OotS invading your brain

[Juggling Goth]

OK, please do not turn this into yet another row about Miko/Always-Evil-creatures. It's been done to death.

This is a question for those who DO tend to think V's Familicide was a very very bad thing even before it took out the Draketooths, or who feel pretty sorry for Redcloak (though I do know he's a villain who really ought to quit with the murdering and the torturing), or who think the Giant's comments about Always Evil races were pretty awesome.

Do you find it's affecting how you play (tabletop or video)?

I'm playing Neverwinter Nights at the moment (cos I'm just that on top of the gaming/technology curve), as a paladin, and I'm finding a lot of the stuff in the game is coming down to "don't be Miko, be O-Chul." And I've had to abandon most of the bounty-hunting sidequests because as soon as my criminal either gives me mitigating circumstances or promises to go away and not do it again, I go, "OK, off you go then." And because I'm a big Redcloak fan (though see above) I found killing goblins kind of uncomfortable, though it got easier when I let them attack me first.

Now I've got to a bit of the game where I actually can't progress without killing at least one dragon, and it's really freaking me out! OK, so they're evil-aligned, but they're not attacking me or actively doing anything awful. I could just trust one of them to guard the MacGuffin better than I could, but I don't think the game will let me. Aaargh!

Well done, Giant. You've created a webcomic that's not only convinced me inside its own universe, but is creeping out and affecting my behaviour in others. I'd quite like to win this game, though.

[ancev]

Do you find it's affecting how you play (tabletop or video)?

Of course this happen. OOtS has giving some kind of "common reference" while before those reference (mostly) became from fiction with different reality, or from the fantasy book released as marketing strategy from the game editors.

starting with a satirical fantasy before, and becoming a fantasy itself, OOtS is giving some new, unexpected and shared reference, populating with new terms a dictionary of character, actions, styles and consequences, useful to identify our own parties events.

[Kish]

I think you misunderstand what Rich has been going for here.

"There are goblins in Meldanen's prison! I'll just open the door and avoid going in, so they can leave at their leisure."=Logical way to change the way you play NWN because of OotS (but will I sound insufferably smug if I mention that that's the only way it ever occurred to me to do it, well before reading OotS?).
"This ancient white dragon who has enslaved these dryads and dwarves and is forcing them to kill each other...is a dragon! I can't kill it!"=Not a logical way to change the way you play NWN because of OotS.

Or are you past the white dragon, at Klauth?

Spoiler

Show

Klauth has been slaughtering dragons everywhere near him; I'd call that plenty awful. Killing him will save the life of, in the very short term, one gold and one green dragon, and their respective eggs.

If you reached Klauth without learning that, backtrack and explore caves. The gold dragon will actually give you a quest to kill Klauth.

[Juggling Goth]

NWN spoilers (because there is anyone other than me who hasn't got around to playing a game this old, I'm sure)

Spoiler

Show

Yeah, I found Klauth before I found the other two. Oops. Ah well. Hopefully when I do find them, I can wave Klauth's head at them for XP.

The White Dragon, yeah, no compunction killing him, after talking to the dwarves and the dryads. In fact, I tried it long before I should've, and got a happy fun respawn for my trouble.

Klauth I talked myself into on the grounds that he was killing other dragons to prolong his life, but I didn't like the way I had to kill the Blue Dragon to get there. Especially since the Blue Dragon might have been played for laughs, but he seemed... well... kinda brain-damaged. I wanted to get back to the snow globe and use the White Dragon's corpse to do the deed, but the game wouldn't let me.

I'm OK with killing things that are hostile and trying to kill me. Or that I've been explicitly told that they've done something evil - I've started a few fights. It's not that I can't kill dragons and goblins (although finding a bunch of goblins shortly after I reread SoD didn't help). But with monsters that were peaceful until I came blundering through their lair and attacked, or ones that surrender to me, I feel really guilty. And the ones that go, "You break into my house, you kill my servants..." kind of have a point. (Except when the servants are actually slaves. Then they don't.)

