RP Servers Plz

[Sarkon]

This the wrong section for this post? W/e

I personaly hope that there will be multiple servers. Perhaps Permadeath servers, RPs, and Normal ones. That would be great. I don't wanna be stuck trying to RP with a friend of mine when a idiot comes out of nowhere, starts attacking us and begin yelling stuff like "I RAPED YOO ANd YA MOM!!!!11!1!"

Please, I hope you can spare us this horrible pain.

[Thargan]

I'm hoping since the developers created a forum specifically for RP and Lore, they will care enough to implement RP servers.

A sandbox game such as this can provide a wonderful opportunity to RP and it would be a waste to throw it away.

[yXXe]

Permadeath is like asking the game to jump in the sea, go below the water, and hold it's breath for a month.
Plus, didn't OP create another topic regarding the RP server discussions? Keeping the forums clean, people.

[Shinzon]

No RP/PvP servers, just ONE server... Read this article:

Who Are These People Anyway?
People tend to think that [virtual worlds] alter how people perceive one another. That gender and race and handicaps cease to matter. It is a noble vision, sure... In truth [they] reveal the self in rather disturbing ways. We all construct 'faces' and masks to deal with others. Usually in [real life] interpersonal relationships, the masks can slip, they evolve and react, and they have body language and cues. [In a virtual world], on the Net, whatever--they cannot. And people see specifically this: what you choose to represent yourself as, and that is more revealing of your true nature than gender, race, age, or anything else... it's not a matter of how we hide, it's a matter of how we are revealing ourselves.
The above paragraph comes from an unpublished interview I gave many years ago now. It came in response to the question, "How do you think virtual worlds affect people's perceptions of each other?"
A tangled question. Many seized on the sentence, "Thank heavens for playerkillers" in the last essay, and used it as evidence that I, or UO, am "on the playerkillers' side." Unfortunately, that's not only incorrect, but a reductionist view of a tangled situation. A better question to ask is, what exactly is the population of an online world, and what social forces drive it?
In discussing the Other yesterday, one word seemed at the center of the issue: Power. The conflicts that arise are there precisely because competing agendas (and often, as in the case of the playerkillers versus the roleplayers , competing play styles) attempt to exercise power over one another. I got a letter from Kazola, proprietor of the Treetop Keg and Winery on Great Lakes, saying that the tavern is not famous for being a target, but for being a roleplay haven first. It became a a target because of that fame. Yet I would still argue that it had the roleplay fame within a narrower segment of the overall UO community than its fame as a "flickering light in the darkness." And it is worth examining why exactly this is so. Why did it become a target just for being what it is? And why was its struggle so compelling?
Richard Bartle, who along with Roy Trubshaw is generally credited with writing the first mud (multi-user dungeon, if you wish to call it that, but let's say "virtual online world" instead) wrote an essay which among designers of virtual worlds is often considered essential reading. In it he classifies players into four types:
• Those who seek to interact with other people, or Socializers
• Those who seek to dominate other people, or Killers
• Those who seek to learn and master the mechanics of the world, or Explorers
• Those who seek to advance within the context of the world, or Achievers
Now, these are simplistic definitions, of course, and there is plenty of debate over the exact mix, and whether these are reductions to stereotypes, etc. It is interesting to note that "roleplayers" aren't even on his list, though they are generally considered to be a major force in online gaming--under this system, they are merely a variant of socializers, and the line between in-fiction chatting and out-of-character chatting is blurred.
The fascinating part of the essay, however, is where Bartle discusses the interactions between these groups. Killers are like wolves, in his model. And therefore they eat sheep, not other wolves. And the sheep are the socializers, with some occasional Achievers for spice. Why? Because killers are about the exercise of power, and you do not get the satisfaction of exercising power unless the victim complains vocally about it. Which socializers will tend to do.
Further, Bartle pointed out that eliminating the killers from the mix of the population results in a stagnant society. The socializers become cliquish, and without adversity to bring communities together, they fragment and eventually go away. Similarly, achievers, who are always looking for the biggest and baddest monster to kill, will find a world without killers to be lacking in risk and danger, and will grow bored and move on.
Yet at the same time, too many killers will quite successfully chase away everyone else. And after feeding on themselves for a little while, they will move on too. Leaving an empty world. However, since killers tend to know the world really well, there are not many ways of keeping them in check. From the playerbase, the explorers are the only ones with a real chance, because they know the game better than anyone.
Among some virtual world designers, the dichotomy is simpler: you have what they term "GoP" players, or goal-oriented players, and you have everyone else: the roleplayers, the socializers, etc. And the conflict is always between these two types. My own preferred metaphor goes back to the work of child psychologist Bruno Bettelheim, who discussed the two ways children tend to amuse themselves. One form is the "game," where there is a winner and a loser. It is competitive, and may or may not involve team play. The other is "play," which is non-competitive. It can be as simple as chatting a lot, or it can be building blocks, or (as it often is with children) it can be make-believe-- which is after all, roleplaying.
