Why is RP-PvE more popular than RP-PvP?

[Nelien]

Can someone help me understand this. In my opinion Roleplaying is all about immersing yourself in the game world, feeling like you're part of it and that there's nothing unnatural stopping you from being who you want to be. So naturally I feel a PvP server, where the freedom of attacking whoever you want (on the opposite side) is present, is the best suited type of server for RP.

 

Wouldn't the PvE mechanics break immersion? You're standing next to a player of your opposing faction with your lightsaber/blaster ready but simply can't touch the person because of some other-wordly intervention called "pvp-flag". To me that breaks the spell of being in a world of war, conflict and constant danger.

 

On the other hand, I can understand the annoyance of people who are in the server NOT to RP and might try to destroy the experience for RP'ers which is easier to do in a PvP server. But really, to me that's an added danger of the world that can be easily "embedded" in the roleplay.

 

So what is your stance on this? Why did you choose RP-PvE or RP-PvP?

 

 

// Alkara Nelien

[Pamoya]

I am no RP expert. But I prefer RP-PVE over RP-PVP. One style of RP is total immersion in the game environment. But another style of RP is creating your own story with other people, and for some people it is very important that everyone involved consents to the direction the story is going to take. For obvious reasons this isn't possible on a PVP server. Plus, there are lots of game mechanics which break immersion if you take them literally. The PVP flag is just one of many.

[Slamz]

If you REALLY want to roleplay, there should be "RP-FFA".

 

That is, I should be able to kill people on the same team, too. Everquest had one server like this and it stayed as a popular option even after they introduced team-PvP servers as an alternative. Just today I wanted to kill someone because he took my quest item after I'd killed all the stuff it spawned. I had to kill it all again. What a jerk. If it was an "RP-FFA" server, I would have put my flamethrower up his nose.

 

 

But yes, anyway, I agree. "RP-PvE" is not really roleplaying.

 

It's not really roleplaying if a Sith and a Jedi come face to face and they don't fight because the Jedi doesn't feel like it. Qui-Gon did not get to tell Darth Maul, "Oh I say, old bean, not quite ready at the moment. Going to have a spot of tea, I think. Maybe we could do this later? I'll just pencil you in for Thursday." Anakin had a real choice to attack Mace Windu or not. It wasn't like there was some invisible barrier preventing him from attacking.

 

 

So really I don't know how roleplayers can stand PvE servers. There you are, a deadly Sith Warrior, scourge of the galaxy, dedicated enemy of the Light Side, and here's a Light Side guy right in front of you, and you can't do anything except wave at him because you didn't pick a PvP server? That's not roleplaying. That's just shackling yourself with unnecessary restrictions.

 

I realize the concern is that "people will ruin the game" but without the ability to act freely, you aren't really roleplaying at all. (The ideal setup would be free-for-all with consequences...)

[Omnitroop]

It comes down to playstyle. Either one is valid, depending on your preferences. I like RPPvP because I like having large-scale PvP battles between factions that are based around RP story elements.

 

Some people don't like PvP. They don't want to deal with wPvP situations. Or they want to be able to go out and about and RP anywhere they can without being interrupted by other players. Those people are there for RP just as much as people on RPPvP servers, they just don't want to RP combat situations.

 

There definitely isn't a right way to RP vs a wrong way, or a better way overall. It all comes down to what the player wants. To say that one specific way has more merit over the other is a fallacy and ignores one of the primary aspects of roleplaying: respect among players.

[Tallian]

It comes down to playstyle. Either one is valid, depending on your preferences. I like RPPvP because I like having large-scale PvP battles between factions that are based around RP story elements.

 

Some people don't like PvP. They don't want to deal with wPvP situations. Or they want to be able to go out and about and RP anywhere they can without being interrupted by other players. Those people are there for RP just as much as people on RPPvP servers, they just don't want to RP combat situations.

 

There definitely isn't a right way to RP vs a wrong way, or a better way overall. It all comes down to what the player wants. To say that one specific way has more merit over the other is a fallacy and ignores one of the primary aspects of roleplaying: respect among players.

