Dragons, Gods and Demons: Why?

Seed22 · May 6, 2022

27 minutes ago, Latex said:

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.

Now this take I really like. Personally I do the same for my chars, but with a slight difference. The ‘main’ characters I have don’t even try to be heroic at all, well except one. They’re rogues. They’ve got powers, but they also have others they’re responsible to, and are young adults themselves. So what happens when you give a young adult magic?(as most of my chars are spellcasters with limitations) They use their magic for their own gain and to try and take care of those close to them, the Marvel BS can be saved for some other deluded cape, in their eyes.

This, I think, gives them something to grow off of. Their main struggle is survival first of themselves and those close to them, then morality and greater purpose second.

Edited May 6, 2022 by Seed22

Ashington · May 6, 2022

Because even Superhero Comics do that?

Lemme see,

Dragons:

Gods:

Demons:

Edited May 6, 2022 by Ashington

Paragon Vanguard · May 8, 2022

So on the note of OP RP by the OP, why do cats always talk with a lisp? I .... this is the right place for this right? Cats.....lisp......its the lack of lips, isn't it?

Anyone?

I just noticed cats weren't included in the OP's idea of OP RP, and I wanted to throw that around and see what kind of fur flies.

And to anyone thinking this is off topic, WELL, I am pretty sure the topic is who can start the biggest forest fire, and if you toss a lil cat fur on it, it starts baby!

yes, i know not to begin a sentence with "and"....dont be so judgey.

yes, I know judgey is not a word and I should have used judgmental

peace?

fancy ketchup · May 8, 2022

I dont really rp but I like to make the dumbest heroes possible as I enjoy a good laugh. Faults are more interesting to me.

I loved the Tick.. No brain whatsoever.. Die Fledermaus used to crack me up. Such a waste of a "super hero". He would run in the face of danger. I recall him disconnecting his phone when they shined his signal for help.

All that being said, making the most ridiculous character in game isn't for everyone. I personally wouldn't have as much fun playing any other way. Why? I don't know.. Maybe my parents dropped me on my head. Maybe I partied too hard in highschool. The why doesn't really matter. Here we are. Our experiences help shape who we are and we are all the main characters in our own stories, so we should be mindful when we disagree with the best way for all of us to have fun together.

Personally if I ran into an "all powerful" being I would see it as an oppertunity to play the village idiot. If they don't like that no worries. I know a gorilla in a tux that will team with me.

Edited May 9, 2022 by fancy ketchup
Me bad at talkie.

ZeeHero · May 10, 2022

I agree wholly with the OP. While I do not particularly enjoy my RP being stuck at the "Street level" that is a stepping stone for many a hero to grow from humble beginnings to universe saving badass or whatever, the character should be created with plenty of room to grow.

Each person will have their own preferences as to what each stage of that looks like in the long run but there are a few overall constants as far as principles.

One of my strongest characters on COH, is Astera, who is one of the less experienced of a roster full of characters with tons of room to grow. That is becuase I learned over time partly through research and mistakes of my own, that it's far more fun to create a character with a ways to go and RP them as striving towards these goals, than trying to create a peak character with noplace to go.

she is definitely powerful in her current state but still has quite a ways to go and things to learn if she is to live up to heroes like Statesman in both power and deed.

I feel bad for people who feel the need to try roleplaying omnipotent gods or stuff like that. it's a given that for the setting, people will be playing powerful superhumans but, that does not mean they need to be ALL powerful, or perfect. a relateable character needs to have flaws, and weaknesses.. and I'm really not the best at explaining it all but its a lot more complicated than just slapping a few powers together. or even superficial traits.

It's hard for anyone to make a truly good character, me or anyone else. But people should still keep trying and improving.

Quote

Personally if I ran into an "all powerful" being I would see it as an oppertunity to play the village idiot. If they don't like that no worries. I know a gorilla in a tux that will team with me.

If someone is clearly doing the "I AM OMNIPOTENT OOOOOH" thing, I either just gtfo and leave them, or react IC like my character is dealing with a delusional person.

A good point was made that gods and dragons and angels and all that in comics are no more powerful than many superhumans and this is indeed the case.

However you really can tell from how these people write and RP after awhile if that's what they had in mind or not. I have a character who's powers come from a recessive demonic heritage gene, deep in her ancestry, and transforms into a more demonic, taller, more voluptuous form with red skin and glowy eyes when fighting, but she is as a newbie hero more on the level of a street sweeper almost ready to graduate to state and nationwide threats. she may rise to far greater power one day but that's experience for ya.

Edited May 10, 2022 by ZeeHero

TwoDee · May 10, 2022

On 4/30/2022 at 3:49 PM, DrunkFlux said:

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.

As "luck" would have it, I had a pretty salient example of this "one bad session" during RP fairly recently, where a character's powerful magic made a roleplay less interesting, in a way that would not have happened if the magic was better-prefaced. I relate it here in the hopes of illustrating my own prior thesis that Magic-origin characters are not intrinsically tools for unsatisfying roleplay, but that they're the most prolific form of 'multitool' character capable of "solving" many, many narrative problems, and that can lead to bad storytelling.

During an open RP AE event, our guild - themed around ex-Praetorian Powers Division and Resistance - teamed up with a guild themed around "Heroes for Hire," to play through a SFAE about a romp through an ancient temple to find a cursed Roman artifact. As ringers, we had a few other, non-SG-affiliated PUG roleplayers; a two-guns vigilante guy, a ninja, and a magical elf goddess.

As the missions went on, it became increasingly clear that, in the constructed narrative of the AE, the Roman artifact was a magic nuke, intended as a weapon of last resort against the Nictus. This urn, if opened (a la the Ark of the Covenant from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade), would kill all aliens and alien-hybrids in a massive blast radius, leaving only the purebred human beings alive.

This lead to a rigorous and spirited debate about the ethics of the weapon going to Vanguard versus destroying it. Our Praetorians were professionally indebted to Vanguard, but personally worried about the potential abuse of an "anti-alien" magical bomb. So, the topic came up of "should we try to hide it once more, knowing that someone else might try to dig it up and use it for evil again?" The Heroes for Hire were on the "this is outside my pay grade and I won't take the heat for destroying it, we can minimize it in the paperwork but I don't know what else you want from us" page. The vigilante and ninja were in the "Vanguard can't be trusted! Destroy it! Cast it into the fires of Mount Doom!" camp.

It was an interesting, if slightly exhausting, debate between the three sides, until the Elf Goddess helpfully offered [sic]: "Well, I'm the representative of an entire planet of benevolent, magically powerful elves, so I could simply teleport it to my home planet, where the homeguard of archmagi will ably protect it from any malfeasance or threat until humanity's time of greatest need and no sooner."

And I felt terrible for the player, because that just killed the roleplay. We were having an interesting back-and-forth exploring where these characters land in an ethically nuanced situation ("Do you submit a captured WMD to the 'authorities' and expect them to use it responsibly?") and a single character offering a 'perfect fix' where she magics the problem away with all of the downsides negated and all of the upsides maintained was a gigantic violation of the social contract.

It's not just that it instantly negated all of the tension of the argument; it's that it also now pivots the entire roleplay to be about that character if we want to try to salvage it and make it interesting. Approaching that player's contribution charitably, I'm sure that they would have been amenable to there being some kind of space elf political faction that could use the artifact, or some other point of interest that makes "the space elves voip it away and give it back when we need it" less profoundly unsatisfying. However, to even discover those nuances, we'd have to re-center the scene, which was previously about "what do we do with this artifact," onto "well, okay, please tell all of us more about your utopian society of elf wizards, since our solution is incumbent on powerful magics that only your character has perspective on." I'm sure that the player didn't intend it to read as being an attempted hijack of the story to be all about them, but functionally that's what it was, and people did not vibe with what they perceived to be an act of narcissistic narrative selfishness. That roleplayer was pointedly ignored for the rest of the stumbling debrief as everyone awkwardly shuffled to an unsatisfying conclusion of an otherwise-solid storyline.