You may have recognized yourself in one of these models, and may have recognized situations and events from UO as well. Now, many of the responses to the first essay on the web boards and the newsgroups discussed how idealistic a vision it expressed... and thus viewed the second essay as a reversal. Yet really, the dichotomy of game and play are two sides of the same coin. One does not tend to exist anywhere without the other. Whereas the most idealistic vision of a virtual world, the fully community-oriented one, would seem to be composed of only "play," in fact it would founder. It's in human nature to need both, in one way or another. It's the nature of reality--and therefore the nature of virtual reality as well.
From a strict in-context perspective, the actions of a killer within a virtual world can be seen as sociopathic: they do not recognize the mores of the society in which they operate. This is not to say that they are bad people-- it has been well-established that interactions in a virtual setting create a level of psychological disinhibition that encourages freer action, less inhibited speech, and perhaps a little less thoughtfulness; this is probably largely due to the intoxicating sense of anonymity that we feel online. One has to wonder what the proper method of controlling people is, when they are generally not bad people, but merely "drunk" on the sense of anonymity.
Ideally (yeah, back to those pesky ideals), we bring them to an awareness of the virtual community they are disrupting, whilst at the same time still permitting people to (in final analysis) exercise power over one another, because people tend to seek status and power, and it's an important mechanic we cannot do without.
To boil all the high-flown stuff above down into simple premises: we must have playerkillers in UO, because the world would suffer if we did not have them. But they also must be channeled, so that their effect is beneficial, and not detrimental. And they have to learn to act within the context of the "play" space, and not perceive UO as just a "game" space.
In other words, a lot of it is about education. And most roleplayers have a story to tell about the time they first introduced someone to that form of play, and the way in which the former killer or hack 'n' slasher tentatively started trying out new waters, and eventually discovered that "hey, this roleplay things isn't all bad!" They may not become true roleplayers, but they may also adapt their play style to conform more to the virtual context. The mud designer and theoretician J C Lawrence terms this "functional roleplay," where behavior patterns of those who do not roleplay are conditioned by the presence of things like social systems, reputation systems, and other "channeling" devices.
It's largely about perspectives. The issue for the killers is whether they will gain the wider perspective and cease to be "virtually sociopathic." And the issue for the socializers is whether they will recognize that the killers are a part of their society too, and not always a bad one.
The thorny issues that then remain are the nitty-gritty of virtual community building: how do we govern in a world of anonymity? How do we police, and who polices, the players or the game administrators? What sort of punishment is appropriate for virtual crime? What sort of punishment is even possible for virtual crime? The answers to these questions that the UO community seeks out will shape UO for years to come, because they are questions that we the designers must ask of the players--no tool we give to players will work unless players take it up. And it could be that not a large enough proportion of players are ready or willing to take them up. But with the formation of governments and militias, we already see that the UO community is "self-aware"--aware of itself as a community, and therefore implicitly asking for tools to define its own society.
In the end, being a "killer" or a "roleplayer" is just as much a mask as the character one chooses to play online. It reveals something about how the player perceives UO, but not necessarily about their actual nature. (As a classic example, not all playerkillers are 13-year old boys, as popular legend would have it. What makes a playerkiller is a perspective on on the world, not an age.) As designers, our role is to juggle the often conflicting perspectives.
The answer to "who are these people anyway" is better phrased as "who am I, in this virtual reality?" And until a player can answer that well enough to understand their motivations, they may not even be playing the way they really want to. The Greeks put it as gnothi seauton--Know Thyself. If you find these simplified classifications of player styles to be confining--make your own. UO is both a play space and a game space, and that is at the root of all the most wonderful things about it, and also at the heart of the most painful issues it faces with virtual community, playerkilling, and the like. "Giving up" and targeting only half of that equation is not a fruitful approach, in the long run. Only education, self-knowledge, and an awareness of others is.
And education, self-knowledge, and an awareness of others sounds a lot like the process of growing up. Hearkening back to yesterday--something is being born. But we do have to teach it how to walk. More on that tomorrow.
-Designer Dragon
For further reading, for the interested:
• Richard Bartle's article Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit Muds
• Julian Dibbell's classic article on a virtual world community discovering itself, A Rape in Cyberspace
• A simplistic personality test can maybe help you judge which of Bartle's types you fall under
In addition, Kazola mentions that the Treetop Keg and Winery is thriving-- congratulations. Another victory against the forces of darkness--the darkness of social collapse, that is!
Many many people have asked to reprint the first essay, "A Story About a Tree," and just as many have asked if it is a true story. Yes, it is a true story. Please do feel free to pass it around to friends, if you feel it has touched you.
One last note: some people were troubled by the idea that the concepts about the necessity for playerkillers and the like translate back into real world society. The answer is, of course, no. The essays are about virtual worlds and not about the real one. Often concepts translate in one direction, not the other.