 

All your Game masters disallowed the playing of evil alignments, didn't they

[OddjobXL]

The very, very, first roleplaying game was PvP.

 

The Braunstein game was Napoleonic miniatures on acid. Each player had one figurine representing one character, and rather than recreating some grand military battle, each character had a personal goal to be pursued by means of negotiation and intrigue.

 

Braunstein begat Blackmoor which begat Chainmail which begat Dungeons & Dragons, or something like that...

http://www.robmacdougall.org/blog/2007/05/dungeon-master-zero/

 

However the form did evolve over time, on paper at first to the point that open interparty fighting was usually discouraged in favor of narrative (and tactical) cohesion, and then online with MUDs and MUSHes where the idea of consent was born to keep violent and disruptive players from ruining the experience for roleplayers interested more in story and character than whacking each other over the head with sticks.

 

Obviously the smart thing to say that will bring golf claps from all around is that all roleplaying is great and however anyone wants to approach it is superawesome.

 

However, my experience with PvP is that it tends to turn what I'd consider serious roleplayers off (people who focus on creative skills over eye-hand ones) because your "story" will only ever be told as the results of a fight somewhere. Great roleplayers don't rise in ranking or get better gear for all the effort they put into storytelling or community building. So they'll always be second fiddle to those that can just come along and eat their lunch. Most of us just don't have the patience for that and find a better place to do our thing.

[Tallian]

The very, very, first roleplaying game was PvP.

 

 

http://www.robmacdougall.org/blog/2007/05/dungeon-master-zero/

 

However the form did evolve over time, on paper at first to the point that open interparty fighting was usually discouraged in favor of narrative (and tactical) cohesion, and then online with MUDs and MUSHes where the idea of consent was born to keep violent and disruptive players from ruining the experience for roleplayers interested more in story and character than whacking each other over the head with sticks.

 

Obviously the smart thing to say that will bring golf claps from all around is that all roleplaying is great and however anyone wants to approach it is superawesome.

 

However, my experience with PvP is that it tends to turn what I'd consider serious roleplayers off (people who focus on creative skills over eye-hand ones) because your "story" will only ever be told as the results of a fight somewhere. Great roleplayers don't rise in ranking or get better gear for all the effort they put into storytelling or community building. So they'll always be second fiddle to those that can just come along and eat their lunch. Most of us just don't have the patience for that and find a better place to do our thing.

 

TOR rewards those role players, since they are also the people who playing in groups most often, by giving social points. Now, being a bit of a soloist myself, I haven't bothered looking at the stats on social gear, but if bioware thought it through, they will make sure that the stats it gives are stats that will allow those RPers to compete effectively with those who farmed up pvp gear.

 

Plus, you know, having that displayed social score will allow them their bragging rights to counter the gankers anyway

 

Now both groups have stats that will make the other type of player scoff and say its a measure of how bad you are

[OddjobXL]

I don't think clicking on dialogue tree options is roleplaying at least in a meaningful sense unless you're in a singleplayer game where that's the only option available.

[Gritten]

My preference would have been to hit up Jung Ma and go with an RP-PVP play through. I think it would be a lot more exciting and add a challenge to the game.

 

The problem with PVP servers, RP based or not, is griefing. That's why a lot of people don't want to go to an PVP server. Whether you're immersed in the world or not, there is a time where everyone wants to hop on for an hour or two, not talk to anyone, zone out and do some missions. On the higher level worlds you'll pretty much always need to be looking over your shoulder for that other guy that may or may not jump you. (Which personally I think would be awesome).

 

On any PVP server though you're going to have to face the lvl 50 gank squad that is just about to cause some level 30's problems.

 

I'm playing on Lord Aldraas simply because I have a couple of rl friends who want the option to PVP vs not. I figure I'll just leave myself open PVP (if possible...) and simulate the experience

[fodigg]

They are more popular because roleplay depends on consensus and any time you can kill someone without their consent that breaks down "roleplay" in favor of different rules. Of course, if EVERYONE is in character that's not necessarily a problem, but if someone is "griefing" it is a problem. That's why there's no RP-FFA, or even FFA generally.