To again emphasize the point, I don't believe that this player was a godmoder, or intended to godmode. I believe that they had written a powerful magic goddess character and were simply making her help, because helping is what heroes do. This is a superhero game, and it's meant to cater to the fantasy of getting to save the day and win in the end. However, the disconnect in that roleplay stemmed from bringing a character with magics that trivialize a story hook, and then electing to use those magics, knowing that they were trivializing the story hook. Or, as the OP put it,

On 4/17/2022 at 6:07 PM, MHertz said:

I wanna say "No, dummy, that's not what I'm trying to do — I'm not looking for a solution, I'm looking for engagement in finding a solution."

I don't want to imply that a or couldn't have gone, "well, lucky for all of you I brought my dimensional space shifter that can displace the artifact in space and time until mankind's greatest need, completely nullifying the interesting ethical ramifications of this situation!" Hell, this is a purely fictive space: a big sexy vore monster lady could eat it, or a character themed around Warner Bros. cartoons could paint a train tunnel on a wall and throw it in before erasing the tunnel, or any number of other outcomes. However, for roleplayers to accept that kind of anticlimax as credible, non-Magic concepts implicitly demand more explanation, because even though this is a fictive space, Science (or Tech, or vore, or "cartoon rules") is a concept understood to have fundamental scalability limits, and that means that players are more willing to call bullshit when, say, a scientist who was not previously established to be a specialist in portal tech suddenly pulls the SpaceTime Gun out of his ass. There's no such social contract in place for , nor necessarily can there be, because by-definition Magic encompasses everything that is "supernatural," which is to say, everything that is unexplained and defies classification.

"Magic players are more prone to trivializing roleplay challenges and making scenes less fun" isn't necessarily a point I want to argue, because I don't think it's provable. However, I do think that there are a number of credible explanations for why roleplayers like the OP (and, needs must be said, myself) anecdotally encounter magnitudes more with boring, encounter-trivializing capabilities than , from the obvious statistical weight of there being more roleplayers on Homecoming total, to the genre precedent allowing magical characters to be a lot faster and looser about what they can and can't do.

ZeeHero · May 10, 2022

Magic is a difficult one becuase it depends on how the character's magic works. is it a strict hard magic system? something akin to alchemy in Fullmetal Alchemist where it's a science with hard rules? Far less likely to make issues.

As far as the more powerful a character is the shorter lifespan in plots... entirely depends on a couple things. firstly, the stories and plots they are in, secondly the nature and versatility of their powers, thirdly, how fast their power grows, number of setbacks on the way.

This kind of thing has no one answer as its always dependent on so much. But one constant is how dedicated those involved in the RP are to making it work out and how like minded they are in how things should work.

Edited May 10, 2022 by ZeeHero

Paragon Vanguard · May 11, 2022

Really? So you guys really think magic is the only thing that can be used in a fit all solutions way?

The fact is, all of them can. So the argument isn't really about what their origin is, it's about how they play or rp. Blackholes, wormholes, time manipulation and....oh yeah, PORTALS (you know, like in PI) can all be used in the place of magic. It has nothing to do with the origin.

18 hours ago, TwoDee said:

It was an interesting, if slightly exhausting, debate between the three sides, until the Elf Goddess helpfully offered [sic]: "Well, I'm the representative of an entire planet of benevolent, magically powerful elves, so I could simply teleport it to my home planet, where the homeguard of archmagi will ably protect it from any malfeasance or threat until humanity's time of greatest need and no sooner."

And I felt terrible for the player, because that just killed the roleplay.

Couldn't the proper approach be "no, we can't do that. This has to be dealt with by us, so we know it is properly dealt with", leading to more rp? I dunno.....you are saying she killed the debate, but I don't think that is a fair assessment, unless turning it over to Vanguard also was a debate rp killer, because she was making the same argument. Also you said the debate was just going around in circles so she may have been trying to give an out before people got frustrated? Just tossing that in, obviously I wasn't there. Not saying I agree with it, but sometimes it is not about bad rp, and definitely not about origin. (not trying to call you out TwoDee, it's just discussion... 🙂 )

I know there are "bad" or probably more like "inexperienced" rp'ers out there. There are some that come with grand ideas of what they want their character to be, no matter how it effects others. I know this. However, a good rp'er can work with this as well, or maybe more properly work around this. In all the posts I read above, though I have not read all of them, none of them makes a valid point that origin is the cause of bad rp, or that origin is the only one that can be manipulated. Anything that magic can do, all of the others can do. In fact "I just made a machine that taps into magical energy" would be a valid technology/science thing. (I just gave myself an idea for a character, dont none of you steal it!)

Don't get fixated on origin, or THINK for one minute any of the origins are opening up that window for others to jump through. It is the rp'er alone that does this, as they can do this with any origin, and are usually an inexperienced rp'er. No, I am not married to magic, my main is science. My co-main technology. Or vice versa, whichever week I am in decides which is which ( which week are we in anyway? ) I do have a magic based guild, and magic based toons (as well as all other origins as I am an altaholic), but not trying to defend magic as much as saying it's the rp/rp'er/.....US. 🙂

TorrentYed · May 11, 2022

1 hour ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

Really? So you guys really think magic is the only thing that can be used in a fit all solutions way?

I don't think the notion is that magic is the only origin that can be utilized that way. To quote from the response above yours:

19 hours ago, TwoDee said:

I don't want to imply that a or couldn't have gone, "well, lucky for all of you I brought my dimensional space shifter that can displace the artifact in space and time until mankind's greatest need, completely nullifying the interesting ethical ramifications of this situation!"

McSpazz · May 11, 2022

1 hour ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

Really? So you guys really think magic is the only thing that can be used in a fit all solutions way?

The fact is, all of them can. So the argument isn't really about what their origin is, it's about how they play or rp. Blackholes, wormholes, time manipulation and....oh yeah, PORTALS (you know, like in PI) can all be used in the place of magic. It has nothing to do with the origin.

Interesting you say that. I used to avoid magic at all costs in terms of concept explicitly because of this. However, as @ZeeHero said

16 hours ago, ZeeHero said:

Magic is a difficult one becuase it depends on how the character's magic works. is it a strict hard magic system? something akin to alchemy in Fullmetal Alchemist where it's a science with hard rules? Far less likely to make issues.

This is ultimately the potential issue with implementing magic in a concept that brings us to the core of this thread's topic. It's not that technology/science is somehow less exploitable than magic, it's just harder to do without sounding stupid. Sci-fi, even if it's technobabble, is generally grounded somewhat in reality. It's easy to look at an outlandish concept based in mad science and ask questions like what powers it, where are the materials coming from, etc. Basically, for sci-fi, you go into the situation expecting that the laws of nature are going to be, if not followed, referenced. Concepts that use sci-fi and treat it like magic are usually concepts that revolve around ideas that are not well understood or non-existent (portals, time travel, nanites, hacking, etc).

What makes magic different is that there are no rules. No matter if you believe magic is real or not in reality, different groups of people have different ideas as to how it works. If you go into a situation not looking to how IRL occult groups believe magic works, you can basically do whatever you want because basically all magic exists in a space that portals and time travel do. People are often far more willing to accept poorly written fantasy/magic concepts than they are sci-fi be it from an audience or writer's perspective. But, keep in mind, this doesn't just apply to magic characters. This basically applies to supernatural non-scifi concepts in general. The more things that are referenced that the audience understands as fact in the real world, the more things need to be established to explain why that doesn't apply here. As magic as a concept sort of messes with how things work at the very foundation of reality, it's almost like skipped past the uncanny valley.