[Kish]

Spoiler

Show

The blue dragon was--well, brain-damaged isn't the right term. Effectively, he was newborn, artificially aged by Klauth.

Killing him, vs. leaving him alone and having a much tougher battle with Klauth, is meant to be a moral dilemma, but on the other hand, he would most likely have just stood there until he starved to death if you hadn't killed him.

[Juggling Goth]

Spoiler

Show

Yeah, I figured he wasn't living a long and happy life whatever I did, so it may as well count for something. Plus, I had never successfully taken on a dragon without a big chunk of help, so it was less "more difficult" fight and more "impossible, gonna need to stop playing the game". I still think my paladin should have fallen. Ah well.

[Goosefarble]

I can't say anything like this has ever really affected me in games, but then I don't really play that many games made after about 2005, and it's hard to think about a game character's feelings when their AI makes them so dumb they wouldn't understand the difference between me killing them or not.

But, in writing, Rich Burlew and a bunch of other people made me think a lot more about the killing of beasts and evil creatures and stuff. Although I've always been a fan of the whole "no evil dictator thinks themself evil" argument, so I guess I was that way from the outset.

But yeah, when you think about all of Redcloak's stuff about goblin suffering and then go back and read through the early OOTSs with Belkar killing the surrendering goblins and that... yeah, it gives you a little more pause for thought.

[Dark Elf Bard]

YES! I play D&D Daggerdale, and I actually find it hard to Kill Goblins!

[ti'esar]

I can say with certainty that it's not affecting how I play at all, since I've pretty much had the same opinion as Rich on this kind of thing for as long as I can remember - well before I began reading OOTS, at any rate.

[Fallbot]

I can say with certainty that it's not affecting how I play at all, since I've pretty much had the same opinion as Rich on this kind of thing for as long as I can remember - well before I began reading OOTS, at any rate.

This. I can remember playing Baldur's Gate what must be a decade ago and feeling awful about that xvart village, never mind pen and paper RPGs.

[zegram 33]

not d+d but in oblivion/skyrim i tend to use fear or paralysis spells rather than killing my targets, unless said target is evil, in which case he gets shanked

[guguma]

The sad thing is when You are playing a CRPG %95 of the creatures just attack you and most of the time You will be forced to do what You do not want to do. No matter how many options they provide You, You really do not have much choice to role play in a CRPG.

I love CRPG's I have played BG Series, Planescape Torment, NWN Series, IWD Series but in the end all of them turns into a character build game (and mostly a power build) rather than a role playing game, even if you try to role play it gets frustrating how the game pushes you into doing things you do not want to do, or to not to do things that you really want to do thus you quit trying to role play.

About your question, before OotS I have never even "thought" about goblins they were like chairs or tables, but after OotS I tend to sympathize towards goblins, and I really like Redcloak, so yes it did affect me somehow.

[t209]

not d+d but in oblivion/skyrim i tend to use fear or paralysis spells rather than killing my targets, unless said target is evil, in which case he gets shanked

I heard that

Spoiler

Show

you can get a letter from the bandit that tells him not to join with bandit.

I think it also deconstructs and reveals the Always Chaotic Evil types like

Spoiler

Show

Forsworn may seem as Barbarian Tribes or Bandits but you will learn that their land was stolen by the local Nords.
Falmer may seem like goblins but they were transformed by Dwarves (In ES verse, Dwarves are actually elves with dwarf traits) and became wild and blind.

After reading this comic,

Spoiler

Show

I felt regret for killing Ulfric even though I hated him and his idiocy.

[Juggling Goth]

The sad thing is when You are playing a CRPG %95 of the creatures just attack you and most of the time You will be forced to do what You do not want to do. No matter how many options they provide You, You really do not have much choice to role play in a CRPG.

