here's an idea on races:

[echomatrix]

i know this could be a bit difficult to implement, but here goes.. have there be no difference between humanoid monsters (goblins, gnolls, harpies, etc.) and playable character races.. with such a variety of races, it could add more realism to the game world. no longer would there be this or that playable races and the rest be 'cannon fodder.' i for one would love to play a centaur or gnoll, and a harpy would make a great scout for a warparty. of course, it would take more balancing in the skills area but with no classes this would be a bit easier to do than with. this could be part of the idea where even goblins could create a city, if the spawn was not totally whiped out.. it would allow the players to be part of that building of an empire for any of the humanoid races, or if possible, a player could lead such a civilization, making for a more constanly evolving world..
any thoughts?

[Indigo]

Thats not a bad idea. If they can balance it out to where no one race is overtly more powerful than another. I think it would be really cool but then theres the rp aspect of it. If something like that happens I would hate to see a harpy partied up with the palidin of the priest of life:) Ya know what I mean?

[Kintoun]

Nothing was able to stop an Iskar necromancer from partying with a Human pally in EQ. People would whine and gripe about how unrealistic that was, but then the party would just counter saying how the Iksar RP's as being a 'good' person, and abandoning their own race. Ya right, then a week later you see the same Iksar running through the Iksar town buying stuff here and there and conversing with their own ilk =P. It would be nice to be able to play as any possible race, save only a few (dragons, gods, etc.). But I would also like to see some sort of way to disallow a evil race to party with a good race. I'm sick of seeing people do this. Of course this would be very limiting so it is almost impossible to implememnt. Anyone else have some ideas that could make an evil race not able to party with a good race?

[Morte]

The alignment system could take care of that. First, though, I'd like to point out that most races are not really evil. Orcs 'n Goblins are usually considered evil, but that is not really true. They are more primitive than humans, and therefore more warlike and more brutal in battle. This does not make them evil. Humans, which are usuallu used as a baseline to judge these things, are not that friendly most of the time, but they seem to ignore the fact that although goblins from time to time raze defenseless towns, human raiding parties do so as well. Of course some races really are evil, for example Drow or Dark elves. These should have an evil alignment in human cities, but not in cities inhabited by races that do not care for that as much as humans do, like Goblins. The same holds for Necromancers, Paladins and the like, although summoning a demon will probably be considered evil in most areas. Getting back to the question, traveling in the company of characters of evil alignment would rub off on your own alignment. If said evil character partakes in evil activities while you travel with you, as they are prone to, you will be considered evil yourself, simply because by traveling with them, you condone their actions and make no attempt to stop them. If you stand by while one of your companions butchers a helpless child, you are no less morally degraded than the actual killer.

[echomatrix]

as far as the evil thing goes, something they could do would be to implement something like if complete opposite alignments group up there is an xp penalty or something which would be more or less depending on the severity of the difference between the alignments, i.e. you loose more xp if your good grouped with evil, less if good and nuetral, and to make this a little more real, have several varrying degrees between all the alignments, as well as add chaotic or lawful such as in d&d. this is because a person can be good like robin hood, or evil like a car salesmen (no offense to any car salesmen on the board 8^) ).also, there could be actions on the part of the cities based on player actions to have a dynamic relationship between the races in general. for instance, say the elves and humans get along fine, but then, a group of elf (or at least majority elf) party waltzes into town and slaughters half the population. based on that action, the relation ship between elves and human would degrade, and elfs then, if the actions were severe enough, would be kos at human towns.

[Rend]

I don't know how anyone can say goblins, orcs etc. arn't really "evil". All these roleplaying games stem for Lord of the Rings as far as I'm concerned, and I think that is a good base to show the difference between good and evil. "Evil" characters (orcs, Gollum) can't even eat the food of "good" races( elvish waybread). they are repulsed and discusted by it. Even elvish rope burns the skin of evil creatures (Gollum). The way it is in Lord of the Rings is that evil and good are completly different creatures. They will never get along. A goblin will always hate and try to kill an elf or dwarf, its an instinct that will never be overcome. Only humans seem to be able to ride the line of good and evil.

[Morte]

Lord of the Rings is not the final authority on the matter. There have been many fantasy worlds since then each different from the others. Even if they stem from LotR, that doesn't mean that everything that is true for LotR is true for other fantasy settings. Most of those are written from a human point of view, and most humans hate goblins and consider them to be evil because they are fighting them all the time. Goblins are a somewhat primitive and warlike race, and therefore loot and plunder human settlements, whether the inhabitants can defend themselves or not, and preferably the latter since goblins are not known for their bravery. But this is not behaviour alien to humans or other, more developed races. Humans loot and plunder without discretion as well, other human settlements and those of other races. Must you therefore immidiately designate them as evil?