But this isn't to say that I think magic/supernatural characters are more likely to break roleplay. As the core of the issue are concepts that utilize powers with poorly defined rules, magic is by no means more likely to do this. Magic is just easier to do this with be it by accident or intentionally. You have a lower bar to jump over with that suspension of disbelief and people are more likely to accept "it works because magic" than other concepts. However, in broad strokes, the actual behavior here is just as readily found in any poorly designed concept.

What's the difference between a poorly written hacker and a poorly written technomancer? What's the difference between poorly written medical nanites and poorly written magical healing? What's the difference between a poorly written Fae queen with a dimension they rule over like a god and a poorly written mad scientist that rules over a pocket dimension like a god?

Not much. I think the biggest issue is that people seem less likely to think about what rules dictate their character's abilities in magical concepts than others for the exact same reason people are more likely to accept a lower standard of explanation in magical/supernatural concepts.

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

2 hours ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

Really? So you guys really think magic is the only thing that can be used in a fit all solutions way?

The fact is, all of them can. So the argument isn't really about what their origin is, it's about how they play or rp. Blackholes, wormholes, time manipulation and....oh yeah, PORTALS (you know, like in PI) can all be used in the place of magic. It has nothing to do with the origin.

Couldn't the proper approach be "no, we can't do that. This has to be dealt with by us, so we know it is properly dealt with", leading to more rp? I dunno.....you are saying she killed the debate, but I don't think that is a fair assessment, unless turning it over to Vanguard also was a debate rp killer, because she was making the same argument. Also you said the debate was just going around in circles so she may have been trying to give an out before people got frustrated? Just tossing that in, obviously I wasn't there. Not saying I agree with it, but sometimes it is not about bad rp, and definitely not about origin. (not trying to call you out TwoDee, it's just discussion... 🙂 )

I know there are "bad" or probably more like "inexperienced" rp'ers out there. There are some that come with grand ideas of what they want their character to be, no matter how it effects others. I know this. However, a good rp'er can work with this as well, or maybe more properly work around this. In all the posts I read above, though I have not read all of them, none of them makes a valid point that origin is the cause of bad rp, or that origin is the only one that can be manipulated. Anything that magic can do, all of the others can do. In fact "I just made a machine that taps into magical energy" would be a valid technology/science thing. (I just gave myself an idea for a character, dont none of you steal it!)

Don't get fixated on origin, or THINK for one minute any of the origins are opening up that window for others to jump through. It is the rp'er alone that does this, as they can do this with any origin, and are usually an inexperienced rp'er. No, I am not married to magic, my main is science. My co-main technology. Or vice versa, whichever week I am in decides which is which ( which week are we in anyway? ) I do have a magic based guild, and magic based toons (as well as all other origins as I am an altaholic), but not trying to defend magic as much as saying it's the rp/rp'er/.....US. 🙂

What's this about a magic based guild I hear? >.> <.<

To some slight fairness, TwoDee acknowledged the other origins having similar hand-waivy issues. Though I still agree a lot with what you're saying, even if I myself haven't gotten heavily involved with RP. The elf goddess person didn't kill the scene, the debate probably did. I mean, there's only so much to debate, you have a WMD to handle, right? You need a solution. All she did was just put the nail in the coffin. Take her out of the situation, and given the nature of what I read, someone else would of done the same thing in that group, eventually. Maybe not exactly like that, sure, but they still would of. I think if you wanted to salvage that session, maybe a simple sentence like what Vanguard wrote would of sufficed.

I don't know all the tropes/superhero story stereotypes that have been going around in RP, but this has me thinking, because I'm sure this issue has occurred elsewhere; maybe it's time for more creativity on the story side of things? How many times can the same hooks be treaded upon? The same points of contention had? The same story beats and predictable climaxes created before people begin to tire and you get situations like the elf goddess?

Hey, maybe even try it from the opposite angle; Why not try some story tropes from the villainous angle? Much harder to write for and forces creative solutions in my opinion. That, I think, can lead to less hand-waivy situations. If not, maybe get rid of any chance of a McGuffin(again, bit harder to do) to even try and force more problem-solving creativity? These are just some ideas I had. May have been tried already, again, not sure, but..eh, it's something.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Seed22

TorrentYed · May 11, 2022

I feel that saying:

1 hour ago, Seed22 said:

The elf goddess person didn't kill the scene, the debate probably did.

—Feels just a hair unfair! But to give additional perspective, I was at this event, and to give additional context, the last enemy on the map had been bested, the fighting was over, and the group had a moment to really discuss the weight of what they had just discovered! And in a full team (I checked the logs!), every single person on the team weighed in with thoughts about what should be, could be done with this thing, from comic-book style quips to thoughtful meditations, centered on the thesis that even with powers solutions aren't so simple. That is not a dead scene, that is a scene springing to life!

But a fair point is made—how long do you let that sort of discourse go on? At a point spinning wheels is absolutely exhausting, but we had also only gotten less than five minutes into that part of the scene.

TwoDee · May 11, 2022

4 hours ago, Paragon Vanguard said:

Couldn't the proper approach be "no, we can't do that. This has to be dealt with by us, so we know it is properly dealt with", leading to more rp? I dunno.....you are saying she killed the debate, but I don't think that is a fair assessment, unless turning it over to Vanguard also was a debate rp killer, because she was making the same argument. Also you said the debate was just going around in circles so she may have been trying to give an out before people got frustrated? Just tossing that in, obviously I wasn't there. Not saying I agree with it, but sometimes it is not about bad rp, and definitely not about origin. (not trying to call you out TwoDee, it's just discussion... 🙂 )

To address a few points here

Quote

"...unless turning it over to Vanguard also was a debate rp killer, because she was making the same argument."

Only in the very most literal interpretation, completely ignoring the social dynamic and the reality of how the solution was presented. Vanguard is a lore-established organization of known quantities. It's the 'ends justifies the means' purpleside military that works with both Blue and Redsiders against outside existential threats, but which is also behind the xenophobic rhetoric that pervades Paragon City. Every roleplayer who has a passing familiarity with the RWZ (or even, say, the level 10 Montague Castanella arcs) has a basic gist of who Vanguard are and what they do, because they're a textual element of the canon, and that's an inclusive floor to hinge a debate roleplay on. Although "let's give it to my society of magical space elves for safekeeping" is fundamentally the same core rhetorical argument as "let's give it to Vanguard for safekeeping," - that is to say, it's an argument to pass the buck to a better authority to wash the players' hands of it - only one of those arguments situates a player character as the better authority, to have monopolistic control over the story element away from the other players with no shared basis for understanding the ramifications.

Hence why even "no, we can't do that. This has to be dealt with by us, so we know it is properly dealt with" is something of a rough ask in this scenario: unless there's a clearly articulated OOC ((no, we're not doing that, that's a deus ex machina)), escalating an in-character conflict to a player conflict, that still invites an argument about how actually the elf wizards are super trustworthy, which still unmoors the roleplay further and further away from elements of shared understanding like Vanguard and towards a single player's narrative control. If there was an attempt to provide a solution that wouldn't spur further debate there, it failed. Which brings us to-

Quote

"Also you said the debate was just going around in circles so she may have been trying to give an out before people got frustrated?"

