Your View: Making A Successful Storyline

[ryno2 1285]

Dwarven cannon lore

that is all

[Zarsies 6795]

Xionism.

[luv 3469]

Just now, Zarsies said:

Xionism.

Y-yeah

[TeaLulu 1783]

6 minutes ago, Zarsies said:

Xionism.

sorry bae ur not a storyline :[

 

5 minutes ago, Luv said:

Y-yeah

and no the part of xionism ur involved with with all the edgy murders and attacks is not a very indepth storyline or antagonist and certainly not worthy of being a server storyline since its basically entirely against the special snowflake aengudaemons and doesn't involve the rest of the server at all

 

i am sorry to disappoint

[luv 3469]

2 minutes ago, TeaLulu said:

sorry bae ur not a storyline :[

 

and no the part of xionism ur involved with with all the edgy murders and attacks is not a very indepth storyline or antagonist and certainly not worthy of being a server storyline since its basically entirely against the special snowflake aengudaemons and doesn't involve the rest of the server at all

 

i am sorry to disappoint

I've never done an edgy murder in the name of Xionism?

[Zarsies 6795]

Memes aside, you're right. I was posting ironically. Although, if grown, Xionism and Swgr's series could make for sufficient conflict for related groups but it leaves out the unaffiliated and thus could only work for that branch. There needs to be more from player groups who can rely on the staff to help their stories rather than solely staff-made or player-made conflicts; the answer is in a blend where both sides bring their strengths to the table. This is step 1, so we're getting somewhere, but there's a lot more to do.

[Rom 59]

A Few Recommendations

 

Proactivity over Reactivity

This is mainly directed at the idea of having a main antagonist (an idea which, when done right, has the potential to be, as many others have stated before me, a tremendous success). Rather than having a villain that is reactive (taking on the role of antagonist simply to fill an OOC gap or because the races of LoTC have 'irked' them in some form or another) is far inferior to a proactive (a villain with motives, set to be acheieved regardless of our action or inaction) one. Immersion is bolstered with the feeling that we are, as we should feel, in a living world, and our nations and races are only pieces on the board, as the world moves around us, rather than for us. Frankly, if we get in the way of some hellish being's machinations, only then will they begin to care. Supervillains would much prefer a world without superheroes, they might finally be able to finish the job.

 

Conflict

Conflict is the cornerstone of any storyline - it's what gets you on the edge of your seat and roots you there permanently until you realise you've been holding your breath if done right. Of course, conflict for conflict's sake can achieve the opposite and become dull, so we need a reason just as much. The conflict could be between nations (what comes to mind for me is the Cold War - the epitome of 'edge-of-your-seat' with paranoia, espionage and supposed pre-emptive movements creating divides between two superpowers with the scariest weaponry ever seen) or with a major antagonist, although they wouldn't create conflict for the sake of it (however, I am aware that there is a need to create interesting events for everyone) and would be far more surgical about their moves, which leads into my next point...

 

Fear

The best way to keep someone firmly focused on something is by scaring them to the point where they can't look away. In a game built around punching trees, it's hard to do, but possible. Rather than rumours and whispers of a villain's power, a demonstration does the job just as well. Players need to be terrified into believing that there is something out there that could strike at any time, any place, and make you nervous to even log in. Mads Mikkelsen's Hannibal Lecter in the recent TV adaptation is an example of how villains (yes I'm romanticising the idea of an antagonist, but please continue to humour me) can be terrifying, whilst still being vulnerable. The man himself bases his life on subterfuge (a technique I'm pleased to see others suggesting), and an uncanny ability to manipulate and plan ahead. As a viewer, I can only say how riveting it was to see a man, as vulnerable as any other, be so far ahead of everyone else, and so well-prepared, that even I was second-guessing the heroes' movements. When he finally revealed himself, he did so in a way that crippled the heroes immeasurably, and shrank any chance of potential resistance. That's what we need.

 

OOC Interest

It's all good and well me harping on about how we need this and that, but the bottom line is it needs to appeal to players. Whatever is decided on, people need to be drawn in, motovated to log in and find out what is happening. In this case, I suggest utmost secrecy, with not even any OOC knowledge or disclosure about the storyline being made - only intrigue and initiative will yield the truth. Having your character not know something, but you knowing it makes it slightly interesting. Making you know as little as your on-screen blockhead is massively interesting. It creates doubt, confusion and intrigue, the likes of which are difficult to replicate. On the subject of involvement, getting players stuck in is also important: forcing us into acting by trapping us between a rock and a hard place opens up a load of possibilities. Maybe we are the rock, the hard place, the one forcing us in between and the one in between all at once.  Maybe the antagonist is already out there right now, hidden inside the body of a nooblet. All jokes aside, watching a story develop is far better than reading about how event-based characters are making forceful developments.

