep in mind when dissecting why powerful magic frequently ruins stories.

 

I too was thinking that there are writers like Tolkien and Sanderson who actually treat magic as what it is: something that can and, to some degree or another, should have rules and limits in relation to the type of worldbuilding you're using in whatever setting you're going with. Storytelling, roleplay, either way. Magic is something that we can understand as "We don't have to explain a thing." but should, when used in constructive writing such as roleplay and creative works aimed at higher age groups, be seen through the same lens we see science: rules, laws, "this only works because of these other things being present."

 

Does that stop magic from being powerful and theoretically limitless, though?

 

My answer would be "No, you just have to be very careful in explaining how and why it is."

 

An example of at least trying to seem like there are such rules and "rational understandings" of magic would be the Fate franchise [Stay Night, Zero, Grand Order, etc.], in that they have an at least somewhat defined system with rules, limitations, and, if you will, "exceptions that break the rules but here's why!" that are cumulative efforts on the part of multiple people, if not generations, or otherwise in circumstances where we are given to understand that it would have been possible to achieve that and thereby retain it as a phenomenon. Such as Schweinorg having the Second Magic [Operation of Parallel Worlds], creating it in a set of circumstances where "high sorcery" [magic that isn't as logically understood by modern conceptions and viewed through a soft worldbuilding lens] was plausible as a means to reach and comprehend what amounts to the full truth and understanding of magic as a phenomenon.

 

But all that being said, magic should be used in the same way we would with science, as according to Sanderson's Law. Explain it in a careful, consistent way and people will go with you... But remember that others are involved and need to be considered when you're roleplaying. And make sure your editor calls you on any foibles/forgetting when you're writing novels.

 

Sorry if this seems to be reiterating some of your main points but felt a need to agree and build on, offer another example that could be tied in, that sort of thing.

[Blackshear]

People are gonna play demons, dragons, and gods...learn to live with it.  (I even came across one toon, roughly level 4, who was going on about being a half-demon half-dragon who had ascended to godhood.  Needless to say she was in Pocket D cruising for lesbian sex.)

I do, however, have a few notions I'd like to share on the general presentation of demons...who they are, what their cosmic role is, their relationship with human souls, and so forth.  Just some food for thought:

Souls

Suggestion: Every person's soul is ultimately their own. The notion that a soul can be stolen / eaten / destroyed without the owner's consent ultimately goes against most major religious and spiritual beliefs.  It also fits with the consensual nature of RP that your soul cannot be lost or taken unless you, at some level, consent to this occurring. Of course, this could occur by psychologically breaking down a subject until, in their heart, they surrender their soul. Once your soul is surrendered the evil entity can do what it wants to the poor thing.

There are canon examples of soul trapping in the game, such as Numina during the Mortimer Kal strike force.  Soul traps are definitely on the table in game.  However, bear in mind that in the Morty Kal situation Numina had to be weakened enough to be trapped, and when the trap was physically damaged she immediately escaped.

What it comes down to is this:  if another player states that you can't eat their soul they're not godmoding...you are.  Literally.

The role of demons

In that vein, remember that the general role of demons in Western religion is to either punish the wicked or to tempt and corrupt mortals in order to bring about their damnation. I see a lot of people RPing "slaughter" demons who frenzy and kill mortals by the bushel, but that really makes little sense. Demons killing indiscriminately are not going to be able to claim all those innocent souls, after all. Tragedies such as mass slaughter do not necessarily break mortals down, either...tragedy sometimes makes us band together and can even cause some people to commit themselves to the greater good.  Anyway, we don't need demons to slaughter us, not when we do such a good job of that ourselves.

A warrior demon that exists to enforce underworld "laws," prop up a demon warlord, or to fight against other supernaturals, though, makes perfect sense.