I love CRPG's I have played BG Series, Planescape Torment, NWN Series, IWD Series but in the end all of them turns into a character build game (and mostly a power build) rather than a role playing game, even if you try to role play it gets frustrating how the game pushes you into doing things you do not want to do, or to not to do things that you really want to do thus you quit trying to role play.

I'm finding it easier to roleplay and do the nice-paladin thing rather than the XP-gain thing at this stage of the game, where I'm level 13 and have learnt some better tactics. In the earlier stages, frankly, I needed every monster head and the contents of every locked chest I could find just to survive. There are also a few moments I find frustrating because the dialogue choices force you into paths I don't quite want to go down. (I don't like the "now you die!" bits; they seem a bit too gloaty. A bit too Miko. Especially if I'm regarding killing a particular NPC as a necessary evil. I tend to quit the conversation and just attack silently at that point.)

And yeah, either because it wants you to do things a particular way or because it's such an old game, I'm finding the lack of creativity frustrating. There's a bunch of times when I want to take a third option, but it won't let me.

Spoiler

Show

Like when I wanted to use the White Dragon corpse to kill Klauth instead of killing the Blue Dragon. (Or the Brass Dragon, I guess, though I hadn't found her cave at that point.) Sometimes it helps, though: in the Creator Race Ruins (Past), I got the bright idea to smash some of the Smoke Riddle equipment, hoping that would take out the riddle in the present. It didn't. Then I started panicking that I'd smashed what I needed to solve the Smoke Riddle, but thankfully the game put it back for me.

[Icedaemon]

I already disliked the 'fight them because they are evil' sort of plots before OotS and considered most D&D plots too simplistic.

[ti'esar]

I already disliked the 'fight them because they are evil' sort of plots before OotS and considered most D&D plots too simplistic.

I have no problem with "fight them because they're evil" - what I object to is "fight them because they're goblins".

[King of Nowhere]

I have no problem with "fight them because they're evil" - what I object to is "fight them because they're goblins".

Generally the plot is "fight them because they're evil - they're evil because they are goblins". So it's more or less the same thing.
Or, if there's some more detail "they're evil cause they made those deeds [roll from a random chart of stereotyped evil deeds, put them as part of a backstory]". Really, that feels like a very cheap excuse plot to introduce some dozens mooks it's ok to kill, and it's generally bad storytelling unless it is d pulled out very well. Unfortunately, most times people using that kind of excuse plots aren't trying to tell a good story, just to handwave the idea that you can kill those mooks.

i never liked that, way before oots, but reading oots reinforced that. I've never been one for color coded monsters.
I especially went out of my way to avoid killing some xvart's tribes in baldur's gate 1. there' you just stumbled in their villages and they were considered enemies by default. I tried to stay away from them.
In nwn, I don't think I acted any different. but I was more pissed when I had to storm some caves. I was invading the homes of sentient creatures, who had the rigth to defend themselves at that point. in some cases (can't remember specifically) I would have liked not to do that, but the plot required it.

Anyway, shortly after reading SoD, I started DMing a campaign. That was heavily influenced by oots. I made a campaign where the pcs had to protect a peaceful orcish tribe from an evil elf, that was trying to frame them for evil deeds they did not committed to have an excuse to crush them and take their land.
And i never had a chance to show goblins before we stopped playing, but i made them a pretty badass people, capable of figthing to a stalemate golem armies and high level adventurers.

[ti'esar]

My point is that they don't have to be synonymous - one of the reasons the "Always Evil Races" idea bothers me so much is that it's not actually necessary. Even if you just want a generic black-and-white morality story, there's no reason you ever have to assign the "good guys" and "bad guys" based on race. It's as possible to run an adventure involving defending a peaceful goblin village from generically "evil" PC race bandits as it is the opposite, and with no more moral depth - but without the pseudoracist overtones of the more 'normal' scenario.