 

Final Words

I believe a main antagonist is the way to go, but for the love of God, make us fear them. Do the unthinkable; wipe out a nation, a race, hell, even destroy a whole isle. Force people towards each other,  see what cracks appear and act on them. Maybe even make use lose for once - no more of this escaping; if you wan't to get away to the next map, then overthrow the new overlord/s and lead a revolution. We only leave when we earn it. It gives us an IC and an OOC reason to log in, fight, and move on. After almost five years, it's time we shook things up a bit. If you can get an OOC reaction, you get an IC reaction (maybe wrecking some fast travel points is a good idea to start with, that'll piss people off, and stop us 'escaping' to 5.0 as easily, plus people will want to get it back OOCly). I trust you to make us care about a major story that touches everyone, not some sideline tale that's group-restricted.

[Samoblivion 532]

Bring back the Bohra.

 

Sounds memey, but in all seriousness there was a lot of untapped potential in that lore. They were a well liked event race and going off what I remember of their lore from my ET days there's certainly room for them to have survived Anthos in some way or another.

[arakrsptec 171]

I personally like conflict, because it's fun to RP for me. Don't care for a boring event where everyone's making friends with the antagonist.

[Drop Koala 332]

I simply suggest creating a character, who is played by an et who goes around the world, creating mischief leading up to a larger event in the world where most there can be involved in someone, not just a single Golden boy, but multiple groups who come together to end the evil,

[shimmeringbliss 268]

I think that something that really needs to be considered is the realism of an antagonist.

 

As many people have eluded before me, foreshadowing is great! But I'd like to take it a step further and look into 'how foreshadowing works'

 

Its not fun and its extremely boring to have 'a' 'group' 'pop up'. Good, bad or grey; race, guild, family, cult; appear, step through portals, come from the ocean, its so boring that they do not have the same limitation as other groups, and that realism is never considered!

 

(Just like how every single event seems to have a thousand year old scroll that talks about everything, a weapon, but I can never find a spoon or a bowl when my character searches through ruins. Does the ancient civilization not eat?)

 

I think the most important thing is to give them a realistic goal that serves to drive 'conflict', not primarily with themselves, but to others in a subtle way. And I mean it more than just Oren vs dwarves again! But playing on individual factions that exist within the races, the nobles, the guards, the farmer. 

 

Its also..... Not fun to me, since I have a character that doesn't have its emphasis on fighting. Please understand that there exists so many more characters who are scholarly, who are pacifist, and they all deserve to get involved as well instead of being 'corrupted' and gaining superpowers because of it. 

[Adasinio 120]

An antagonist that feels natural would be cool.

 

Then again, I've yet to see the story-line that's currently unfolding ... That is if there is one, I was told there is. 

[TeaLulu 1783]

Further feedback on this topic follows:

 

Things you should not do for an antagonist or server storyline, and why.

 

1) Don't Make all the antag characters special snowflakes

You may consider the term "special snowflake" to be toxic, but actually, it's not. It's a phrase commonly used to refer to characters who are outside the norm by far, considered OP, or are given unusual or unique abilities, gifts, or backstories. Sometimes people make these characters on their own; Sometimes they are made by having friends who are staff. No matter the case, they always end terribly. 

Just as there should be no special snowflake server protagonists, the same applies to any antagonist characters. That also means that people the antagonist makes "friends" with should also not be subject to special snowflake-ism or special treatment, powers, etc. Which brings us to our next point,

2) Don't break lore/powergame

There is some leeway on this for official server antagonists, but even then they should still be flexible and be able to be defeated by player characters; Player's actions should not be disregarded just to keep on track for a storyline. There's lore that exists on the server and while some ET may stretch the line, they really shouldn't stretch it in terms of wide-scale antagonists and attacks. Nor should GM or other staff. Unfortunately disregarding or just plain breaking lore when trying to run a storyline has the significant impact of giving characters a misunderstanding of the lore IC. This can have heavy repercussions on the server in the long run. (It can also break another person's storyline or event; Say their event hinges on a player recognizing a certain type of magic to figure it out. Oops, they think its some other magic because one time they saw an event with fake magic.) "Antagonists" shouldn't be capable of doing anything out of the norm, like, summoning dragons from the void, somehow. 