Demons and their freaking high-and-mighty attitudes

It makes sense for demons to be contemptuous of mortals.  I think that's a reasonable take. If you'd previously spent eleventy-zillion years hanging out with Hitler, Pol Pot, Ted Bundy, and similar dregs you'd be forgiven for thinking all of humanity is the pits. However, the more intelligent demons might realize a few home truths. First, not all mortals are like that.  Second, some mortals attain sufficient power to challenge demons (whether the demon is PC controlled or an AV or what have you, I promise there is some "mortal" character out there who can bring it down). Third, mortal souls are just as eternal as demons, and on the cosmic scale are their equals, and perhaps even their betters. Finally, morally speaking a tempter demon is a very low creature. There is no human crime, no matter how despicable, that they are better than. If you want people to damn themselves then you are lending your tacit approval to literally the worst possible behaviors. Bear that in mind before you start thinking demons are sexy. Tempter demons in particular are about as sexy as a drunk slob in a chili-stained tank top beating his family. Actually, morally speaking, they've even lower.

Demons as rebels and iconoclasts

I think a lot of players play demons because it makes them feel free.  Demons don't have to follow the rules!  They can do whatever they want, neener neener neener!  Well, that's legit, but I think it's important to consider what your demon is rebelling against.  One literary conceit regarding the underworld that I enjoy is the notion that even a powerful demon can never really be comfortable there. The notion of the underworld as a cut-throat collection of nasties constantly trying to take each other down definitely has some dramatic merit. Much like the damned, demons may well live in an environment that is constantly changing for the worse. They can spend millennia scrambling up the ranks just to have it all ripped out from under them in an instant. Perhaps the demons in the underworld are, in their way, being punished just as much as the damned. Maybe here and there one of them realizes their whole system is basically a scam and just walks away. There's certainly some room for drama and character arcs in a backstory like that. (And room for demonic enforcer types to show up to try to drag them back home.)

 

On top of that, some demons might be allowed the illusion of progress by more powerful demons, just to have it ripped out from under them purely for the lulz.

D&D Demons

You cannot expect other roleplayers to accept D&D lore as canon in CoH.  Read CoH's native lore on demons, elaborate on it as you will, but don't sit in Pocket D sniffling at people that you're not a DEMON, you're a DEVIL from Baator, etc. etc. etc.  Not only is that technically a Code of Conduct violation it's just plain lazy.  I mean, I get it, D&D cosmology is fun, but claiming it as your backstory is really no different than saying you're from Krypton or Middle Earth or something.

The CoH afterlife is limitless and could cover a whole lot of very different underworld experiences.  Go nuts!  There's loads of world mythology out there about the underworld critters that plagued a thousand different civilizations.  There's a whole lot of rich material out there to draw from that isn't anybody's intellectual property.  Or just make up some backstory stuff for your demon that's so cool that other players will want to be part of it!

 

 

Edited April 23, 2022 by Blackshear

[Crystal Dragon]

@Blackshear Just saying, but that's a wealth to read. Thank you.

[Blackshear]

Aw, thank you!  That's very kind.

[huang3721]

I think the problem is nothing can stop people from roleplaying Satan (or any omnipresent character depending on the context). Some people love accomplishing their power fantasy at the expense of others. Even more, doing so is relatively easy. They don't need expensive build to dominate others (like in PvP), and I suppose writing an OP character is much easier than writing a balanced one.

 

It's like that child who won't play with other kids unless they play the game according to his whim. These kids are not his friends, they are his toys.

[SaintD]

Powergaming assholes choose backstories and craft characters to facilitate being a powergaming asshole. Am asshole, will asshole.

 

..... that's all there is to it.

[Crystal Dragon]

11 minutes ago, SaintD said:

Powergaming assholes choose backstories and craft characters to facilitate being a powergaming asshole. Am asshole, will asshole.

 

..... that's all there is to it.

Pretty much. And there are ways to differentiate good players from them, but the most telling is their bios. How they write about their character can be the most telling detailed red flag waving over their head or it will be blank of anything suitable to detail them from a regular casual player.

[Bastille Boy]

On 4/17/2022 at 3:24 PM, MHertz said:

I prefer characters that need help.

