Good Conquers All. Really?

[Majyk]

This is my third attempt at this, the computer keeps eating my post.

Good triumphing over Evil is an overused stereotype that leads to boring RP.

Oh the bad people's castle was stormed, taken, the bad leader dies, all is well in the kingdom! Yay! Good guys get a party, almost all bad guys are dead or in prison. The end.

The only thing that keeps this from being fun is: It's been done too many times before.

Wouldn't it be cool if the bad guys won? They take control of a certain zone. Totally kicked the crap out of the good guys.
What will good do? This is another catalyst for RP. The good can slowly build up their armies again, they could infiltrate the bad organization, they can start guerrilla warfare, etc.

See? Isn't that better than just a party for the good guys and the bad guys have prison?

I think so.

[Miah]

I never really wanted to play anything evil on the server, not because I don't enjoy it, but the fact that evil and neutral appears to be a small percentage, sadly. Many people claim to be neutral, but if a crime is going on, a neutral character would likely keep their head down unless it directly affected their interests, yet I found that if there is even a hint of evil doings, generally, a huge gathering of heroic people step forward to put things right. I'm not saying they shouldn't, but, it's rare to see anyone observe a crime, or criminal, and not feel the need to intervene in a heroic, brave, or downright silly manner. Hence, why I couldn't play an evil character, it's just impossible with near-psychic people picking up on it, then defiantly objecting and threatening till you have to just give up. If your evil, you expect that but not on the scale that someone couldn't, throwing an example out, be pick-pocketed, even if it were played out well, and in a way that it wasnt ridiculous, such as an obvious crime, without that person and 5 others around noticing, and an angry mob forming.

Yikes, sorry if i seemed to get a little ranty there, not trying to offend or be like that in any way, just, sometimes wish that you could meet someone who could fall victim to a crime, and criminals/evil folk could get away with it once in a while. *nod*

[Jacula]

The good guys don't always win if one is to be realistic. The world is a cruel, unfair and gritty place, and it will bring you to your knees no matter how tough you are. The same thing goes for what happens IC'ly, or in my mind at least it should.

I find it peculiar while playing my gnome, who happens to be chaotic evil that many players use themselves of meta gaming when they attempt to expose him. Now, while playing an evil character I always ask the permission of those I'm playing with OOC'ly if the RP leans towards actions which may end up in one character being killed, disfigured or so on.

If they don't give their permission, I simply try to find a way to compromise through discussion. After all, being a bully is not something that is recommended. In all walks of life really, not only regarding role playing.

Sadly, as I choose to respect the input of those I play with I sometimes experience that the same respect towards my own input is not given. This may appear in many forms, from suddenly knowing my characters name or magically having a deep insight into his deeds without having witnessed or even heard about them IC'ly.

With that said, playing an evil character is challenging but it does add a nice contrast to the RP community.

This post was not aimed at anyone in particular, nor was it intended to offend.

Thanks for reading.

[Mayson]

More accurately, I think, no one will ever win the war. Because - correct me if I'm wrong - that would be the ultimate dead-end to RP.

I think the quintessential problem is what people define as 'winning' in this case. There are no lasting victories here, not in any material sense of the word- rather, the game here seems to be one of escalating and ebbing tensions. One side does one thing, another counters or responds. There is still a zero-sum, but the important thing - above all - is for (in technical terms) stuff to be happening. Because when you cut it to the quick, that's what RP is. Stuff happening.

Evil wants to create a massive Ogre-firing super-death-cannon? Good. The 'good' guys have a go at destroying it. Maybe they destroy it- and maybe the 'bad' buys respond by sacking the good guys base with hordes of Arthur Fonzerelli clones and a shrieking Frank Zappa solo. Awesome. Stuff has happened, fun RP was had by all, and there is, in fact, more stuff to have happen.

Nothing ends. Because ending stuff is boring. Victories on both sides should be tangible- not lasting or final.

QED

That's a good point. I agree with you kinda.

[Piroska]

I'd like to take a quick moment to interject by reminding the community that metagaming is strictly against our rules. If players are using their knowledge of things going on to influence their characters' actions, there's a problem. I have no issue if the players proceeding after a discussion in order to move an encounter along or foster interaction and roleplay, but they shouldn't just be doing things willy-nilly. If it does sincerely become debilitating, you should contact a staff member in-game or send screenshots of the roleplay with a summary to one of us.

Please keep in mind, however, that if players are allowing their characters to be blatantly stupid in-game (for example, picking a lock on a door near a guard in a crowded city), they are probably not going to be protected.

[Psychyn]

Interesting topic so far, regarding the question: "Should good always win?" I think it has been properly backed up already that this is far from the case. As said, it's a dead-end for the RP and what Majyk describes sounds actually twice as more fun already.

However, what did leave a sour taste in my mouth was a event that went on some time ago already. As a evil playing character, I expect nothing but trouble if I do anything evil in plain sight. As there have been ways to inform people over long distances which is actually quite a nifty thing, I'd like to point out that it actually bended around the metagaming aspect.

While not metagaming per se, as all people involved were informed beforehand with the long-distance method.. Users of a "Good" alignment shouldn't simply make use of this method to get informed before barging in from a unrealistic distance to "Save the day."