[Craft (Cheese)]

This is off the current topic, but I have another way OotS has invaded my life.

Now I can't envision spellcasting in any way except as pointing and saying the spell's name. Even in games/universes where casting definitely does not work this way, it seems silly to represent it any other way.



*** Coincidentally, I just started playing NWN for the first time myself earlier today. Due to my total stupidity (herp de der, I'll practice casting spells on nothing here in the tutorial area to see what they look like when I cast them! They won't make me fight anything without giving my spell slots back) I ended up facing the gauntlet of playing a level 1 wizard, out of spells, with no wands/rods/scrolls/staffs (not even any potions), and no party members to help out, in a dungeon crawling with dozens of monsters, on 4 hit points, and 8 STR/DEX. It. Was. Horrifying. I never thought I'd be so scared to death of goblins and skeletons!

[Bastian Weaver]

Um, no, I guess it didn't. Though if I ever encountered a one-eyed goblin character wearing a red cloak, I'm pretty sure I would attack him immediately, screaming "THIS IS FOR THAHN!"

[martianmister]

Um, no, I guess it didn't. Though if I ever encountered a one-eyed goblin character wearing a red cloak, I'm pretty sure I would attack him immediately, screaming "THIS IS FOR THAHN!"

One-Eye: "Must not wear red cloaks..."

[t209]

Um, no, I guess it didn't. Though if I ever encountered a one-eyed goblin character wearing a red cloak, I'm pretty sure I would attack him immediately, screaming "THIS IS FOR THAHN!"

When you said "THIS IS FOR THANH", it reminds me of

Spoiler

Show

When Captain Price go in full armor assault on Makarov, who wiped out the resistance and killed Soap.

[Bastian Weaver]

One-Eye: "Must not wear red cloaks..."

Not EVERY one-eyed goblin wearing red cloaks is evil, of course. At least, I think so. There could be exceptions. Still, I would put them under "Favoured Enemy" in my character sheet.

[Nark Mage]

NWN spoilers (because there is anyone other than me who hasn't got around to playing a game this old, I'm sure)

Trust me, you're not the only one. I got the game when I was a kid, and didn't understand the game, so I put it aside. I was like 10 when I got it. I'm 20 now, and I'm just now openning up the 1st NWN with all the DLC to play it. I have beaten the 2nd one, however.

In NWN I am playing a fighter for the first time since I was like 12 (they became boring after I figured out how powerful arcane spell casting can be), and his name is Roy Greenhilt. he's a lawful good black male with a greatsword.

I make all the decisions Roy would make (lawful aligned, but not afraid to fight).

I definitely let OOTS influence the way I play D&D. Monsters aren't just monsters anymore. I think about the consequences.

I am usually chaotic good, however. I do not have a problem killing someone that I thing might hurt an innocent later. I'm a vigilante type. If I see a tribe of goblins and I KNOW they have attacked a village, i'll slaughter them to the last man and raise their corpses to help me kill the next tribe of goblins I find. I am unforgiving in my defense of the innocent.

[ti'esar]

On a third angle of "OOTS influence", has anyone else who DMs ever homaged/been influenced by the comic in planning their campaign? I've been considering incorporating a few minor 'shout-outs' into my current plans.

THAHN

Geez, if you felt so bad about his death, one might think you would spell the man's name right.

[Bastian Weaver]

Geez, if you felt so bad about his death, one might think you would spell the man's name right.

Funny story, actually. I went through a dozen strips to check how is his name spelled correctly.
Then I mistyped it.
That's the way my life goes.

[Raimun]

I've tried to find alternative solutions to violence in CRPGs (if possible) even before I started reading OotS and obviously after that too. Still, I think moral conundrums are better implemented in stick figure comics than in video games.

