Trending Games | World of Warcraft | Black Desert | The Witcher 3 | Mortal Online

    Facebook Twitter YouTube YouTube.Gaming Discord
Quick Game Jump
Members:3,911,161 Users Online:0

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

The Inane Ramblings of Devour

OR : How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Game!

Author: Devour

Conflict, Slave Mistress Of Politics

Posted by Devour Monday February 11 2008 at 10:49AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

Greater Poop: Is Eris true?
Malaclypse the Younger: Everything is true.
Greater Poop: Even false things?
Malaclypse the Younger: Even false things are true.
Greater Poop: How can that be?
Malaclypse the Younger: I don't know man, I didn't do it.

Welcome to the first of quite possibly five or six or maybe even eight different blog articles on various things wrong with games, gamers, cucumbers and implements of the mildly erotic nature. I myself enjoy magické mosté darké, and I hope you do - too. So, enough dimtroductions, let's get on with the Greatest Show On
   To start, I'm a fan of roleplaying. I lament every foul blow I feel against our ancient brethren, the storyline, and I weep at the cold feel of mechanics before lore. I enjoy all kinds of roleplaying, high or small. Tavernkeep, soldier, dragonslayer, king? All of them are unique, all of them important. All of them interesting to someone. But, when you dig down to it, they - if correctly implemented in their role - all revolve around conflict, some more than others. All can see the soldier and dragonslayer's conflict, their plying their trade in slaughter and fighting. The King's conflict is in the Courts, convincing and bribing and all else, in the name of keeping his position for his children. But, where is the conflict for the Tavernkeep? Where is his business against others?
   In limited resources, of course! If there is not enough barley to go around, not enough adventurers to visit his pub, what does he do? Kills off his opponents? Maybe, but it will reflect badly on the Tavernkeep who did it. This, my friends and lovers, if the essence of politics. Being able to kill someone in order to get your goal done will cause others to fear you, but to despise you - too. You may be able to crush your enemies, only to turn around and your former allies are ganging up on you.
   He could, of course, have done it better another way. He could've made a few Tavernkeep friends, made a Union and driven out the ones he didn't like, consolidating a friendly reign for a short time. Again, conflict has driven this, player versus player has driven this. Without PvP, and the ability to seriously threaten someone, you'd have ended up with a load of whining c*nts complaining about how little barley they had and how no one was buying it.
   The best part of this is, you don't even need a huge amount of support with a complete PvP base, players can sort out their own troubles. A job system would have to be put in, and wages, but other than that it'd be good. Did that kind just cheat you out of your reward for disposing of the dragon? Regicide, me thinks.
   Nevermind the players policing it themselves. Some idiot being OOC and spamming /dance and /hug? Crush them beneath the iron gauntlet for being insane. A person abusing the powers of royalty to cause the guards to throw your friends in jail? Crush them. Your mother making you go to bed early because you're probably about ten and will cry in the morning? Find out if she plays the game, and crush her.
   I'm sure people'll point out flaws, but they're the kind of people who eat hot dog buns with hot dogs, so I'll ask myself, "Gee Devour, what do you want to do tonight?" and reply to myself in a slightly evil tone, "The same thing we do every night, Devour—Try to take over the world!"


- Conflict drives real life.
- PvP, direct or indirect, drives games.
- Both drive politics, and therefore roleplaying.