Nothing wrong with trying to make your characters shine, but if you couldn't realistically be there to actually commit good, then don't.

While perhaps luring away from the original topic, my point was that you should give people from both alignments a actual chance. If evil is being committed and you get informed through some way or another, don't barge in when you have nothing to do with it. It would be nice if people asked permission over OOC channels, or emote their way to the spot were evil is being committed at.

The same would naturally be for good users, if they manage to take hold of someone evil and imprison him, don't go making a attempt at breaking him/her free from the jail if it's simply not realistic or possible to do IC-wise. This way, it will allow both alignments to actually engage deeper into the RP, and make schemes/plans for a actual counter/attack, search, or something along those lines.

One event, while not in favour of a character may lead to many other events of nice RP between the respective good / evil sides, which keeps it new and interesting. And probably most importantly, it keeps it fun. This naturally isn't a attack at anyone, but events like what happened makes me want to start up simple "pre-determined ending" evil role-plays with smaller groups just for the sake of having some degree of fairness between both alignments, which would really limit a lot of things.

If you act in a open place, and friends of you are realistically around to help you out, be my guest.
If you however, you act in a open place and none of your mates are there to help you out, don't help the player in trouble out and let the RP go on. Try to get informed afterwards, find traces, talk to people who did see it, it opens loads of new RP opportunities. (With "open" places I mean places that have no NPC/Guards near. It can be a road, in a forest, at a lake, anything. And remember, evil isn't always stabbing someone, loads of subtle ways to be evil.)

[Miah]

One last point ill make. Remember that a lot of evil RP is organised between players ooc first to sort out permissions and such. As such, its perfectly likely that OOC, a person might not actually want saving, that they enjoy the rp and went into it willingly to advance their character or otherwise. So unless its blatantly obvious, such as someone being beaten up in the middle of a street, don't immediately don the heroics. ^^

[c0rzilla]

I'll admit that I'm a sap and like good winning over evil. However! I -love- it when the good guys have to go through hell, question their own beliefs, have to think like the 'bad' guys, and learn that the 'bad' guys aren't monstrous automotons. In a certain storyline that's going on that alot of people are involved with, my character (a major player) has grown -alot- and has both become stronger in some aspects of her faith, and more cynical in others. So, yeah. I like it when the good side wins, but I don't want rainbows and puppies everywhere.

[Binkleheimer]

It all depends on who is, ultimately, stronger.
Good and Evil are relativistic concepts.
The notion "Good always wins" is because the -winners- write the history, thus putting themselves in a more favorable light.

Basically, if the 'Evil' guild has the ability, they can win.

[Ometh]

Laughing at this post.
1, 2, 3, go.

Good nor Evil exist.
Subjective thoughts, nothing more.

The Alliance view the Horde as evil. This isn't true, the Horde are just a culture trying to ensure they survive while under pressure from the Alliance and atoning for wrongs they did commit.

The Horde see the Alliance as evil. They're not evil, they just make mistakes and are trying to quash a rebel faction before it gains the upper hand.. At least they stopped locking up Orcs in camps.

Wait, I decided both are evil.

The Pandaren are the only good faction.

[Shane]

It all depends on who is, ultimately, stronger.
Good and Evil are relativistic concepts.
The notion "Good always wins" is because the -winners- write the history, thus putting themselves in a more favorable light.

Basically, if the 'Evil' guild has the ability, they can win.

I couldn't have put it better.

To me, there are no such things as good or evil guilds. There are either guilds that are popular because they serve people that are outside of the guilds while the other are about fulfilling their own goals in ways that wouldn't be acceptable to everyone. While the former may have support of outsiders, the later would have a more diverse arsenal of tactics to combat them.

Say, a group of bandits wouldn't mind poisoning their enemies while the Horde's forces would scoff at such a thing and prefer a direct confrontation. To me things pretty much even themselves out.

[Scout]

It's often more impacting when evil triumphs over good. Perhaps I'm biased, seeing as I am a schemer at heart and enjoy playing evil characters oh so very much, but would 1984 have that same feeling at the end if Winston and Julia had a happy ending? There are countless other works of literature I could cite that have a conclusion where good is less than triumphant.

Besides, I'm always of the opinion that it's actually more fun when your characters sometimes fail at something, which is something I feel a lot of people have trouble accepting.

[Aphetoros]

I really want to shamelessly bump this thread because its so interesting and I want more people to see it, but I feel that I should contribute to it as well to be fair.

I believe that there is no good versus evil, only perspective versus perspective. The reason we have these labels 'good' and 'evil' is simply because of the morals ground into our brains of what is wrong and what is right. One of the reasons there are criminals even in -our- world is simply because they weren't taught what we think is right and what should be wrong. They were taught that their way is right.

[NodCommando]

Good and evil should not be taken into consideration when determining who 'wins' or 'loses'. It doesn't matter how angelic you are, you've got the same chance of being killed / losing as an evil person... if not higher in some cases.

[BountyHunter]

The reason that good people always win in the end is because good have numbers. There are a lot more people in the world with good intentions then there are evil and the good people are always more willing to selflessly band together to fight a larger threat while the evil people are more selfish and want everything for themselves, in most cases.

If we're being realistic, yes, evil does have a good chance of winning a fight and if there are more evil people it's more likely but more then often you will have a much larger group of opposing good people.