I think that this is very likely. Not everyone has a taste for conflict in roleplay, or else the preeminent roleplay arena wouldn't be low-consequence bar roleplay. As @TorrentYed indicates, the scene was still young when the fix was proposed, but if the intent was to mollify players and allow them an easy way out, then "my character uses her awesome powers that I hadn't established before to handle everything" is an avenue to hurt egos and start fights, not massage egos and end fights. I reiterate for the second time that I do not believe that the player had nefarious intents or wished to godmode. I think she was just playing a character who happens to have incredible magical powers, and attempting to use those powers without questioning whether a unilateral, my-character-centric solution would be welcomed in the roleplay was what caused the friction.

To respond to @Seed22:

2 hours ago, Seed22 said:

I don't know all the tropes/superhero story stereotypes that have been going around in RP, but this has me thinking, because I'm sure this issue has occurred elsewhere; maybe it's time for more creativity on the story side of things? How many times can the same hooks be treaded upon? The same points of contention had? The same story beats and predictable climaxes created before people begin to tire and you get situations like the elf goddess?

This was a "Story First AE." That is to say, an original storyline set in the City of Heroes universe, created by a player. It was not 'the same hooks treaded upon,' and indeed there is not an ingame storyline where the player comes into possession of a magical superweapon and has to make the hard decision on whether or not to submit it to the authorities. It was a novel and interesting conflict spurred by a novel and interesting fan-work set in a shared universe for ease of access.

Unless you mean to say that 'the heroes debate responsibility' is itself tired and unoriginal. Certainly, we can "reject tropes" for the sake of rejecting tropes. We can set our AEs in the Bas-Lag of Perdido Street Station, where cactus men worship the sun and decapitated heads with pigeon wings throw shit at passers-by. We can set our AEs on faraway alien planets where everyone are animal people who communicate with a series of yips. We can set our storylines in a world where everyone are abstract squiggles that permute into different squiggles seemingly at random, like a Don Hertzfeldt cartoon. However, if you want most players to be interested in your storyline, that requires leaning on superheroic themes, because this is a superhero game and the players involved in the storyline were playing superheroes. "Responsibility" is a salient theme for superheroic works, and it worked swimmingly as a way of exploring the ethics of what our characters believed beyond just "I'm a good guy."

To recenter, I believe that @McSpazz identifies "the core of the thread's topic" correctly.

3 hours ago, McSpazz said:

This is ultimately the potential issue with implementing magic in a concept that brings us to the core of this thread's topic. It's not that technology/science is somehow less exploitable than magic, it's just harder to do without sounding stupid. Sci-fi, even if it's technobabble, is generally grounded somewhat in reality. It's easy to look at an outlandish concept based in mad science and ask questions like what powers it, where are the materials coming from, etc. Basically, for sci-fi, you go into the situation expecting that the laws of nature are going to be, if not followed, referenced. Concepts that use sci-fi and treat it like magic are usually concepts that revolve around ideas that are not well understood or non-existent (portals, time travel, nanites, hacking, etc).

What makes magic different is that there are no rules. No matter if you believe magic is real or not in reality, different groups of people have different ideas as to how it works. If you go into a situation not looking to how IRL occult groups believe magic works, you can basically do whatever you want because basically all magic exists in a space that portals and time travel do. People are often far more willing to accept poorly written fantasy/magic concepts than they are sci-fi be it from an audience or writer's perspective. But, keep in mind, this doesn't just apply to magic characters. This basically applies to supernatural non-scifi concepts in general. The more things that are referenced that the audience understands as fact in the real world, the more things need to be established to explain why that doesn't apply here. As magic as a concept sort of messes with how things work at the very foundation of reality, it's almost like skipped past the uncanny valley.

is not bad roleplay, and roleplayers are not bad roleplayers. However, due to a combination of factors, players such as myself and the OP are more likely to encounter dissatisfying roleplay with roleplayers than other concepts, which is why I felt that the "well, not all Magic concepts, my Demon/Dragon/God/Archmage is better" pushback against the OP was a bit misaimed:

When Homecoming put up its official census, there were 347,517 Magic characters to 173,432 Science. If we assume a perfectly equal distribution of roleplayers and, from them, a perfectly equal distribution of godmoders, players would still be twice as likely to encounter a godmoder than a godmoder, by simple statistical breakdown that the vast plurality of players are .
is defined, in whole or in part, by not having to explain itself, and there is a much higher implicit social pressure to accept hand-wavey solutions from concepts than from concepts, for the reasons that @McSpazz articulates.
Correspondingly, the existing Western canon of Fantasy literature, from which most roleplayers will be taking their cues, is much friendlier to the notion of characters developing inexplicable and limitless godlike power than Sci-Fi literature, from which most roleplayers will be taking their cues. So, purely from the perspective of an inexperienced roleplayer hopping in for the first time, a is more likely to have been "greenlit" to godmode by the genre fiction context they're bringing in.
City of Heroes itself postulates loosely that Magic is the result of an antediluvian God War, but due to its nature as a 'kitchen sink' setting deliberately takes an agnostic attitude encompassing anything and everything into Magic: War Witch, the closest thing we have to a definitive source in-universe, describes broadly as "the ability to bend, shape and tear reality through sheer force of will... transcending all origins." By contrast, the same arc has the contact, Positron, describing himself as "a man with a useless power [that I have to augment] through technology" and the contact, Synapse, describing himself as just "a man with powers." There's a huge difference in the scale and scope of capability ascribed to Magic within City of Heroes, which again is something of an implicit green-light for really high-powered magical concepts when the text pointedly doesn't give the same endorsement of the other Origins.

If you ask me which of those I think is the most telling... it's #1, actually. When one-third of all the players are , Magic roleplayers would actually have to be - categorically - exceptionally gifted and courteous roleplayers to not make up a massive portion of all bad roleplays encountered. The simple arithmetic of Magic dramatically outnumbering everyone else is a very easy, very commonsense explanation as to why nearly all of my bad roleplays feature Magic characters, because nearly all of my roleplays ever feature Magic characters. However, I do still think that there's more to the phenomenon than that, and I agree with @McSpazz's assessment that Magic is easier to write poorly, in a way that shuts other players out.

McSpazz · May 11, 2022

45 minutes ago, TwoDee said:

When Homecoming put up its official census, there were 347,517 Magic characters to 173,432 Science. If we assume a perfectly equal distribution of roleplayers and, from them, a perfectly equal distribution of godmoders, players would still be twice as likely to encounter a godmoder than a godmoder, by simple statistical breakdown that the vast plurality of players are .

I'm not sure this is the best way to determine origins for RP characters. For example, one of my characters is a mutant who uses a lot of tech. Do I give her the tech origin or the mutation origin? These kinds of questions can go many ways. It is true, however (at least from my experience), that magic origin characters tend to be magic based concepts. I'm not sure where the census is so I can't actually check myself, but for the purposes of this conversation, you would need to compare magic origin with science AND technology with the natural origin also taken in consideration.

The reason I point this out is because, of the origins, science and technology are similar enough that even if you ignore crossover in origins, the two are still nearly the same thing.

But there's one last thing I want to bring up here: I don't think that magic is easier to write poorly in a way that shuts other players out. It is indeed easier to write magic concepts more lazily than others in terms of how powers are handled (for reasons I mentioned before), but it is most definitely not uniquely bad in terms of writing it in ways that shuts others out.

For example, as I mentioned in my original post

4 hours ago, McSpazz said:

Basically, for sci-fi, you go into the situation expecting that the laws of nature are going to be, if not followed, referenced. Concepts that use sci-fi and treat it like magic are usually concepts that revolve around ideas that are not well understood or non-existent (portals, time travel, nanites, hacking, etc).

As most people don't understand what goes into hacking, it is often treated much like magic and a hacker character can be just as intrusive to a roleplay as a technomancer even if the latter is theoretically less "realistic" than the hacker. I've seen so many people misunderstand what goes into hacking I wrote an entire diatribe on it. I'm not really sure it's fair to break out statistics on how many characters exist of certain origins when magic-like technology is definitely a thing and doesn't even necessarily need to cause any issues.

