Antag and You

[Gerolf]

In another game I play, someone posted a flowchart/Decision tree about how best to look at antagonism. It was messy and a little overly opinionated for my tastes but it was enough to stimulate some thought in my noggin and I decided to post a cleaned up version for us. Note: This isn't a reflection on anything that has happened IG recently. Just have been thinking about it this morning.

I am not saying it is the end all be all, nor am I presenting this as the only way to think about it, but maybe as a construct to think about things.

In summary there are three points: One, If you harass someone, expect to be harassed back. No one should be safe; Freemen just have to get creative when it comes to nobles. Two, there is a human on the other side of that screen trying to tell their story too. There is no reason to be a jerk about things, and there is a good chance that other person may need to go have a sandwich (HELP SANDWICH). This is OK. Third, if you really didn't enjoy something for an OOC reason, provide constructive feedback. I for one would love to hear something like, "Perhaps you should consider being a more graceful victim? Sitting there stoically while a red hot poker is pushed into your eye isn't really thematic." rather than losing a potential RP partner because they think I am horrible to RP with.



Remember, this is a game, we are all here to have fun.

[The_Last_Good_Dragon]

A good rule of thumb is also this:

Never expect your antagonism to go the way that you expect it to. Other players have friends and resources you often don't know about; maybe you want to make a small scene at a storefront, but suddenly every Knight and Reeve ever is there wrestling your character to the ground. That can feel lame for those who put forth a lot of time to create a character and concept, but it is a necessary risk of being bad. Give your character ways "out" even once they are potentially captured. Make them suave enough to try to talk their way out of jail or away from serious repercussions.

If you are worried about your bad character getting off'd at the first opportunity, consider trying to find ways to use ST events to introduce them or the storyline you want to explore with the evil baddy. ST's give players the Policy Comfort of knowing that changes to their character rest in their decisions (a player cannot be killed during an ST without their own explicit approval, and they may "opt out" of any long-term serious effects, as far as I understand it!) while giving you the benefit of being able to more completely control what players see — for example, they might see a cloaked figure in a pink unicorn mask rushing from the scene where a trio of rabid wolves have been loosed upon a farmhouse!

[LonelyNeptune]

It's worth reminding people to submit recommends for good antagonists, and good victims. It's a good way to provide that feedback and acknowledge that you enjoyed the interaction. Of course, you're not obligated to unless you genuinely think it's deserved.

[Kinaed]

I <3 the flowchart. Thanks, Geras!

[Percival]

Hi! Someone directed me over here because it was an interesting thread (I really like to explore the social and meta of gameplay - roleplay games like TI are a great platform for this).

I have seen good antag and I have seen bad antag. Good antag gives flaws and things for the victim to grab onto and improve their own story - whether it's from despair or revenge. Maybe an antagonist will have an obvious weakness (Turkish delight, a trick heel). It is not entirely one-sided. The drive is to further everyone else's roleplay and inevitably fade into obscurity and get away with their crimes or meet their deeds head-on at the pyre or noose. When I played as Rubeus Manus we would:

* Send taunts and question morality
* attack and give pauses for guilds to recover
* go out of our way to make the motivation clear, providing alternative routes for players that wanted to escape from confrontation
* provide STs which would allow the guilds to have victories so it didn't feel entirely one-sided, without losing our characters and putting an end to the RP.

Bad antagonism involves inserting a character into scenes, turning what was a pleasant scene into a negative that players want to leave. Bad antagonism can be recognised by constant scene stealing (attacking safe places like the hospital or the Queen's, turning up everywhere your 'nemesis' is to break their rest periods, making extended IC hate campains). Sometimes you have to be a supporting character or give your victims time to recover. I've been guilty of bad antag (a whiny gentry woman), and you can self-detect when you're doing it if you're negative in every scene with every character 'because you're bad/a witch'. I only realised once rp partners complained that they would like one scene where I wasn't miserable - and I realised it had affected my moods in real life. It was a miserable drudge to play.

The best example I've seen of a good antagonist was an Inquisitor who acknowledged they were a bad person through their emotes. They acknowledged that what was happening was unfair without their character saying it. This outlined separation between OOC and IC and it helped to define they were playing a character. They outlined their flaws (a twitch, a longing for alcohol, loved ones, a limp, slow mind, quick to anger) which might provide avenues for recourse.

Torture under their hands was a delight, and it made me want them to kill my character. I thought, yes, this is good roleplay, this is a good end. It felt mutually respected. It was weird.

[Percival]

P.S. I don't think that 'sore loser' is a good phrase to use in your flowchart. There will be people who will RP the victim and there are people, for whatever reason, do not want this. Maybe they're a casual player and they just want easy tavern scenes. It is your duty as an antag to not get upset when people say they don't want that sort of roleplay.

The rules, however, say that you can't refuse roleplay because it's dangerous to your character. This said, you will probably enjoy antag more if you play with receptive players rather than struggling against someone who will likely twink, quit or 'aha' you to get out of scenes with you.

These players can be useful for other roleplay supportive of your cause than just playing the victim.

[Gerolf]

I <3 the flowchart. Thanks, Geras!

Gerolf

P.S. I don't think that 'sore loser' is a good phrase to use in your flowchart.

What you describe later on is what I was driving for but "Don't be that guy that goes link dead in the middle of a scene you don't like just because you got caught" or "don't forget this is a non-consent game, bad things happen to good people" just didn't fit in the box.

When I was GI/Cardinal we routinely had characters get arrested then never log in again. Don't do that. It is poor form. At least -try- to do something creative or fun.

One last edit:

The story ends at death if it is about you. This means two things: If you kill another character you have ended their story. Some characters deserve this, some do not. Consider "Does the punishment fit the crime" before you pull the trigger. If the answer is no, you may have driven someone away from the game, or at least RPing with you.

[Taunya]

"Be a good sport" could replace it if you think it matters

[vaxin]

Personally, I've dealt with quite a few sore losers and I think that the flowchart works as is.

I've been insulted in tells repeatedly by people who had no IC knowledge of the events they found irksome, I've had people log off when faced with confrontation, and I've seen countless IC antags frustrated by OOC crossover.

Don't do that.

[Kinaed]

I think it's a shame that lack of IC control over events means "losing" instead of "oh my god, that awesome story we just wrote was such a rush".

TI is a non-consensual game, though - so no, people do not have the right on TI to say "I don't like how this is going, it's not what I want, I refuse to let this happen".

There ARE consensual RPGs out there, but if players choose to play TI, they're basically making a statement that they like their RP risky and not entirely under their own control.