Hardcore vs. Less Hardcore: Musings

[ScottyB]

A lot of very good roleplayers are not good at questing/mechanics challenges and seem to get blown apart by a strong breeze.

^ Me.

I like the "you may die and be unable to respawn/be raised" disclaimer, and the "this may be very, very difficult" disclaimer. I like a chance, if I accidentally come across something or something unexpected comes along, to be able to avoid it - or alternatively, embrace it knowingly.

Sometimes I'll throw myself into a situation I know I'm not ready for. Sometimes I'm not ready to throw my character away. Sometimes I think I'll get out of it alive. Sometimes I survive when I didn't think I could, which makes me feel great because I was expecting to die. But when everything suddenly changes without warning and I'm not even sure what's going on and it turns into a curbstomp, I can't bring myself to enjoy it.

If there are some DMs who don't want to give difficulty disclaimers, then maybe they're the ones who should be putting up Hardcore tags, in a handy-dandy reference sticky.

[derfo]

What if we made hardcore "lardcore," so to speak? Anyone who wants to be hardcore makes their character of the large phenotype, symbolizing their hardy ability to take on the meanest and toughest without having to script any new tags or anything.

This also allows people to switch appropriately by going on a diet if they want to retreat to softcore, and eating everything with the utmost determination to enter the realm of the hardcore, etc.

[wcsherry]

Tags would be a really bad idea.

[9lives]

Compulsory jacket patches for second wave, second citizens.

[Easy]

Should be a warning, or made obvious IC for full death.  Not that I am against full death, but it is good to be mentally prepared for it as I tend to multitask.  Other than that, all good most people like a challenge.

[Oroborous]

I do not like ooc disclaimers. :( -- Consider any Mort[DM] text has a sign of unpredictability and possible hardship.

That's my disclaimer.

I think that's all you need. Some indication of what's going to happen when it falls outside the "box". NWN is an old game, people have the "box" of what to expect well defined and are thrown when its not.

Not to mention, people always have different expectations. As long as DMs are clear on what they intend through a "Hey guys, this quest may be PvP intensive and lead to permadeath" on those situations where it happens its much better.

That said, I'm a player who enjoys a fair challenge. Meaning, I don't expect to always win--but I don't expect a fight that I can not possibly win unless there's a warning upfront that that's a distinct possibility.

I can honestly say, most my worst experiences with DMs (anywhere) came from situations where I went into a situation expecting a challenge and instead just had my ass handed to me--and there had likely been no way around it no matter what I did. I stopped playing for a solid few months after two events in a row like that.

It'd just be great if every DM gave a clue about what they expect.

To be frank, marking people "Hardcore" or "Non-Hardcore" would be a wretched idea. I could easily see it splitting a small server base, making it extremely easy for the groups to label one another and breeding resentment that some DMs focus exclusively on their favored group.

[Nas]

For me, it would have to be a toss up, leaning to hardcore. I often do enjoy spice to a quest, or an event where perma death is very  possible. I find though that  often enough one does not die because of the dms actions, or the NPCs but because of those one travels with. Its unfortunate when those you travel with don't want to use their healing items or potions, instead rushing ahead. As you, the dm team must often notice, the promise of loot and xp will ruin a good event because people become too focused on the reward, and not those they play with. Perhaps if more often, those who screwed around during an event found themselves less often chosen to be brought along, or suddenly surrounded by creatures and needing to be rescued by those they so carelessly ignored in their own greed, others might enjoy the more hard core challenges.

Sorry if the point is less clear then I wanted, trying to type with a migraine and bright light in my eyes.

[ExileStrife]

I don't think tagging will work.  I would refuse to abide by it anyway.

[SkillFocuspwn]

Tagging would just be weird. Why tag?

[Howlando]

It won't happen, no one supports it.

[Starry Ice]

A general tip for assessing how "hardcore" a player/character is is to take a quick look at his/her/its character sheet and inventory. You can usually judge how intense a player is based upon what you see in these; you typically won't need more than this to formulate an impression of the player's capabilities. This can be difficult if you're managing a bunch of players at once, but you can usually find the time for it regardless.