[Thargan]

Uh...


...where in that article did you get the impression that there will only be one server?

Hell, how can you think there will only be one server? I can't think of any technology that would support 30k players at a time.

[KroqGar]

Shinzon, I fail to see how that massive wall of text has anything to do with the topic at hand. The topic is about roleplaying servers, not how people respond to one another in a social setting. Arguing that they are the same thing is possible, but once again, it's not the topic at hand. If you truly think there's only going to be one server, you have no idea of the logistics involved with running an MMO. The strain on that server would be ridiculous, and would cause so many problems the game would be damn near unplayable. If by one server, you meant one server type, then that's completely different, but it would help if you specified.

[Shinzon]

You boggle down in specifics, that article argues that if you sepperate PKers and RPers you will decrease the quality of the whole experience. Social interaction is the core of RP, to argue otherwise is counter productive.

Why can't you have one server?
But what I really meant by that is one type of server...

[KroqGar]

Well, one type of server shoves everyone together. I know that I, as a roleplayer, have been condemned in the past by people who did not roleplay, as they found it weird or whatever. It became very difficult to do, and very difficult to stay in character with somebody running by going on about Chuck Norris or something. It's just a little difficult to do what I like to do. If you put a bunch of like-minded people together on a roleplaying server, it takes away these distractions and gives people what they want. That way, the standard players are happy because they don't need to put up with us crazy roleplayers, and the roleplayers are happy because they don't need to put up with the distracting players.

It works for everyone.

[Sarkon]

Another good fact about multiple servers would be the possibility to imput more power-pc-demanding commands and codes, so it wouldn't be too much to take for a single server. Talking about items, NPCs and maybe spells that currently don't exist on another server.

Anyway, I hope we'll hear about that soon enough.

[KroqGar]

There's no question about whether or not there will be multiple servers. If there is only one server, I'd think there's something wrong. The fact of the matter is whether or not there will be multiple server types.