I also don't want anyone to take my post to mean that I think magic origins are the problem here. They aren't. The issue here isn't a character's origin but the player's behavior. For example, that Fae queen (or whatever), as a concept, isn't necessarily overpowered. The problem had nothing to do with magic. As has been mentioned, they could have been a mad scientist with a pocket dimension in which they were a minor god and the same problem would exist.

The issue is that the player didn't consider the implications of their character and it didn't seem to occur to them that they were invalidating a narrative. This goes well beyond concept origin. It's not that this occurs more with the magic origin that this seems to be more of a problem for them but, instead, because the lower bar to screw it up means that it's often easier to spot. Most of the screw-ups related to magic concepts tend to boil down to unthought of implications. Not necessarily powergaming. Just because it's easier to mess something up doesn't mean most of the people messing up are doing it maliciously.

(Not accusing anyone of thinking that, just making sure my position's clear)

TL;DR: Magic is often written poorly and is more obvious when it is broken, but the problem at play is more so based in a player's behavior and less so their concept. Even a super powerful magical character that could invalidate narratives does not make that happening inevitable.

Edited May 11, 2022 by McSpazz

TwoDee · May 11, 2022

2 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

But there's one last thing I want to bring up here: I don't think that magic is easier to write poorly in a way that shuts other players out. It is indeed easier to write magic concepts more lazily than others in terms of how powers are handled (for reasons I mentioned before), but it is most definitely not uniquely bad in terms of writing it in ways that shuts others out.

I think we're arguing the same point, here. I was not ascribing malice or intent to powergame to 'shutting players out' - shutting players out is just a natural consequence of a character using their powers to completely invalidate a narrative conflict that someone else worked hard on. See your own clarifier, which I agree with:

2 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

The issue is that the player didn't consider the implications of their character and it didn't seem to occur to them that they were invalidating a narrative. This goes well beyond concept origin. It's not that this occurs more with the magic origin that this seems to be more of a problem for them but, instead, because the lower bar to screw it up means that it's often easier to spot. Most of the screw-ups related to magic concepts tend to boil down to unthought of implications. Not necessarily powergaming. Just because it's easier to mess something up doesn't mean most of the people messing up are doing it maliciously.

If there's a "lower bar" to screw up Magic RP and step on other players' toes, then ipso facto Magic is part of the problem, even if it's not a dominant part of the problem compared to the much greater factor of the player behavior piloting that character. I don't see a reason to dance around the hurt that OP evinced at feeling constantly invalidated by Magic characters with, "well, not all Magic characters." Everyone in this thread knows that Magic characters aren't intrinsically godmoders. However, I think it's a more productive outlet to approach the topic from the direction of "what creates this negative sentiment against high-powered Magic roleplay evinced in the OP and by other posters here" and dissect it, which requires not backpedaling every time a correlation is made for fear of hurting the feelings of players of Magic characters. We're all (presumptively) adults here. I play two high-powered wizards, Second Light and B Movie, myself. The former is a biomancer with power over life and death; the latter a chronomancer with power over time. If I wanted to debate against the hyperbolic strawman of "all Magic characters are godmoders," then I'd be first on the front lines overexplaining how actually my blorbos aren't godmoders. However, I trust us to have a more nuanced discussion than that, which is why I cite the statistics.

Speaking of which:

18 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

I'm not sure this is the best way to determine origins for RP characters. For example, one of my characters is a mutant who uses a lot of tech. Do I give her the tech origin or the mutation origin? These kinds of questions can go many ways. It is true, however (at least from my experience), that magic origin characters tend to be magic based concepts. I'm not sure where the census is so I can't actually check myself, but for the purposes of this conversation, you would need to compare magic origin with science AND technology with the natural origin also taken in consideration.

Here's the Homecoming character origin breakdown, from Cipher's statistical analysis 2 years ago. It is, unfortunately, the most recent census we have, but given that Homecoming has shrank over time, not grown, I think it's reasonable to assume that there hasn't been a massive change in demographics, and anecdotally most trips to Pocket D bear out these rough proportions.

That said, I feel like "well, Origins are inconsistent" is something of a slippery slope argument, and I absolutely don't agree that Tech and Science are the same thing just because they both loosely nod to scientific principles, any more than I agree that Natural and Mutant are the same thing because they both represent the character's intrinsic capabilities. We could argue till the cows come home about what 'Magitech' qualifies as, or whether a Frankenstein's Monster qualifies as Science or Tech, but I've never met a Dragon God Demon without on their bar and I suspect neither have you, and the fact remains that when given these five imperfect categories to describe themselves, player characters choose Magic only slightly less than Tech and Science combined.

Certainly, I'm not going to argue that "Magic-like technology" can't be a problem with and writing, nor have I argued that in any of my posts. However, even phrasing it that way - "Magic-like technology" - underscores the dramatically different expectations in tone and level of explanation that the plurality, if not the majority, of players self-define as ascribing to. It's not the end-all be-all, but it is a variable. It is not fair to say that causes bad roleplay. However, you yourself asserted that bad roleplay is more immediate and visible with , and I agree with that and believe it to be correlative in cases like the OP's repeat dissatisfaction with high-powered gods in their SG Base storylines, if not causative.

We call it "God Moding" for a reason; is it so hard to believe that players literally identifying as Gods would be demographically more prone to it?

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

1 hour ago, TwoDee said:

there is not an ingame storyline where the player comes into possession of a magical superweapon and has to make the hard decision on whether or not to submit it to the authorities.

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Mission:Tip_-_Whispered_Rumor

Not a whole arc, sure, but a similar premise in one of the options.

1 hour ago, TwoDee said:

Unless you mean to say that 'the heroes debate responsibility' is itself tired and unoriginal. Certainly, we can "reject tropes" for the sake of rejecting tropes. We can set our AEs in the Bas-Lag of Perdido Street Station, where cactus men worship the sun and decapitated heads with pigeon wings throw shit at passers-by. We can set our AEs on faraway alien planets where everyone are animal people who communicate with a series of yips. We can set our storylines in a world where everyone are abstract squiggles that permute into different squiggles seemingly at random, like a Don Hertzfeldt cartoon. However, if you want most players to be interested in your storyline, that requires leaning on superheroic themes, because this is a superhero game and the players involved in the storyline were playing superheroes. "Responsibility" is a salient theme for superheroic works, and it worked swimmingly as a way of exploring the ethics of what our characters believed beyond just "I'm a good guy."

I should have been more clear on this point. I used tropes when I should have said, "stereotypes". Would have been more apt. Plus, despite what you've listed, those would be very interesting stories, and I'm sure would EASILY draw a large audience if done right( remember, people like different. It's why quirky things get such attention). Superheroic themes( which are part of the genre, and are conventions that are to be expected and can be subverted for even greater effect) are absolutely good to have in CoH for obvious reasons. It's not hard to get people interested in different, you just have to be willing to TRY to be different. Of course, my biggest chip on this event was the exclusion of the elf person. Wouldn't it of helped to let them know of this mistake? Twice now you've mentioned her, did you ever take the time to let her know what went wrong and why?

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

2 hours ago, TwoDee said:

Correspondingly, the existing Western canon of Fantasy literature, from which most roleplayers will be taking their cues, is much friendlier to the notion of characters developing inexplicable and limitless godlike power than Sci-Fi literature, from which most roleplayers will be taking their cues. So, purely from the perspective of an inexperienced roleplayer hopping in for the first time, a is more likely to have been "greenlit" to godmode by the genre fiction context they're bringing in.