I also don't really see the stigma about OOC warnings; while they will certainly dampen any immersion and sense of surprise/excitement if used excessively, a simple warning before a quest about the potential of PvP and/or excessive risk is a courteous way to remind players to be on their toes and ensure they don't feel that you sprung an uber-difficult surprise on them just to blast them away or screw with them. I'd just caution against using any warnings of this type too frequently to avoid frightening players -- don't drop them before every one of your quests, or you'll likely freak people out. I understand why some DMs will be averse to the idea of any warnings, but a single notice before the start of an event doesn't spoil all that much and helps facilitate your connection with the players involved, so I think it can only be helpful, if used sparingly and appropriately.

Tags: lol.

-SI

[MrGrendel]

This was a very interesting read, and I suspect the topic will be relevant for as long as the server is up, so here are my two cents.
 
Poor mechanical aptitude will kill your character on EfU much faster than poor RPing abilities. DMs can also only watch so many people at a time, and I get the impression they tend to focus a lot on groups involved with particular story lines, rather than hopping around. Obviously their time is limited, as well.
 
It's my opinion that EfU will attract good RPers by trying to involve different people every day, and it will attract good powergamers by cranking up the difficulty in general. Yes, the matter is not black and white, but this is what it boils down to in my mind. While I like the fact that EfU is attractive to both groups, if I just want to powergame through NPCs, I can just as easily play a game without other human beings.
 
Excessively hardcore mechanics will drive away (amongst others) those roleplayers who are mechanically weak, while overly easy play in general will drive away (amongst others) those who need a mechanically tougher challenge (and get little or no reward from the excellent RP the server has to offer.)
 
Personally, I actually lean more towards hardcore. This is mitigated a bit by the fact that my characters are often poorly looted out, and I don't remember the last time I've even seen a potion of Heal, if ever. Overcoming a good challenge is FUN, though. On the other hand, I suspect that leaning towards softcore will result in a more interesting server population. In any case, based on my opinions, I would say:
 
1. Quests should scale in difficulty as you approach the "soft level cap." This is already done very well in EfUA, as it was in EfU.
 
2. Related to the "hardcore-ness" of the server in general: FD PvP should have a higher chance of being witnessed by NPCs (not necessarily seen), depending on area type. This should make NPC repercussions for crimes possible for longer than simply the hour or so after the crime.
 
An automatically set flag or such could be nice, too, maybe even some scripts to utilize it. The primary purpose of this would be to make "dominance by mechanical aptitude" more difficult.
 
I bring this point up not because I've had trouble with it but because on two occasions others who enjoyed roleplaying here have mentioned this to me as detrimental to their enjoyment, and on reflection, I don't necessarily disagree with them. Perhaps there is something to it.
 
3. DM spice should range from softcore to hardcore as the branch of the particular story line progresses. If it's just spicing up a quest to make it more interesting, go with softcore. If it's a quest relevant to a characters primary goal/main story arc/etc, then the further in you are, the more hardcore it should be. The DMs I have witnessed in action have good judgement imo.
 
4. I don't think any of the couple of DM quests I have been on caused me to feel the difficulty was unfair. IC clues are key. Some emoting before spice starts are great. And some spooky or ominous environment emotes to indicate sh*t is really going to hit the fan are good too, if you're going to make it more hardcore, to give players a chance to back out or mentally prepare for some serious action.
 
It makes a huge difference seeing the train coming, so to speak. There have been times I saw it coming and jumped anyway, and got splattered - and died laughing. That was fair. I had the chance to get out early, and didn't, but what the hell.
 
If anything, perhaps offering the group an IC choice would be good. Such as a tunnel that splits, with one plain but seemingly empty, and the other with eyes in the shadows, but looking to be decorated more richly, and then letting that influence the difficulty/reward a bit. I'm sure there are other, more creative ways of approaching that, as well.
 
5. To the players: Don't change account names. Some people do want and need mechanical challenges. There's nothing wrong with that, and I enjoy it at times as well. I am sure it helps DMs set difficulties for players if they know what the people behind the characters like.
 
Along those lines, other than recognizing account names of players who seem to thrive on challenges, I suppose anything that requires an application should also suggest a more seasoned player, and warrant a bit harder treatment for the group. Then again, that's probably pretty obvious to the DMs out there.
 
Eh...opinions tend to come and go, but maybe there was something in there worth reflecting on!