[Thargan]

You have also made the mistake of thinking that a person belongs to only one group. I know of many people who would fall under the categories of PKer and RPer.

Look at RP servers in any game. Other than the RPing, what is different? I have been ganked as much on an RP server as much as a normal one.

[Sarkon]

Originally Posted by Thargan

You have also made the mistake of thinking that a person belongs to only one group. I know of many people who would fall under the categories of PKer and RPer.

Look at RP servers in any game. Other than the RPing, what is different? I have been ganked as much on an RP server as much as a normal one.

It's not about getting ganked. I, myself, would like to be an assassin so it's not like i'm against PKs. I think you might have gotten all this quite wrong.

[KroqGar]

Originally Posted by Sarkon

It's not about getting ganked. I, myself, would like to be an assassin so it's not like i'm against PKs. I think you might have gotten all this quite wrong.

No, he's saying that there aren't cookie cutter groups that you can place people into. Many people have more than one type of personality that is described in that article.

Dans un autre sujet, parlez vous le francais, Sarkon?

[Shawk]

Originally Posted by Shinzon

You boggle down in specifics, that article argues that if you sepperate PKers and RPers you will decrease the quality of the whole experience. Social interaction is the core of RP, to argue otherwise is counter productive.

Why can't you have one server?
But what I really meant by that is one type of server...

So to make sure there is a mix of people the RPers have to mix themselves with people that hate them and wont let them do there thing because they're doing something different?

That article is completely one sided, it is biast to actual Roleplayers.. They seem to forget to mension anything about the fact that Roleplayers can't roleplay if there is a bunch of god damn 12 year old running around calling them gay and laughing at them.

There is nothing wrong with giving people who roleplay somewhere to roleplay, these people should be respect, not dumbed down to losers. MMO ROLEPLAYING game.

[Shinzon]

I'm not sure if that was in that article or in another, but he talks about giving roleplayers a space, and the tools to do exactly that, roleplay. Tools were given to form city militias, city governments and the like.

If you make RP specific servers, then you are asking those servers to be targets of DEDICATED griefing organizations; I mean look at second life, just because it is taken so seriously, and RP is paramount, it has spawned the polar opposite.

If you say that RP servers are stricly admined. Well that is null; all servers should be adminsitrated on equal footing. Im sure those same "PK's" share the hatred for glitchers and exploiters and gold farmers.

Who is stopping you from roleyplaying anywhere? No body, I can also argue that PK's are also roleplaying, they are the sociopaths of online games. It also has been proven time and time again, that without a central and a clear enemey people tend to turn in on themselves, or the people currently in power. You need PK'ers in a healthy online world as much as you do need the RPers.

Each community given a free world will carve out it's own niche culture, be it the CS kill junkies, dedicated griefers, casual gamers, and roleplayers.

Also, part of roleplaying is the ability to adapt to all events, and roleplay the event without bitching "NO YOU CAN'T DO THAT YOU LOOSER". Once that happens, you yourself broke your own immersion. PKers chasing you out of your favorite inn? Instead of complaining to the admin requesting a nazi policed server, why don't you actualy play the game, and roleplay that? Here:

Barbrians have overun the countryside! To arms to arms my Brothers! Cleanse this vile spot from the face of our good world... You can do anything in good fun. The indication of when you become a good RPer is when you are able to adapt to any event, be it RP induced, or to the actual happening of your virtual wrold.

Instead you break your own immersion, and make a big deal out of nothing.

[KroqGar]

I am curious to know what you mean by griefing organizations. Are you referring to people coming on the server to specifically harass roleplayers? If so, that is what the strict admin policing would be for. Something to eliminate players like that, and keep a solid immersive world for the players who feel like roleplaying, and deserve a spot on those servers.

I do not feel that all servers should be policed the same. They should all be policed well, for sure, but if you are going to do a roleplaying server properly, it requires some extra attention. By this extra attention, I mean things like naming policies, griefing (As you mentioned above) and other various knick-knacks. It is all necessary for a roleplaying server to run smoothly.