[echomatrix]

no one can truely say what is good or evil.
quoting Anton LaVey:
"Good is what you like, evil is what you don't like."
basically im just saying (and agreeing with morte)
that both good and evil are in the eye of the
beholder, neutral is the only constant as far as alignment goes.. a good real world example would be the situation between the u.s. and iraq, in the u.s. everyone hates
sudham hussain (sp?) and therefore assums (wrongly and shortsightedly) that the iraqi are evil (humans v/ goblins, per se). in iraq, it's the complete opposite. everyone there curses the pres. and hates everyone and everything american (again, per se goblins v/ humans). the only thing i count as the true authority on fantasy worlds are too things: the original cultural legends on which they're based (roughly) and how things actually work in reality, save for magic and what not. no offense, but imho it's a bit short sighted to say that all fantasy worlds are based on the works of tollkein (love the hobbit, and lotr) just because it may have been popularized first.

[Kintoun]

IMHO the gods that created the races of ogres, goblins, and orcs were of evil alignment. And so of course "created them in his own image". Also from what I have read in OTHER BOOKS BESIDES LOTR my conclusions are the same as Rend. And btw if it wasn't for LotR the fantasy world as we know it would be completly different. If someone wants to have a successful fantasy line (be it game or book or movie or etc) it better stick close to LotR to be accepted. So IMHO LotR reigns over all set fantasy rules. But the purpose for LotR wasn't to set fantasy rules, thats what D&D is for.

Good ideas on handling groups tho. Exp penalty or driving your own alignment towards the avg of your group is a good idea too. After all, sometimes it the people we hang out with that define us as a person.

[Morte]

If there had not been LotR, fantasy could indeed have been very different. Some of the elements used in LotR are used in a lot of other fantasy settings. It can be safely established that LotR has had an influence on the modern fantasy genre. Fantasy as it is now uses elements first made popular by LotR, but that doesn't mean that they are based on LotR in any way. It uses elements from Greek and Roman mythology as well. Does that mean that because the gods in Roman mythology were a self-centered, squabbling bunch the gods in a modern fantasy novel are too? The fact that certain races in LotR were evil, and a similar race appears in another fantasy novel, doesn't mean that that race automatically is evil as well. LotR may have been influential, but that doesn't mean that the entire genre is based on it. There are a lot of fantasy books that have very little in common with LotR, and still are very succesful. No one fantasy setting reigns over all set fantasy rules. There are very few set fantasy rules, and those are defined with the genre, not by one succesful member of that genre.

About evil races, someone is only good or evil if everyone thinks you are. The same applies to races as a whole. Let us assume for the sake of argument that in a given fantasy setting humans and goblins are fighting all the time, while the relation between goblins and mountain dwarves are very good. The subterranean dwarves never come into contact with goblins but do a lot of trading with humans.
- The humans, because of the perpetual fighting, consider the goblins evil. For the same reason, the goblins think humans are evil.
- The mountain dwarves think goblins are good, if somewhat chaotic, and their relation to subterranean dwarves is similarly positive. They do not like humans, but do not hate them.
- The subterranean dwarves do a lot of trading with humans and think they are relatively good. Their mountain cousins have an even better standing. Not having any real contact goblins, they usually have no real opinion about them, but they have heard positive stories from the mountain dwarves and will react poisitively to goblins when encountered.
- The dwarves stand in high regard with the humans, because of the trade, although they do not like their attitude towards goblins. They usually do not see the distinction between the two groups of dwarves, and consider them as one and the same.
- The goblins do make that distinction, and disapprove of the trading with humans, but in general like the subterranean dwarves, if not as much as the mountain dwarves.

Pray tell, who is evil?
a) The Goblins
b) The Humans
c) The Mountain Dwarves
d) The Subterrean Dwarves
e) The Mole People
f) A combination of the first five options, namely...
g) None of the aforementioned.

All answers must be supported with arguments, or you will not be eligible for the $1000 prize. Submissions must be entered before: see label.

[Kintoun]

Dammit, the contest ended yesterday =/ I lose

Heh heh I see your point tho. Taking the same approach as the system used for player reporting.