This is the only point I want to contest. Most folks, regardless of origin will pull from the two powerhouse comics, Marvel/DC. These two have easily a plethora of godmode characters compared to any of the fantasy that I've read(in fact, I'd love to find a fantasy novel where the character itself has god mod level power and use it to hand-waive everything, then they get more than one book, or that even that one book is very well received. Note, a NOVEL, not a comic.). Now, if we're talking ridiculous things such as coming back from the dead, magic does it differently than Sci-Fi, but they both do it pretty often. There are equal amounts of traps for inexperienced RPers to fall into for both Magic or Science.

Point 4 has basis, point 3, not really.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Seed22

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

57 minutes ago, TwoDee said:

If there's a "lower bar" to screw up Magic RP and step on other players' toes, then ipso facto Magic is part of the problem, even if it's not a dominant part of the problem compared to the much greater factor of the player behavior piloting that character.

So then if that's your takeaway, how are you going to solve it? What steps can be taken to alleviate the issues that you perceive? Will you enlighten the offender, offering an amiable solution that will, in your eyes, make them better RPers? I've seen diatribe after diatribe given, yet no concrete solution given to alleviate the issue.

57 minutes ago, TwoDee said:

We call it "God Moding" for a reason; is it so hard to believe that players literally identifying as Gods would be demographically more prone to it?

Well sure players can identify as gods, but is it so hard to believe that they don't ALL have to be magic or based in magic? What's so difficult to understand about tech or science origin creating gods? I mean, there's quite a few, again, Marvel characters of Mutation origin that are gods or god level. It can happen to other origins. Don't get me wrong, I suppose that I feel for the OP(though this IS only just RP so it's all really moot anyway, my points or otherwise), but that trying to effectively demonize(haha, ironic) an origin or pick apart a counter point to suit your argument against the origin, then claim you're not doing so, is..well, not great.

EDIT: I don't have any animosity towards you or anyone, just...trying to get to a solution here.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Seed22

Crystal Dragon · May 11, 2022

Oh my goddess this thread took a ride, didn't it!

Well, I think it's safe to say that yes, Magic origin characters tend to be rather off the wall and sometimes using lawless abilities can be both creative and stunting depending on HOW it is depicted in use and practice. I won't say all magic character players know what they are doing, some fly off to the depths of space in breadth of how their magic is used and effects the world around them, but the mention and idea of different dimensional rules, universal rules similar to science has seemed to make sense to me. (Yes, speaking from personal experiences here to share a bit in context, keep reading, I promise it's worth hearing me out.) The idea of formulating baseline rules behind HOW that magic works, and what it does effect wise is pretty important and given the number of new players we've had entering the RP scenes recently, it's safe to say that some are literally writing right off the cuff.

How my magic works, may not be the same for anyone elses magic origin characters, and that's totally okay. But again, a base line in limitations, side effects, or backfires wouldn't be a bad idea to include for suspension of disbelief, and immersive quality. A joke character can very easily become a serious character if time and serious thought it put behind it's play, and background as well as use of whatever powers that character has specifically. But this isn't about joke characters, this is about over powered characters that lack a clearly defined limit either in the context of the content we are playing and immersing ourselves in. I'm not saying globally we need this, but having a rough idea and putting it together from the community's say so based on what lore we do have in the game that explains some of the magic types used - probably wouldn't be a bad idea to compile as a collaboratives effort for creative definition.

11 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

Well sure players can identify as gods, but is it so hard to believe that they don't ALL have to be magic or based in magic? What's so difficult to understand about tech or science origin creating gods? I mean, there's quite a few, again, Marvel characters of Mutation origin that are gods or god level. It can happen to other origins. Don't get me wrong, I suppose that I feel for the OP(though this IS only just RP so it's all really moot anyway, my points or otherwise), but that trying to effectively demonize(haha, ironic) an origin or pick apart a counter point to suit your argument against the origin, then claim you're not doing so, is..well, not great.

@Seed22 Something I wished to point out here. Claiming to be a god is not entirely okay. Demigods, no matter how weakened the line is, is still a powerful role to take on that doesn't break the whole idea of mortality with unexpected strength and powers given to them by their deity parent. Not to say that they are all powerful, but liken to Hercules, Achilles, and Jason of Argonauts for examples here, they are deeply flawed characters based on the myths of that time and era, yet were still highly regarded as characters of power to follow the paths of. Each one had their own trials, triumphs and failings. Not one of them claims to be immortal, or a god themselves, just at home with the mental idea of strength and cunning. Now, I'm not advocating for some of us to collaborate to formulate a baseline of what is acceptable "god play", every group, every circle I've ever dipped into had it's own ideas and concepts of what the limits really were and how far things could go. But asking people to have a close idea, or a note of reminder for themselves of what limits this world has for the character themselves and the reality of those limits for that character would be recommended advice.

Something else I'd like to add to this, is that every single character I've run into has been unique in concept and background, we have a few fallen gods, celestials and netherworld sorts but many of them are not as powerful as even the mythic heroes I mentioned before. Just because they are that specific character type, doesn't mean they are all that powerful, and yes, it is entirely possible to bring an RP scene to a screeching halt by simply calling out the overpowered antics and asking them to explain how they are doing this act given the world limits. Shit, for example? Crys here has seven AT's rolled, every single one of them are HER in the core, but are not at the same time. They are not separate characters but the same one with a different hat on. She's not an expert in the AT she's training in, but her willingness to learn, adapt, and modify her own practices to expand her understanding of the world she now calls home. This is something that most folks just don't do.

Edited May 11, 2022 by CrystalDragon
Yes, I know I've been unusually quiet. I was reading the replies as they came in and giving the issue a bit of thought before I replied again.

McSpazz · May 11, 2022

15 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

This is the only point I want to contest. Most folks, regardless of origin will pull from the two powerhouse comics, Marvel/DC. These two have easily a plethora of godmode characters compared to any of the fantasy that I've read(in fact, I'd love to find a fantasy novel where the character itself has god mod level power and use it to hand-waive everything, then they get more than one book, or that even that one book is very well received. Note, a NOVEL, not a comic.). Now, if we're talking ridiculous things such as coming back from the dead, magic does it differently than Sci-Fi, but they both do it pretty often. There are equal amounts of traps for inexperienced RPers to fall into for both Magic or Science.

Point 4 has basis, point 3, not really.

Well yes, but actually no. You are correct that most people pull from the two powerhouses of Marvel and DC and that they have a plethora of godmode characters. However, as those two companies themselves very often draw from Western fantasy or tropes generally found within western fantasy (mainly the characters that have been around the longest), it stands to reason that many magic based characters are going to be doing the same regardless of if they get their queues from comics or IRL mythology.

Not that it really matters. Comics have the same issues that I brought up earlier. Magic characters have less push to explain themselves until they absolutely need to while still being taken seriously. As for science based concepts...I mean...

Of course! Don't you know anything about science?! (google it)

As roleplay is a collaborative project and, thus, no matter how powerful a character might be, everyone should be given the chance to contribute. Just as an individual author needs to find a way to make Green Arrow just as important to a scene as Superman, so too must two different roleplayers in a scene.

17 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

So then if that's your takeaway, how are you going to solve it? What steps can be taken to alleviate the issues that you perceive? Will you enlighten the offender, offering an amiable solution that will, in your eyes, make them better RPers? I've seen diatribe after diatribe given, yet no concrete solution given to alleviate the issue.

I mean....sure. Way ahead of you.