In first NWN, I always executed the ring leader(s) of whatever band of violent bandits I was fighting, even after they begged for mercy (which was very often). Sure, they had a bad childhood/whatever and they promised to leave and everything but I didn't listen to any of that. My rationale was that it would be ridiculous to let them live after slaying all of their henchmen just to reach them. So, I kill the rank and file but I should let the master mind go scott free? Does that seem right to you? "Captain goes down with the ship."

In tabletop RPG, there would be an option to negotiate a peaceful solution with all of the bandits and not just with the guy holding the ultimate responsibility... who is willing to negotiate only after he's about to kick the bucket.

I tended to save my good will for people who weren't an active menace for a city or a countryside and I went out of my way to help those people.

And now for something completely different. When I played Icewind Dale II, I modeled my party after the Order. It wasn't completely accurate but apart from an actual tabletop RPG-campaign, I don't how else you could play as the whole Order.

Roy was tough. I ended up spawning him stat increase-potions (hax!) at the start because he seemed to have lucked in the stat roll (hax!).

I wasn't able to make Durkon LG and shoot lightning so I picked LG.

Vaarsuvius was just a blaster wizard... with a male body and a female voice.

Haley was kind of useless because it seemed like the sneak attack didn't work with ranged weapons...

Elan rocked! He casted chromatic orb, buffed others, (dire) charmed monsters and because of low Wis and Int, he had mad combat stats (and Cha) and he could sing, sing, sing, sing, the whole frickin' day if he really felt like it.

Belkar was a combat monster (low Wis and Cha= mad combat stats) and I think one of the voices was almost like made for Belkar: "Welp, looks like I'm gonna have to go on a killing spree."

[RLivengood]

Before reading OotS, I was fine with killing monsters. But after I started reading OotS, this happened.

DM: There are several orcs in the room.
Other PC: Okay, let's attack them.
Me: But they haven't done anything. We haven't even tried talking to them!
Everyone: ...
DM: Are you sure you're playing the right game?

[BaronOfHell]

Before reading OotS, I was fine with killing monsters. But after I started reading OotS, this happened.

DM: There are several orcs in the room.
Other PC: Okay, let's attack them.
Me: But they haven't done anything. We haven't even tried talking to them!
Everyone: ...
DM: Are you sure you're playing the right game?

I think you were playing the right game with the wrong group.

Anyway, I don't consider pixels, no matter how functional, to be living beings and as such I've no problem whacking away at fictional characters on a computer screen. I however do like to try to play in a way similar as how I believe I'd act had it been a real life situation (I run away a lot, lol, much more than is typical, because in real life I'm a bit of a coward, so I act cowardly in games as well).

Therefore I try to "complete" games, depending on genre, by means of escape or solving without making harm and as fast as possible. It also means that the game has to be really good when it tries to force me to do something I don't want to do, if I should keep on playing.

I haven't played that many computer games, but I recall I completed the game might and magic 8 in which I ended up slaying in total 3 creatures.
1 was a misclick. 1 was forced (I spend 30 minutes to try to figure out what to do, while keeping on charming the enemies). Finally 1 I had to do, because of a glitch in the game. I have since managed similar feet in other older games, but I hardly remember the details to be honest.

I think I started playing this way some years after I had started playing diablo 2, when reading a diablo 2 coloumn by a guy calling himself mongojerry. At that point I realised how sucky it was that the only way to actually play diablo 2 was to go out and kill, kill, kill!
I think this is the story: http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/thread-10277.html

[Euodiachloris]

Actually, getting through a game without having to kill everything in sight is what I liked about the Silent Hill series. Well, under Team Silent, at least.

Yeah, I know: not an RPG. But, still, the point remains: you can run like a bunny or creep past carefully and not kill stuff until you're faced by bosses you can't avoid.

I hate grinders where you have little choice but to kill everything in sight (regardless of alignment or actual threat) to level up enough to take on the bosses. Which, you can't get around, whatever you might try.

And, it's great reading my attitude in a webcomic. So, although OotS hasn't changed my mind that much, it's cemented it. Does that count?