 

My demon character, Damon Glasseater, needs a lot of help!

 

He can only be summoned via a Latin incantation. The last time Damon was above ground, civilized people wore tunics, Pluto had only recently stopped being worshiped as a god, and stained glass was a valued art form. Now apparently the barbarians have taken over, because everybody is wearing trousers. They think Pluto is either a planet or a dwarf planet or a cartoon dog. There are all these buildings with beautiful glass windows, and if you stain them with depictions of the glories of the underworld, people get upset, and if you eat the windows, people get upset about that, too.

 

It's probably best for Damon to stay at Architect Entertainment in Pocket D when the scientist who accidentally summoned him can't supervise him. People seem to like it when Damon makes the holograms melt. When he's done, DJ Zero lets him eat the empties. Brown glass beer bottles don't look like much, but they taste very, very good.

 

15 hours ago, Blackshear said:

What it comes down to is this:  if another player states that you can't eat their soul they're not godmoding...you are.  Literally.

 

Damon is okay with not eating souls. Souls aren't crunchy, and they don't contain silicon, usually, and you can't make sculptures out of them before you eat them.

Edited April 24, 2022 by Bastille Boy

[Bill Z Bubba]

On 4/17/2022 at 3:24 PM, MHertz said:

From a roleplaying perspective, doesn't this make it harder for your character to take an interest in the trivial inconsequential daily lives of citizens in Paragon?

 

I got tired of ruling in Hell and being part of its bureaucracy. The whole point of coming to Paragon was to get my hands bloodied properly again.

[Blackshear]

Related topic:  Angels

 

Believe it or not, your angel character does not have to be a snotty, uncompromising hyper-moralist who all but spits on humanity and who makes the demons look cool by comparison!  Can somebody in this game please create an angel character who does not seem to take all cues from the Hellblazer version of Gabriel?

You don't have to use your angel as a punching bag for your personal frustrations with organized religion; instead consider making them an example of what you think goodness should be.  Some keywords to ponder:  grace, charity, mercy, forbearance, benevolence.

[DrunkFlux]

I often use an analogy for high power/overpowered characters.  This applies to dragons/gods/demons to.  A racing game, and the heavy weights.  The heavyweights in racing games are the cars/characters/craft with the highest top speed, and the worst handling and acceleration.  If they do not compromise in handling and thrust, they sacrifice in other categories.  These require care, lots and lots of care.  Collisions when they occur(and they occur more if your inexperienced) are much more unforgiving.

 

High power characters are heavyweights.  They require care and caution in approaching roleplaying.  Often also discretion even when your on them casually.  My most overpowered characters can if I mishandle them cause tremendous cringe.  I rarely involve them in major plots, if they are involved, it's likely more indirect for a reason, if I ever get them directly involved, it's usually with an intent to knock them down a peg intentionally, OR as indirect antagonists.  I think this way partly inspired by star treks' Q.

 

Q in star trek, for those who have never watched The Next Generation, is an omni-potent being who can change things at literally the snap of a finger.  He has generally no real limits to his abilities.  He bends and changes reality on a whim.  What makes people enjoy his plots is how he uses those powers; to prank lesser beings.  He's not a good guy, so much as a prankster teacher.  His lessons range from teaching humility (like in Q who) to teaching moments like being careful what you wish for or even out of the box thinking.  If Q was just a fixer in every single episode without any lessons taught, he'd have been far less interesting and even just creating a snooze.  

 

Often, my most roleplayed characters are significantly less powerful, though still very, very capable in there own right.  Alma may be able to mop the floor with council and displays immense talent, but she's young and inexperienced, she makes up for with raw talent, but her talent outstrips wisdom somewhat.  Thats just an example, but my characters make mistakes because I want them to be more human like.  And it creates room for plotlines that you do not see when your character is in a perceived utopia.  Sometimes I even distort things on people, with one character of my own, due to not seeing the whole picture, draws a conclusion that is in contradiction to what's happening, only to reveal the problem shortly after.  Though I try to also provide opportunities to show other perspectives(though I try to do this with other roleplayers).  I call that the "perspective rule", simply, not all of my characters have all the facts of one another.  Only if they are in the same off-screen locations and regularly run into one another.