But as that is a way overly long post, here's the short version: a character's power level determines how much they can contribute to a scene. You need to determine what kind of roleplay you want to take part in and how your power level is going to impact it. But all of this is on the personal level. Nothing can be done from a community standpoint outside of calling out characters that behave badly and asking people with characters you find flawed if they are open to constructive criticism. What is the purpose of that power? Why do they need to be that powerful? Do you intend to roleplay with weaker characters and, if so, how do you plan to ensure they can contribute?

biostem · May 11, 2022

35 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

Well sure players can identify as gods, but is it so hard to believe that they don't ALL have to be magic or based in magic? What's so difficult to understand about tech or science origin creating gods?

I mean, anyone call call themselves a "god", but if we're talking about a more classical definition, then, IMO, magic is the only origin that fits, I guess the biggest sticking point is if you are going to go with the "any sufficiently advanced" viewpoint on technology, then you could argue otherwise...

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

1 hour ago, CrystalDragon said:

Oh my goddess this thread took a ride, didn't it!

Well, I think it's safe to say that yes, Magic origin characters tend to be rather off the wall and sometimes using lawless abilities can be both creative and stunting depending on HOW it is depicted in use and practice. I won't say all magic character players know what they are doing, some fly off to the depths of space in breadth of how their magic is used and effects the world around them, but the mention and idea of different dimensional rules, universal rules similar to science has seemed to make sense to me. (Yes, speaking from personal experiences here to share a bit in context, keep reading, I promise it's worth hearing me out.) The idea of formulating baseline rules behind HOW that magic works, and what it does effect wise is pretty important and given the number of new players we've had entering the RP scenes recently, it's safe to say that some are literally writing right off the cuff.

How my magic works, may not be the same for anyone elses magic origin characters, and that's totally okay. But again, a base line in limitations, side effects, or backfires wouldn't be a bad idea to include for suspension of disbelief, and immersive quality. A joke character can very easily become a serious character if time and serious thought it put behind it's play, and background as well as use of whatever powers that character has specifically. But this isn't about joke characters, this is about over powered characters that lack a clearly defined limit either in the context of the content we are playing and immersing ourselves in. I'm not saying globally we need this, but having a rough idea and putting it together from the community's say so based on what lore we do have in the game that explains some of the magic types used - probably wouldn't be a bad idea to compile as a collaboratives effort for creative definition.

@Seed22 Something I wished to point out here. Claiming to be a god is not entirely okay. Demigods, no matter how weakened the line is, is still a powerful role to take on that doesn't break the whole idea of mortality with unexpected strength and powers given to them by their deity parent. Not to say that they are all powerful, but liken to Hercules, Achilles, and Jason of Argonauts for examples here, they are deeply flawed characters based on the myths of that time and era, yet were still highly regarded as characters of power to follow the paths of. Each one had their own trials, triumphs and failings. Not one of them claims to be immortal, or a god themselves, just at home with the mental idea of strength and cunning. Now, I'm not advocating for some of us to collaborate to formulate a baseline of what is acceptable "god play", every group, every circle I've ever dipped into had it's own ideas and concepts of what the limits really were and how far things could go. But asking people to have a close idea, or a note of reminder for themselves of what limits this world has for the character themselves and the reality of those limits for that character would be recommended advice.

Something else I'd like to add to this, is that every single character I've run into has been unique in concept and background, we have a few fallen gods, celestials and netherworld sorts but many of them are not as powerful as even the mythic heroes I mentioned before. Just because they are that specific character type, doesn't mean they are all that powerful, and yes, it is entirely possible to bring an RP scene to a screeching halt by simply calling out the overpowered antics and asking them to explain how they are doing this act given the world limits. Shit, for example? Crys here has seven AT's rolled, every single one of them are HER in the core, but are not at the same time. They are not separate characters but the same one with a different hat on. She's not an expert in the AT she's training in, but her willingness to learn, adapt, and modify her own practices to expand her understanding of the world she now calls home. This is something that most folks just don't do.

Oh no I wouldnt advocate to RP as a god haha, jusy sayin magic isnt the only origin to have gods I guess? Thats mostly what I was getting at

Seed22 · May 11, 2022

54 minutes ago, McSpazz said:

Well yes, but actually no. You are correct that most people pull from the two powerhouses of Marvel and DC and that they have a plethora of godmode characters. However, as those two companies themselves very often draw from Western fantasy or tropes generally found within western fantasy (mainly the characters that have been around the longest), it stands to reason that many magic based characters are going to be doing the same regardless of if they get their queues from comics or IRL mythology.

Not that it really matters. Comics have the same issues that I brought up earlier. Magic characters have less push to explain themselves until they absolutely need to while still being taken seriously. As for science based concepts...I mean...

Of course! Don't you know anything about science?! (google it)

As roleplay is a collaborative project and, thus, no matter how powerful a character might be, everyone should be given the chance to contribute. Just as an individual author needs to find a way to make Green Arrow just as important to a scene as Superman, so too must two different roleplayers in a scene.

I mean....sure. Way ahead of you.

But as that is a way overly long post, here's the short version: a character's power level determines how much they can contribute to a scene. You need to determine what kind of roleplay you want to take part in and how your power level is going to impact it. But all of this is on the personal level. Nothing can be done from a community standpoint outside of calling out characters that behave badly and asking people with characters you find flawed if they are open to constructive criticism. What is the purpose of that power? Why do they need to be that powerful? Do you intend to roleplay with weaker characters and, if so, how do you plan to ensure they can contribute?

Thats a great write up and steps, but I was aiming that question at Two mostly. I was thinking maybe some RP classes for those deemed “bad”? But then thats a bit subjective…

TwoDee · May 11, 2022

I'll cede ground here on two points:

5 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

https://homecoming.wiki/wiki/Mission:Tip_-_Whispered_Rumor

Not a whole arc, sure, but a similar premise in one of the options

I'll grant that there is indeed such an arc buried in City of Heroes, only available through an esoteric Halloween-only Tip, and kudos to you for remembering it when I didn't. I don't think, however, that it's fair to expect that most players would have played this storyline in a roleplay team setting given the context, compared to something more accessible like, say, the RWZ arcs or, in a more directly comparable way, the Praetorian "moral choice" arcs.

However...

5 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

I should have been more clear on this point. I used tropes when I should have said, "stereotypes". Would have been more apt. Plus, despite what you've listed, those would be very interesting stories, and I'm sure would EASILY draw a large audience if done right( remember, people like different. It's why quirky things get such attention). Superheroic themes( which are part of the genre, and are conventions that are to be expected and can be subverted for even greater effect) are absolutely good to have in CoH for obvious reasons. It's not hard to get people interested in different, you just have to be willing to TRY to be different. Of course, my biggest chip on this event was the exclusion of the elf person. Wouldn't it of helped to let them know of this mistake? Twice now you've mentioned her, did you ever take the time to let her know what went wrong and why?

I resent the implication that the creator of the storyline wasn't "different" enough as a knock against them, here. There's no such thing as platonic originality and anyone who tells you that they wrote a truly original storyline is a narcissist, a hack, an idiot, or all three. We all are an amalgam of the influences we bring in, and you can see that borne out in the endless proliferation of superheroic character bios, of roleplay touchstones, of faceclaims, of theme songs. I reiterate that a storyline confrontationally asking the player characters "are you willing to set aside your responsibility to authority if it would keep people safe?" was a good and valuable storyline that made for good RP, and a full max-size team wouldn't have signed up to play it if that concept wasn't resonant. I am fairly confident that none of those players had taken an RP team through the Malleus Mundi plot, and more generally that none of them had experienced this kind of storyline in a City of Heroes roleplay team context.

Originality for the sake of originality doesn't have any value, because new ideas aren't definitionally more valuable than old ideas. Bas-Lag is an excellent setting, and Perdido Street Station is an excellent story, and China Mieville is an excellent author, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect City of Heroes roleplayers to be contextually familiar with the way that the Handlinger parasite burrows into the throat of its victim in the same way that I can expect the concept of a Shivan - a goo monster inhabiting a corpse - to be contextually familiar. It's a useful shorthand to lean on the setting of City of Heroes for precedent because it's the only setting that all players can be absolutely assumed to have some familiarity with, as the world that all the characters are inhabiting.