As for your point about adapting to a situation, your example is incorrect. Adapting to a situation in roleplay is adapting to other roleplayers and the situations they present to your character. Somebody running up to you and saying something that is clearly not immersive, such as, although it is stereotypical, something about Chuck Norris is a way to break immersion. It is done by the other players, not caused by me. If I am trying to hold a conversation with another roleplayer in a tavern somewhere, and one of these players is sitting near me spamming the chatbox so that I find it very difficult to read what the other character has said, how is that my fault?

As for your example of roleplaying in game, I have done that in MMOs before on normal servers, because the party I was with was roleplaying with me, and I have been called all sorts of nasty names that I won't repeat here. This has happened on numerous occassions, and it tends to discourage me from roleplaying on that server ever again. It is a very difficult thing to ignore, and very frustrating. Because of your argument, I get a very strong feeling that you have never had to udnergo this, and I strongly urge you to go through it before you argue against roleplaying servers.

I find the last point you make rather stinging, because that's exactly what I'm trying to do: play the game. I'm merely trying to play it in my own way without interruption or fear of retribution.

Is that too much to ask for? I don't think so.



EDIT: Your last point I also find ignorant, because as I said before, I do not believe you have gone through the experience of being harassed for enjoying a different playstyle. The reason this is in an edit is because it wouldn't fit anywhere in my above post.

EXTRA EDIT: In case you did see my earlier comments, I apologize. They were said in frustration but that frustration has since passed.

[Shinzon]

Trust me; I have seen everything there is, it is not my personality how ever to allow them to get the better of me, and granted that is not possible for everyone; they will say something that will make someone's blood boil...

Naming conventions should be in place for all servers, not just the RP ones; numbers, slashes wierd symbols, do not belong in a name. No matter how hard a server is polieced once you get the attention of dedicated griefing groups, they will find a way to annoy you without actualy breaking a single rule, or in essense they can clog any guns directed at them with their own corpses. Open world sandbox games are popular targets for things like "Goon Squad", yes there are entire gamer organizations that are based soleley on pissing other people off, they enjoy your pain, and they thrive of it. You cannot have one extreme (The RPers) and expect to not have to deal with the polar opposite.

Why should one community be overlooked while another is being given the benefits? Just soley based of the fact that you chose to play the game a little different, how is that fair? What you will have as a result is a migration of the general population into the more "Secure" servers, and with them comes everything else.

Well if the griefer is able to spam his message, that means the chat system is faulty, there are safeguards that can easily be coded in. that auto mute players spamming a message, you also have as a player the option to block him. Also a weapon I found quite usefull when fighting griefers, is to first stoop down to their level, they will trust you, and then slowly turn the knob turning the conversation into something more inteligent, and before you know it, you made a convert and a friend; I have done this many times, and it is satisfying, all you have to do is keep your head cool, and don't let him get to you...

Again, a specific roleplaying server will do nothing, but draw attention to yourself, and the attention of groups that intentionaly want to ruin your day. Think something along a 4chan raid, those are quite... Impressive in their own right.

I am arguing the point that creating a dedicated server to something is not the solution. When an isolated space is created for a certain group, that means something is fundemantly wrong. Instead give each player community the tools to deal with the problem themselves, instead of relying on an intervention by "GOD/Admin". What do the groups harrasing want? A reaction from you, and usualy the best weapon against them, is to make them RP without actualy realising that they are doing it.

When you RP; what do you do? To me it is sticking to the moral guidlines I want that charachter to be, an exaguration of a fascet of my own personality. This doesn't attract any "OMFG UR GHAY" attention, as to others it seems that I am "Normal", but most of the time, I will know the lore of the said game, I will know the history of the players of the said game...

[KroqGar]

I find your post loaded with condescending and patronizing tones, and it bothers me. I don't know if it was purposeful or not, I'm just letting you know that's how I read some parts.