 

Personally, I'm glad there are lots of RP-PvE servers so those who view PvP as an interruption have lots of space to go, leaving those of us who view it as an opportunity for an alternate mode of play to enjoy it.

[JaxinRiens]

I don't think its any different than teh over popularity of PVE servers over PVP in general. Most mmo players play these games to escape, and most of these people cannot take failure especially not of the personal kind.

 

In a warzone the failure is the teams, you may have had a large part in it but to the player its the teams failure.

 

In Mass PVP, its the zerg in these players eyes.

 

In solo pvp its on you.

 

RP-PVPers know this and can work it in with their characters. I find far better roleplayers on RP-PVP due to the nature of the game, If you are a godmodding jerk someone will put you in your place whether you want them to or not. On an RP-PVE server this is not true. But there are far more godmodding jerks than decent roleplayers that can accept failure thus over popularity of RP-PVE compared to RP-PVP. I am not saying that everyone on an RP-PVE server is like that, just that the statistics favor more on those servers.

[Tallian]

On any PVP server though you're going to have to face the lvl 50 gank squad that is just about to cause some level 30's problems.

 

So, when you hit level 50, organize a patrol through the lower level areas hunting gankers... Its called emergent gameplay I know I plan on having a group put together for random roaming through the world looking for good fights once I hit 50(and ganking noobs isn't a good fight, tho jumping the people ganking them in the middle of it can lead to some good ones)

[Raphael_diSanto]

I don't think clicking on dialogue tree options is roleplaying at least in a meaningful sense unless you're in a singleplayer game where that's the only option available.

Yeah, the social points don't really cut it in terms of "rewarding" roleplayers. It doesn't reward social RP, it doesn't reward so-called 'cantina' RP, and it doesn't reward player-driven story RP, which is where many roleplayers get their kicks.

 

Roleplaying in an MMO is very different than roleplaying in tabletop. And roleplaying, in general, doesn't always have to be about having complete freedom. Many times, roleplaying is simply people coming together to co-operatively tell a story. Roleplaying is, after all, nothing more than consensual improvisational method-acting.

 

For many roleplayers, it's all about the story, it's all about the events within that story, how they affect your character, how they shape your character. A story is nothing without conflict, however, having the outcome of that conflict decided by who clicked a button faster is often less than optimal in terms of narrative cohesion or plot synergy.

 

By and large, who wins in any given specific fight, in a narrative-driven storyline is related to a number of things - The needs of the plot at that time, the skills and suitability of the characters involved, that sort of thing. Tolkien did not roll dice to see whether or not Gandalf beat the Balrog, and Lucas did not roll dice to see whether or not Han killed Greedo (regardless of who shot first, LOL)

 

The point is that in many roleplaying storylines, the skills of the person behind the character are significantly less important than the skills of the character itself or the needs of the plot. Many PvPers "play to win", without thought or regard for what makes a good story or dynamic tension in the narrative.

 

An FFA or world-PvP environment may be more "realistic", but that doesn't mean it's more conducive to cooperative storytelling.

Edited December 19, 2011 by Raphael_diSanto

[Wystlin]

Rp as it is pretend does not exclude me from being powerful because I cannot click fast enough. PvP does.

 

It also lets me play weaker characters, the bread of the rp community, to bolster others who are strong. On a pvp server this means not only am I a target, I am a dead target.

If I spend my whole time dying I have no time to rp. Direct repeated actions in game often are ooc (killing the bosses in flashpoints for example) I elect to have my faction warfare be ooc unless I choose to go ic with it (joining a warzone).

 

I admit that the rp I have with pvpers tends to the less godmode variety. Mostly because taking a hit is the nature of how pvp works, they are not afraid to fail. This doesn't exclude being sat on for hours on end because someone decided it is more fun to ruin anything I am doing , than let me be.

 

Yeah I could log out (no more rp then), I could get friends to counter gank (wait what about my small meeting with the criminal element to negotiate the release of ..) or I could get on my own high level and dish out returns.

Bioware did make it so that you don't encounter world pvp til midgame , and have safe places to rp out of the reach of gankers, but that itself is also limiting. Not everyone who goes to Nar Shadda is killed, why must I be?