 

Thats harder to do with a more powerful omni-potent being, hence why I rarely mess with them(though I do have them).

 

I think also, the more powerful a character is, the shorter their lifespan as interesting characters in plots.  The brighter a star burns, the quicker it burns out.  O type stars explode before planets even form around them.  Super overpowered characters can become boring in only a few sessions.  Or even just one session.  So little story telling gets involved with them as a result.  And this also applies when a person hears of your characters stories from others.  It can hurt roleplay with them before they even get involved with your plots.  So this means even MORE care has to be taken with them.  This applies even WITH a well crafted backstory.

 

It's not just backstory, but HOW you roleplay the character actively.  

Edited April 30, 2022 by DrunkFlux

[Latex]

This thread seems like a hot topic!

 

Roleplay is like music taste, not everyone likes what you like. Everyone has their own opinion on what lore accepts and what doesn't, it's usually why story-writers for MMO video games leave things typically open ended, you are free to interpret the spots they missed in whatever way you wish and no one can really tell you're right or wrong in 'your version' of the universe unless it's something really wacky! Even then, City of Heroes strength and why it has such a versatile (and extremely loyal/passionate) Roleplaying Community is because you can plausibly Roleplay almost anything you can come up with which includes Dragons, Gods, Demons and much much more.

 

Everyone has their friend group, their SG, their themes, the type of plots they enjoy, for me I like gritty and hyper realism imposed on characters that aren't, 'The Boys' or 'Watchmen' even 'Invincible' are my inspirations I dislike Marvel movies and lean toward truly adult takes on the Hero genre. But lets say an anime featuring some Demon was another persons main creative draw, who am I to tell them that's wrong? I'm not willing to arbitrarily put restrictions on other peoples characters. If my style of Roleplay doesn't mesh at all with someone else's I'll brush it off and politely quietly slip out from a scene.

 

My advice to Demons, Gods, Dragons and others is simply go by the basic tenants of Roleplay; for very powerful characters like these you need flaws, your character needs a constant stream of personal obstacles to overcome some of which may need outside help. If your character enters the world complete you have messed up, you need to allow other characters to influence, interact and change your perspective. You've got to remember to collaborate you can't Roleplay alone, that is just story writing.

[Qualith]

On 4/17/2022 at 3:24 PM, MHertz said:

I have to admit, this is something I do not comprehend. Why do players feel the need to portray characters who are even greater than superheroes? You're already on a path to becoming an Incarnate, one of the most powerful beings known to exist. But your character must be even bigger than that, right out of the gate. A god, a vampire, an unkillable assassin, an angel, a demon, a millennia-old super dragon, a reality-bending alien, a cruel and mysterious fae creature from the dawn of time, or (as some bios would have it) "the fastest person / best psionic / strongest hero / whateverest whatever" in existence.

 

And I ask: why?

 

From a roleplaying perspective, doesn't this make it harder for your character to take an interest in the trivial inconsequential daily lives of citizens in Paragon? Why would your character care about a single purse snatcher, or a pitiful plot by the Freakshow to hold a crime competition? Doesn't this backstory require jumping through some hurdles to explain why your ultra-powerful ancient evil dragon is struggling against level 2 Skulls at the start? Are you trying to create a character with power on your terms, without any weaknesses unless you permit them? Is it because super-beings play for much higher stakes on a heroic scale (savior of the timestream, guardian of the universe) and much lower stakes on the emotional scale (can never be hurt, never touched by mortal loss or trauma)? Or is this an OOC (out-of-character) thing, where you feel inadequate unless your character is somehow better than those of other players?

 

I don't know, I don't get it. Characters with limits and flaws are so, so much more interesting to me, and I have a hard time relating to (and RPing with) characters who fill this "god mode" role. I prefer characters that need help. Characters that cooperate, rather than dominate. So why do you choose a god-mode kind of character? Please explain the appeal. I'm willing to understand, here.