On the subject of discussing a a roleplaying server, and saying that they should get special attention, this is a thread about roleplaying servers. I am discussing ways to improve the quality of the game experience on those servers. If this were a thread about how to better a normal server, I would be discussing that. As it is, I find nothing wrong with the ideas I've presented in this thread, seeing as that is what we're discussing.

You talk about raids and such by griefers, but how long do those last? 1-2 days at the most? I'd say the majority only last for a few hours. Griefing guilds and different, but there would be more control on a roleplaying server to control that. Maybe not in terms of game emchanics, but in terms of community support against people like them.

In the end, that's all I'm asking for: A server where me, and a like-minded communtiy can play the game in peace and not be disturbed. There are many people who agree with me, and that's why roleplaying servers are popular in games. If they weren't popular, your argument would have more weight to it, but as it stands, I think that a roleplaying server is needed in any MMO, to encourage roleplaying and a more powerful immersion that I have yet to find on any normal server.

As for your point about how I roleplay, I tend to play various characters that are too varied to pin down under one category, but I tend to roleplay very openly, which is why I tend to come into conflict with non-roleplayers. From the sounds of things, your style is more subdued which is good, but it's different for everyone, right? Therefore, can you not see why people would ask for roleplaying servers?

We're obviously not going to agree on the subject. I mean, I'm as stubborn as a bull and I lack the argumentative skills to convert you to my side of the debate, if you can indeed be converted (Although I have a feeling we're alike). Because of this, all I ask you to do is to see things from my point of view and ask yourself if a roleplaying server would really affect you. If it doesn't, why do you care so much about whether we get one or not? You clearly have no intention of playing there, so why argue so vehemently against it?

I certainly see where you're coming from in terms of how it will seperate people and the community, but I do not feel it's that big, or will happen as radically as you're suggesting. If it will happen like that, then why hasn't it happened before in other big name games? You need to realize that people (I think i said this above, but I'm not sure) aren't so cut and dry like that article stated they were. There are people who cover two, if not more, of those categories. People, as a rule, are never cookie-cutter personalities. There will always be roleplayers that are PK'ers or whatever.

I'm going to restate my point here for emphasis on what I'm trying to get across: The difference between a roleplaying server and a normal server is community. It is much easier to get along with a community of like-minded individuals than it is to get along with someone who thinks you're weird for what you do.

And finally because I forgot about it earlier, at the risk of negating all of my final points, I think you misunderstood what I meant by naming policies. By naming policies, I obviously mean no slashes or symbols, but what I really meant was names fitting with the lore. For example, no names like 'kewldewdz' or 'awsumguy'. Do you understand what I mean?

Anyways, it's late and I'm going to sleep, so I won't be able to respond to any response from you until tomorrow. I do hope we get to carry on, this is actually really enjoyable, albeit slightly frustrating at some parts.

[Shinzon]

No; it wasn't my intention to have any patronizing tones, if I came across like that I appoligize.

I know all to well about RP and RP servers, and the morons running around left and right. Hell I even acted as a priest and married an IRL friend ingame...

I am not saying, that I am out to get and remove your own space where you can do as you please, but perhaps my argument with the fact that "All servers should be policed equally" is me saying; all servers should be what you call "RP Servers", where there is equal naming conventions, and players are generaly held to a higher standard; after all this will be an M rated game right? So I really hope the community as a mass can crush together the notions of "Halo tards" and the like; it is possible. To me there shouldn't be a "Normal" server or a "HARDCORE" or a "Roleplaying" server, the more varied the community the better, and the true design challange when creating an MMO; is to figure out a way, how you can make each group enrich eachother's experience. (I say group, not under the pretence that all players fit in a cookie cutter ideal; but that after a while, guilds or groups of players will pick a side or create their own, then others will clump to that group; until you have distinct "Communities").