 

Pvp requires consent for rp purposes. I choose to give it only when I wish to.

[DuchessOfDork]

I admit that the rp I have with pvpers tends to the less godmode variety. Mostly because taking a hit is the nature of how pvp works, they are not afraid to fail.

 

That's exactly why I prefer an RP-PVP server. I feel like.. if I'm gonna play a character that thinks she's powerful, and then I get my *** kicked in PVP, I have no business roleplaying a powerful lord of the Sith. I feel like PVP makes us earn our reputations. I want to actually have a character people don't want to run into because I weel KEEL zem.

[Darth_Rahlik]

In WoW I played on an RP-PvP server and I would love to do that here too, but narrowminded children ruins the game experience with ganking, corpse camping and just behave super badly.

 

Too tired of that crap. RP-PvE to not ruin the game.

[Beltane]

I play on RP-PVE.

 

I focus on writing when I am roleplaying. If I am in the middle of writing a paragraph (or several paragraphs, the emotes are not very long in this game) and someone runs up and kills me during--well, that's just annoying. I will just have to go back to where I was when the incident occurred and pretend it never happened.

 

For another, combat RP happens all the time on a PVE server. There are /emote duels--writing about fighting someone--and there are also /duels, where you can PVP specific people if the RP dictates it. These manual switch duels make much more sense for RP than everyone being able to kill everyone else at any time.

 

There are story based RPers and there are gaming based RPers. Personally, I use game mechanics (including PVP) to supplement my RP instead of allowing my RP to be ruled by mechanics.

 

And as someone else said... faction PVP is still not a perfect world for RP. Sith fight amongst themselves plenty, which a PVP server wouldn't allow unless we dueled each other anyway.

[JaxinRiens]

 

And as someone else said... faction PVP is still not a perfect world for RP. Sith fight amongst themselves plenty, which a PVP server wouldn't allow unless we dueled each other anyway.

 

Not true there is a FFA pvp zone on tatooine. which from a lor perspective for the current time would make sense that the sith would want to off his enemy away from the eyes of Kaas' City.

 

However, you are a certain type of roleplayer, one that the RP-PVE playstyle fits. This si why their are different server types. The OP was asking why RP-PVE was more popular, and the reason is there exists many more rpers liek you than like me.

 

When i play my character, i do let mechanics drive my play slightly. If i am supposed to be the greatest duelist of all time... well i better be able to back that up. The bonus to this is if someone god-modes that they are better than i am, i can challenge them. if they lose then obviously i am better, if they win they are better. RP-PVP leads more towards spontaneous in character RP than long drawn out complicated story lines and it makes it easier for a casual to pick it up.

 

Scenario: I am on Ilum, i lead a legion of imperial troops icly with soem tiles to lesser darths serving with me or under me depending on rank. Our group Encounters another group of pvpers, this group has no official RP ties with us. DUE to the mechanics of the game, we have spontaneous roleplay, as we now form a unit to complete a pvp goal, we can then talk about the case for months to come. Or we can simply never see each other again.

 

In guild we may be running a storyline or multiple storylines, such as master apprentice relationships or missions ( flashpoints/operations) that are seperate from the story.

 

The key is that neither play-style is wrong, as an rp-pvper i would be board on a pve server as my competitiveness would not be satisfied. But i can see where a story-arc rper would feel claustrophobic on a pvp server.

[Maeh]

In theory, people that are Pro PVP vastly overestimate how popular they think PVP is.

 

 

This might account for your distorted vision.

[StealthNerf]

I've played on both server types.

 

Most RP happens away from combat zones on RP PvE servers, so there's really little to the decision to pick a server type other than whether you want to have the possibility of PvP during questing. Nothing else really comes into it.

 

I tend to stay away from RP PvE servers because I find the constant moaning about ganking pathetic. It happens a lot less than people say.

Edited December 19, 2011 by StealthNerf

[DuchessOfDork]

If i am supposed to be the greatest duelist of all time... well i better be able to back that up. The bonus to this is if someone god-modes that they are better than i am, i can challenge them. if they lose then obviously i am better, if they win they are better. RP-PVP leads more towards spontaneous in character RP than long drawn out complicated story lines and it makes it easier for a casual to pick it up.