All of the character tropes you described have had comic books written about them, they are regular facets of western sci-fi fantasy in fact the distaste for those themes and ideas is kind of odd. As well as the continuous claims of god moding or having characters without weakness. By level 30 your fighting fae. by endgame your doing fire farms full of hundreds if not thousands of demons that are mulched down in two or three attacks. By endgame you kill a god of death than you have the option to kill that goddess that invented the concept of magic (no combat just a dialogue death). Your playing super heroic characters that regularly cross vast dimensions of time and space. There's also a lot of strength to be found in diversity in regards to characters, your average high level magic character probably knows very little about computer systems or weapons fabrication, which tech/science/natural have the claim on. Magic origin characters aren't greater than superheroes, they are superheroes.

 

Some parts of magic users popularity might be related to the resurgence of modern fantasy, or dungeons and dragons. But too be honest the roleplaying community has also had a lot of magic using characters. Ever since the start. I don't particularly find it troubling or bad but just the nature of the game. Claiming it's godmodding when you have the option in game to pick things like time manipulation or other powers that scale to the manipulation of the fundamental rules of reality is odd, those abilities are baked into the game as well as the super heroic genre. 

 

Claiming that others characters exist without flaws or limits is odd to me, and honestly only something that can be determined on a case by case basis. I'm not going to respond to it as if that post can somehow quantify an entire genre of player. 

 

[Paragon Vanguard]

Plain to see some of you hate Superman. I get it, DC was not my first choice either due to the overpowered characters. So I bought something else. 

See what I did there?

 

It truly does not matter what any of us thinks about someone else's play style. If it is not received well by anyone, they will become lonely quickly. No skin off of my back. Being an alt-a-holic with more toons than Elon has cash I can say, some are pretty powerful, and some are not. I play a superman type, which is none of the ones that the op hates apparently, but is...well, more powerful than my vampire (are vampires really that powerful next to...well, most supes?). I also have a street cop that will not go up more than lvl 20 for the most part. AND I have a totally rad dude 70s toon that is level 5 forever. So where do I fall in, in all of this? 

I dont have a dragon, therefor, all you dragon people are bad! 
 

It's okay to be frustrated or to not like play/rp styles. It really is. It's okay to post about it, in my opinion, or at the least ask why people choose to play such and such a style even when you dont really want the answer you just want to make a point. It is okay, I dont have to read it, nor respond. 

Unless I wanna!

 

Just remember, you are talking about rp, and everyone has their different views on it. I use to worry about people feeling the need to level their character to the n'th power squeezing out the last .4% over hardcap (it can be done), and had to come to terms with....it really isn't my business. In fact, they can be very helpful when I need answers to my toon performing in a certain way to fit rp! 

Love you to the n'th people! 

My point....and I do have one, is that people are people, but characters are also characters. Maybe you run into a bunch of bad rp'ers, I don't know. Maybe you don't know. Maybe you are one and you don't consider yourself one (dont worry, I can help anyone who wants to know if they are a bad rp'er), but its a game to be enjoyed, not just by us, but by everyone else who is playing as well. THAT....is the answer. 

[UltraAlt]

On 4/30/2022 at 2:44 PM, Blackshear said:

Can somebody in this game please create an angel character who does not seem to take all cues from the Hellblazer version of Gabriel?

 

I wonder if a character called the Heavenly Healer that I ran into a while back would fit your mold.

I believe they were an electric/electric defender.

 

When people says some kind of character isn't out there in THE CITY, they probably just haven't run into them yet.

[Bastille Boy]

On 4/17/2022 at 3:24 PM, MHertz said:

Why would your character care about a single purse snatcher, or a pitiful plot by the Freakshow to hold a crime competition?