[echomatrix]

that is true about lotr, but only because ppl making the fantasy world probably couldn't think of a better way to do it, which is what i'd like to see happen with arcanity: more variety in playble races.. and i agree with allignment of races, much like so many things: it's majority rule.. one point i'd like to add though, regarding players (probably repeating myself, i've lost track...). i think that reqardless of race, every player should start out nuetral, like a newborn, or a blank sheet of paper so to speak, and their alignment be decided by actions in the future, through that report system, be it in code or by player..

[Indigo]

Usually in conflicts the writer of history gets to decide who is evil. However, I would say that the gods of goblin and troll are generally more chaotic than those of "good" humans. I think though that instead of trying to decide what character is good or not, we should let the characters actions decide that. If a goblin goes hunting with a human party, perhaps their standing in the goblin city should go down as it goes up in the human city.. If thats what the character wants then there should be consequences in their homeland for their actions. This of course is asuming that Goblin and Human are 1. at war.. or 2. deemed lifelong enemies. If each race has its own goal on what a perfect world would be that alone could be the source of many conflicts. Not good vs evil but belief vs belief. Look at how often religon in our own reality has caused major wars.. Nothing worse than a holy war.
What started this whole issue was the hope that opposing races would not break whatever rp scenerio the developers dream up for us. Why would a necromancer hang out with a paladin of the prime healer? Why would a character whose religon tells them that a certain race is inherently evil party up with someone from that race. The hope was that we dont see the famous EQ scenerio of all races are my buddys and no matter what I do or who I kill I will still be in good standings with my hometowns teachers and merchants. There will be crossovers, for rps sake I sure hope so.. but I just hope it doesnt turn into "troll tank, LFG"

[Foxnix]

Hopefully the classless system will aid with the RP aspect as, in EQ as has been quoted alot of the reason for the cross belief grouping is that such and such a class which is vital to our group can only be found in such and such a race.

Also I play a Necromancer but I dont consider myself to be evil. I am a Gnome so moderately Neutral to begin with and being that I practice the art of death several people don't like me. I group with Paladins but Whilst grouped I tend to batter at them and verbally we usually agrue. One of my good friends is in fact a pally so we RP a comradeship from when he in his just way saved my worthless life and I inturn saved his. its a fickle balance but works.

[Morte]

I sometimes play a Necromancer as well, but he isn't evil, just slightly insane, as most of my characters are. I like the chaotic aspect of my characters. It is real fun to RP. Same with other games, by the way. If you ever play Warhammer, play Skaven. They are very chaotic, and tend to blow themselves up every so often, but they are really fun to play. I once put a Doomwheel oon a hill, and because of that (it goes faster downhill), I could reach the opposing general in the first turn, actually running him down. Almost the entire army ran off the battlefield, which resulted in me only having to run them into the ground as well. So much for Bretonnian knights.

[Foxnix]

What an excellent stratrgy (sic)!! But there was equal chance of the wheel getting out of control and your insides becoming outsides!!

Good philosophy though hehe.

My mentality is like that... What could possibley go wrong ;)

[Morte]

I have blown myself up on numerous occasions, but it still is fun to charge into those stupid knights with three doomwheels, or to fry them with warpfire cannons. Also, if you ever play a goblin army, you have to include squighoppers. They can wreak havoc on an unsuspecting army. Especially those with large regiments packed tightly together. Five squigs can keep hopping for a long time.

[Foxnix]

Hehe it would appear with have the same attitude cause I have indeed done the Squighopper thing!! But they do tend to get bored and eat your own troops!!

Also in 40K I played (several years ago now) Orcs and there bikes and buggys have a tendancy to go really really fast but then explode 3 or 4 feet from the enemy frontline! Hehe always fun to take out the first line in an accidental suicide assualt.

Sorry I forget the names of the pieces I refer to I blame age! As When I played 40K it came as a book not in a box which I saw the other week whilst I was shopping in town! When did that happen?

[Morte]

Don't know. I never played 40K. I prefer the fantasy setting. They have Skaven and Squigs. My brave Skaven Warpfire thrower regiment, 5 throwers large, killed entire regiments of charging knights. I burnt down a regiment of really expensive knights charging the warpfire thrower teams. He hadn't played against Skaven before, and thought that his 20 elite knight could handle it easily. They obviously were wrong, and although the team blew themselves up in the aftermath, the three knights that survived ran very hard, and I set fire to the archers I intended to remove in the first place when a burning skaven ran into them and exploded.