 

I feel the same way. I don't feel like we should be able to tell people how amazing we are. It should be earned.

 

By the way, I'm not an amazing PVPer. I just feel like things should be fair.

Edited December 19, 2011 by DuchessOfDork

[Raphael_diSanto]

However, you are a certain type of roleplayer, one that the RP-PVE playstyle fits. This si why their are different server types. The OP was asking why RP-PVE was more popular, and the reason is there exists many more rpers liek you than like me.

 

The key is that neither play-style is wrong, as an rp-pvper i would be board on a pve server as my competitiveness would not be satisfied. But i can see where a story-arc rper would feel claustrophobic on a pvp server.

 

This is exactly it. RP is not a one-size fits all kinda thing. There's as many different flavors of RP as there are different types of Heavy Metal music. Just because you like one band doesn't mean you'll like them all.

 

My personal solution for god moders on PvE servers is /ignore

 

That said, I ignore anyone who's playing a character who's supposed to be the greatest -anything- of all time. That's not my kind of RP.

 

Remember folks, if character A beats character B in a duel, half the time it's because player A is better at dueling than player B, and not because character A is tougher mechanically than character B. And in roleplay, it really shouldn't matter how good -you- are at anything. It's all about how good the character is.

 

Also, "tougher" in this sense is purely arbitrary, because BioWare, not us, decide how much damage a lightsaber blow does, and how much damage a blaster bolt does.

Edited December 19, 2011 by Raphael_diSanto

[jaGator]

One of the biggest elements of an RP server is getting to enjoy the game without community distraction. Ideally, there's much less immaturity and non-game clutter in general chat.

 

In practice, if you find the right guild this won't bother your game experience no matter what.

 

Unsolicited PvP is often this same type of immature community distraction. Yes, there is a mechanism for gankers and loot thieves in PvP, but often it is simpler to not really be bothered.

 

I am playing a LS Sith. I doubt that many Jedi would distinguish me much from a rampaging spawn of evil Sith however - even on an RP PVP server. There might be some chance on a PVE server.

[JaxinRiens]

In theory, people that are Pro PVP vastly overestimate how popular they think PVP is.

 

 

This might account for your distorted vision.

 

Yeah, this is very true, I also think that the opposite is true. pro pve-ers vastly overestimate how important a boss kill is, or how great they are because of it.

 

The different between the content is dynamic vs static. Most games pve is static in that X boss does X strategy, and once you figure that out you can always win unless someone screws up. PVP on the other hand is dynamic. X class may play X Y Z ! @ # $ % ^ & ways the counter may be A B C D E F G H ways to play your class. Then when you involve group dynamics you get even more complex.

 

Its American football vs golf.

Golf is a game of a single person against the environment(course) you post your score and you then compare with other golfers. In the end anyone can complete the course if they use the strategy of put the ball in the hole. Just some are better at it than others due to practice.

 

In american football ( or really any team sport i just played this one for 12 years). Each play is its own duel against the opponent. Sometimes duels set up the other for failure in a later fight like lulling someone into throwing a powershot so you can counter by letting them land jabs. It is dynamic, unpredictable. No one strategy wins all the time. The goal is the same Score more points than the other guys. but how you do it changes based on every encounter. Most PVPers do not hate pve, they simply see it as a challenge to pass the time until they can pvp.

 

Gankers are not pvpers, they are the same as ninja looters or gearscore elitists, they are insignificant people that are making up for some failing in real life, the only difference, a pvper can easily deal with a ganker. A pve'r can only avoid the Gearscore Elitist.

[Raphael_diSanto]

Yeah, this is very true, I also think that the opposite is true. pro pve-ers vastly overestimate how important a boss kill is, or how great they are because of it.

 

Many PvE players definitely do, although I think a very large proportion of RPers do not. Many RPers, especially the ones that come to PvE-RP servers are more interested in the RP, the stories and the inter-character communication that is the bread-and-butter of their RP than the 'elite boss' kills.

 

Or maybe that's my own distorted view, since I'm one of them