 

The demon's heart pounded. The witch who had summoned it fifty-one years before was now on her deathbed. She was still conscious, lucid, and in good spirits, but her smiles masked the truth. In two days, three at the most, her eyes would close forever, and the demon would go back to Hell. Most likely, she would go there, too. 

 

"I'm sorry I couldn't find a way to free you, dear," said the witch. "But I did find a way to keep you above ground a bit longer."

 

A hope. The demon felt its eyes blaze.

 

"You have a big decision to make," said the witch.

 

Now it was worried. "The last time I made a big decision, it went badly."

 

"You've had lots of practice making small decisions, dear. You've gotten quite good at it."

 

The demon hesitated.

 

"You don't want to go back to the sulfur pits, do you?"

 

It shook its head.

 

"Who do you want your new masters to be? Thieving spiders, self-righteous pyromaniacs, or trigger-happy buffoons?"

 

"I don't like the police."

 

"But that's your choice?"

 

It paused, but only for a moment. "Yes."

 

"Then put on your ring of disguise. Open the bottle of cabernet franc on the table and fill my cup. I've had quite enough tea. Then take the rest of the wine with you to the police station down the street. Make sure you're in view of the security cameras, then chug the wine. Hurl the bottle at the station's front window, and spit your worst insults at those dirty cops. When they come to arrest you, don't resist."

 

The demon was in the back of a paddy wagon when it felt her pass. It didn't know where the witch's soul went, but it knew she wasn't in Hell.

 

Suddenly the flimsy handcuffs felt solid.

 

Why on earth had it called the police "buffoons"? They were street-smart, strong, and brave! And some of them had truly beautiful souls. The sergeant in the passenger seat, for instance, was delightfully corrupt. It had chosen wisely, this time. The police deserved a loyal servant. It silently vowed to be the best, most obedient, most helpful prisoner the police had ever captured.

[WhiteNightingale]

The superhero genre is a power fantasy by definition, a "grounded superhero" is an oxymoron. You're supposed to be out there being larger than life and having everyone stare at you in awe at what you do. Even Squirrel Girl is famous for beating Thanos and Doctor Doom and Galactus.

[Seed22]

7 hours ago, WhiteNightingale said:

The superhero genre is a power fantasy by definition, a "grounded superhero" is an oxymoron. You're supposed to be out there being larger than life and having everyone stare at you in awe at what you do. Even Squirrel Girl is famous for beating Thanos and Doctor Doom and Galactus.

What even is a “grounded superhero”?  Street level? And another question, why is it ALWAYS a hero? How is that interesting? If everyone’s the hero, who will be the villain? These are questions for the OP/others interested I suppose. 
 

[Latex]

15 hours ago, WhiteNightingale said:

The superhero genre is a power fantasy by definition, a "grounded superhero" is an oxymoron. You're supposed to be out there being larger than life and having everyone stare at you in awe at what you do. Even Squirrel Girl is famous for beating Thanos and Doctor Doom and Galactus.

I think it depends on what 'genre within a genre' you want to represent.

Take Watchmen, Rorschach isn't really a Superhero, hell not a single Watchman is 'Heroic' they're humans first and the narrative is grounded by that.
The Heroes you speak of are more the Marvel Universe which is a lot more upbeat with cosmic threats and the Heroes always save the day, the vast majority of them are pure, we see little fault with their personalities.

Meanwhile Rorschach is turned to pink paste by Dr. Manhattan because he threatened to tell the world about Ozymandias plan, so the entire world lives in a lie because a literal God among men decided it was for the greater good to silence the truth.

In The Boys we learn Heroes can be complete narcissistic assholes that employ a brand that benefits them monetarily to uphold. Their mistakes get brushed under the rug, they commit coverups, some are nice in front of the cameras and utterly vindictive and callous behind the scenes.

Of course there are many more examples! The point is not everyone enjoys the Marvel take on Heroes. For me personally I like to be extremely grounded, my Heroes struggle with the stress of Heroism in a world filled with them where expectations are set very high, exploring these aspects in Roleplay does it for me.

 

Edited May 6, 2022 by Latex