Assuming we wanted to hit the same emotionally-resonant narrative beats, the story wouldn't have been particularly improved by making the Ancient Romans the Ancient Reticulans from Zeta Reticuli, who all have horns on their chins, and the Nictus the Mej, who are sentient clouds of rose pollen that inhabit Reticulan hosts, nor would it have been improved by making the Council into the Voidborne, a right-reactionary militant sect of the Reticulans, and so forth. If anything, it would have been alienating, and served as an impediment to getting the players engaged on the same snappy ground-floor hook. If I'm running a 3-hour AE run, I don't want it to have to come with 2 hours of backstory. "The Fifth Column and Council are fighting over ancient ruins!" Have at it, heroes!

Regarding the player, I initiated a brief OOC debrief about "((Hey, let's not have any players make a unilateral decision about what happens to the cask, that's against the spirit of this roleplay))." I didn't call out the player specifically, rather framing what was a critique of their choice as a critique of how the roleplay went more generally. I agree that more probably could have been done to turn that into a teachable moment, but if you were a player who'd just suggested a heroic act that made everyone shut up and start talking around you, would you want 7 players to kick off a conversation in the spur of the moment about how you'd just fucked up? Particularly when your motives for participating might have been conflict-avoidant, as was dissected above in those "diatribes?"

Which brings us to...

41 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

So then if that's your takeaway, how are you going to solve it? What steps can be taken to alleviate the issues that you perceive? Will you enlighten the offender, offering an amiable solution that will, in your eyes, make them better RPers? I've seen diatribe after diatribe given, yet no concrete solution given to alleviate the issue.

I'm a roleplayer. I like to write. What I'm not is a personal roleplay tutor, and I'm quite happy to let @McSpazz and @CrystalDragon pick up the slack there. I'm interested in improving the tenor of roleplay inasmuch as it makes my experience more pleasurable, hence why I'm willing to put the kibosh on a scene to have an autopsy about "((Hey folks, this scene imploded; let's articulate what went wrong here))." However, that's not for everyone, and generally speaking when I attempt that kind of breakdown outside of curated spaces like a supergroup or closed roleplay clique, especially when it was the actions of one roleplayer that caused the problem, I'm met with hostility and "are you calling me a bad writer!?" indignation, not a conciliatory dialogue about boundaries and narrative flow. From a cost-benefit analysis, it's more juice for my squeeze to take a breath, recenter, and hop back on the RP horse. I make more friends that way, surprising as it may be to hear that I have friends from what a tightass I'm being in this thread.

Where I feel more free to broach these topics is threads like this one, where we're not "in the heat of the moment" of roleplay, and are better able to articulate ourselves in a thoughtful way. I hate to use this as ammunition, but earlier in the thread someone was kind enough to tell me that I'd changed their mind and given them food for introspection about how they comported themselves in roleplay, and to my mind that's already a victory for the roleplay community. I come down pretty similarly to @CrystalDragon's expectations-

1 hour ago, CrystalDragon said:

Now, I'm not advocating for some of us to collaborate to formulate a baseline of what is acceptable "god play", every group, every circle I've ever dipped into had it's own ideas and concepts of what the limits really were and how far things could go. But asking people to have a close idea, or a note of reminder for themselves of what limits this world has for the character themselves and the reality of those limits for that character would be recommended advice.

-which is to say, I'm a big advocate of the 'don't be a jerk' principle, and of critically examining one's own roleplay on occasion to make sure that you're not being a jerk, either intentionally or accidentally.

I don't have a good final segue into this divergent point, but regarding the "not all Gods" avenue, that feels to me like arguing the exception.

1 hour ago, Seed22 said:

Well sure players can identify as gods, but is it so hard to believe that they don't ALL have to be magic or based in magic? What's so difficult to understand about tech or science origin creating gods? I mean, there's quite a few, again, Marvel characters of Mutation origin that are gods or god level. It can happen to other origins. Don't get me wrong, I suppose that I feel for the OP(though this IS only just RP so it's all really moot anyway, my points or otherwise), but that trying to effectively demonize(haha, ironic) an origin or pick apart a counter point to suit your argument against the origin, then claim you're not doing so, is..well, not great.

A god is "a being or object that is worshipped as having more than natural attributes and powers." A god being a supernatural object of love and adoration, definitionally existing outside of the paradigm of what can be achieved through comprehensible means, precludes all Origins but Magic except on aesthetic technicality. Yes, a "god" could be a sufficiently-advanced alien, or a Twilight Zone reality-warping mutant, but the very notion of a being with sweeping unilateral control over some or all aspects of reality places it squarely into City of Heroes' textual definition of Magic, quoted above, and purely anecdotally, I've never seen a player playing a God or Demigod who wasn't Magic-origin...

Spoiler

...except in one particularly memorable multitool case where the "Tech Origin" God in question was a naval admiral, super-scientist, powersuiter, negotiator, politician, thought leader, and omni-disciplinary holder of an ever-growing list of PhDs. And all of the aforementioned was merely a Tech augment to her existing Magic, so even though she had the next to her name, she still explicitly stipulated in triplicate that she had near-limitless powers. 😉

We're drifting into purely anecdotal territory where we move further and further from claims that I can make with confidence, but I think I'm comfortable assuming that cross-sectioning godmoders as a class, and then cross-sectioning that into purely those who say "what if I was just literally God?" you're going to see an overwhelming number of icons represented simply because is the easiest and most intuitive way to write that concept, with the least hoops to jump through.

Crystal Dragon · May 11, 2022

11 minutes ago, TwoDee said:

I'm interested in improving the tenor of roleplay inasmuch as it makes my experience more pleasurable, hence why I'm willing to put the kibosh on a scene to have an autopsy about "((Hey folks, this scene imploded; let's articulate what went wrong here))."

This is actually something I do recommend for folks that run into a bonkers story that needs cross checking. It's not even a matter of being a bad writer or roleplayer, but just a means to have a clearer understanding of where the story bit is going and analyze what effects would take place with the characters involved. And in group settings that everyone has agreed on terms, works quite well.

13 minutes ago, TwoDee said:

We're drifting into purely anecdotal territory where we move further and further from claims that I can make with confidence, but I think I'm comfortable assuming that cross-sectioning godmoders as a class, and then cross-sectioning that into purely those who say "what if I was just literally God?" you're going to see an overwhelming number of icons represented simply because is the easiest and most intuitive way to write that concept, with the least hoops to jump through.

I suppose the one question to ask here, is what do we consider a "god" in power level, or scaling in character play depiction, but everyone is going to have a very different aspect of view to this, so I guess it's always good to check with your fellow players in your group to see if they share the same view points and are able to uphold to them in story play.

29 minutes ago, Seed22 said:

Oh no I wouldn't advocate to RP as a god haha, just sayin magic isn't the only origin to have gods I guess? That's mostly what I was getting at

But while I do not suggest playing a god character, or even a demigod in this type of setting for folks unfamiliar with group/team story line play, it is something that I've seen happen in-game on multiple different characters and to multiple different players. How that aspect is presented is so bloody important, but remembering to keep that character firmly grounded in the game world we are playing in is super important too. It's easy to slip into the mind of someone consumed by unlimited powers, it's a challenge to find the balance between that power, and what good or evil that might do while maintaining solid footing with that role within the groups or circles you play with. There is good forms of godmoding, acceptable even but there are also egregiously bad forms of it too.

Sign In

Dragons, Gods and Demons: Why?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in