Also; the fact might be, is that we are arguing about the same thing, and share each other's opinion, just from different angles...

Why should there exist a difference in communities? Are some communities incapable of performing similar tasks just because the server they play on is named differently? I don't like seeing messed up names that I can't pronounce without breaking my tounge, I don't like seeing "L33T SP34K" even though I understand it.

My point is Unification, I believe it is possible for all types of players to exists within the same ruleset, and add to each other's gaming experience. Call me an optimist...

****

Scrolling up it is like watching nukes being fired at... My god... Those are some mighty Great Walls of text... Certanly high calibur artilery flying around

[KroqGar]

I know, I was thinking the same thing last night. It would be kind of unfair for us to travel into some other thread and argue the same point. But, as I said before, I'm really enjoying this discussion.

*****

Now, onto the bulk of the post. Your point makes a lot of sense, and I am starting to see what you mean, whereas before it was blurred. I agree with what youa re saying, when you say that all servers should be the same in their communities, if by what you're saying you mean that all servers should have an immersive community that is respectful to everyone, where everyone gets along.

However, judging by the majority of members on these forums, and the responses I have seen in some of the roleplaying threads, it will not be. I would love for the entire community to be involved in at least some level of roleplaying, but I don't think it's going to happen unless ruggedly enforced. And if it's so enforced, it will turn off a large portion of gamers.

Because of this, a seperate server should be made to give roleplayers a good place to do their craft away from the distractions of others. Regardless of whether one is actually made I'll be roleplaying, but it would be nice to have the same sort of communtiy I've come to expect from other games.

Your point, as it appears to me, is the ultimate goal that MMOs should get to be, and I eagerly await it, but there's still a few hurdles that need to be overcome in order to make something like that fun for everyone involved, instead of a small portion.

So, on a side note, do you plan on roleplaying in Mortal, Shinzon? (This has nothing to do with the argument.)

[Traceur]

"functional roleplaying" is how i define a good RPG of any kind - the more of a simulator the game tends to be, the more likely you would have to behave like your character would behave in order to get the results they want within the world's consistent rules.. then, the difference between roleplayers & non-roleplayers is simply that the second group of people are role playing themselves.

the proclaimed-roleplayer wants to strike Greywall because the character's long lost wife was kidnapped by it's inhabitance for feeling of revenge. the functional-roleplayer wants to strike Greywall because of it's treasures. who is the better roleplayer? the second - first, greedy people are more believable then revenger's, but more importantly: the proclaimed-roleplayer invented a background which never happened in game, the functional-roleplayer just did what's best for his character.

as far as i'm concerned, the need for a roleplaying server is proof of holes in the sandbox.

[Uruz2012]

You could just include the random leetspeaking iidiots in your roleplay.

Here's an example:

Two friends are rping, we'll call them Joe and John for simplicities sake.
Along comes Tehpwnzor. He's yelling about pwning noobs and whatnot.
Joe asks Tehpwnzor what language he's speaking and if he understands english.
Tehpwnzor starts insulting Joe and John for being rpers.
John turns to Joe and explains that he doesn't really understand what Tehpwnzor is saying but he seems to be insulting them.
John and Joe proceed to kill Tehpwnzor and split the loot.
Tehpwnzor hopefully learns that all rpers aren't carebears and stops bothering them. If he doesn't then all he's doing is providing rpers with a steady profit from his gear/money.

[Shinzon]

So, on a side note, do you plan on roleplaying in Mortal, Shinzon? (This has nothing to do with the argument.)

I guess; yes in my own way. I will in most probability play a full out mage. If it is possible I would like to open my own Academy of sorts; usualy in other MMO's I end up being the historian, that remembers every single important event that impacted the server some how, or at the very least, the charachter interactions and what they have resulted in. You wont hear any leet speek from me thats for sure; as for actual roleplay of getting a virtual brother, sister, or even marrage; that is a bit too much for me personaly, though I have no problem acting as a priest in the said marrage...