3) Changing name/outfit/hair constantly isn't the same as subtlety or subterfuge

Heads up for any possible storylines or antags; constantly changing an antagonist character's appearances does not qualify as subterfuge or subtlety. It's honestly just inappropriate. Even if you are emoting all the hair dying, or all the illusions, or what not, it's still not subterfuge. What it is is an amateurish attempt to try and hide from the consequences of earlier actions. Those consequences arise only when one truly does not understand subterfuge to begin with. If you are not capable of staying hidden to begin with, then no amount of outfit changes will fix that.

4) No throwaway characters

This goes for, well, everyone. Everyone! Don't make a throwaway character to do something dangerous like sneak into a place, steal something, or kill someone. Not saying this has happened, of course it hasn't! but don't do it.

5) Don't target specific groups i.e. holy groups

This just re-inforces the "special snowflake attracts special snowflake to make a ball of special snowflake RP". As a paladin I'm sick of it; Unless you have a legitimate reason to do so, don't attack a holy group just because it's the easiest way you can think to get your evil-ness across. Its a trope. It really is. It's literally, "How do I strike fear? Oh, I know. Piss the aengudaemon groups off and that'll look scary to the other people". No, that doesn't work. Unless you have a legitimate reason to be attacking the Aengudaemonic group, then don't use that "IC hatred" as a crutch for your evilness. This isn't me not wanting to get ganked either, it's just that most of the time it is so cliche and also it alienates the playerbase from us. Which brings us to the next point,

6) Hating Aengudaemons isn't a good RP reason to attack anyone

This is the most simplistic excuse in the world, and the reason I say it isn't a good RP reason for server wide antagonists is the fact that there is no depth to it. There isn't anything for players to discover. All it is to them is, "Oh look, the Paladins/ascended/cleric/whatever get to have all the events again. Guess I'll go back to grinding skills." It's dumb. A serverwise storyline/antagonist needs to have depth. Attacking Aengudaemonic groups just for being Aengudaemonic groups is the shallowest crap in the world. That isn't to say you can't target Aengudaemonic groups. But you need to have a reason for it, and you can't implement it as only direct attacks on those groups. It just alienates the Aengudaemonic groups from the players further. Aengudaemonic groups should operate as support for others, they shouldn't constantly be the main target where others come to their defense in order to get involved in the event.

7) Don't be blatantly evil

This has already been touched upon by everyone. Try being morally grey! Try having a hidden agenda. Try subtlety. Try not being obviously evil and just going on a rampage and wanting to wreck stuff. And therein we lead to,

8) Don't be blatantly evil and then try to act like you're not

Yea, this doesn't work for antagonists. You can't actively be attacking settlements and then trying to justify it afterwards. "Oh, uhh, they pissed us off first, ya. Not our fault." No, that doesn't work. You can't justify that. Just...ugh, no. Alternative: Instead of blatantly attacking and then denying, send some minions to attack while the true antagonist acts to help the good guys defend; Bad guys are defeated or flee, true antagonist looks good for helping. Oooo elementary style subterfuge so easy

9) If you're going to play people against each other, do it right.

Number one example of doing it wrong: Attacking Group Bananas and then claiming it was because of something Group Apple did. No, that doesn't work. That won't pit people against each other because its so obvious it's not even a trope; No author would ever write that into a story. No one is going to fall for that. "Oh, you attacked us because (unaffiliated party) didn't do the thing? Aww man let's team up and go attack them together!!!" Yea, no. Just...no. That won't ever work and if anyone uses that as an IC reason for a warclaim it should be denied on the basis of being unbelievably stupid.

 

[AGP 3169]

LotC as an entity doesn't and shouldn't have a "main" storyline. No matter how much event teams and lore teams have tried, people only remember "story" lines as forced, uninteresting, and bland. The White Rose, the Teutonic Order, Oren, the Schism Wars, the Duke's War, Haelun'or genocide, etc. are what people remember because they're alive and they're real. Real rp people with real rp motivations are the core of the LotC experience. Oocly engineered storylines and events have never had any legacy bar resentment and annoyance.

[Salvo 1852]

a server storyline that includes everybody will never work as most people in here wanna be heroes and/or a select few people are given important roles above the other players (ex: golden lance/ascended)

 

the dukes war and the schism war are the two conflicts that immediately come to my mind as they were organized by the players, created by the players and carried out by the players, with real consequences on the losing part: what if Adria won the dukes war, or the Aesterwaldian coalition the schism 1? things would b pretty different rn IMO

 

when u fight against some shitty undead you know that you can't lose as aenguls/divine beings will swoop in and save the day for us mortals, dude!

after all most people here don't even PK when they're killed how would u expect them to accept a loss

 

tl:dr

 

no special groups

don't make a serverwide storyline as it's boring, forced, and meaningless. let players do their own ****

do not play or allow people to play aenguls/keepers/retardedly OP magic beings it's legit disgusting