Bloodborne-esque Plotting and Ideas

  • Thread starter Perfect Neglect
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
More or less, but by that argument a modern-day pistol is just a spell that fires small metal pellets at enemies. :p
 
Ah, this took off nicely I see, though I'll just linger for a while until we - hopefully - discus the role of being a villain.
 
Ascended Raider said:
Ah, this took off nicely I see, though I'll just linger for a while until we - hopefully - discus the role of being a villain.
Click to expand...
We don't need straight out "Villains" so to speak. The term "Villain" entails that there are "Hero's" that exist from the get-go, which means there would be characters that are truly good, and truly bad, something that goes completely against what I believe we're trying to make. In this world, it is doubtless that people have grown isolated from society. In this isolation from normal human convention they'd be forced to view the world in a different angle, an angle focused on them, rather than them and their interaction with society(a factor that even the lone wolf baddie would have to take into account). Unless one intended to roleplay as a character already well acclimated to the land(a task better left to NPC's methinks), then they would be severely limiting how their character would develop, and stunting their overall experience by trying to make their characters sole purpose to be a "Villain".


tl;dr
Its entirely reasonable for characters to do good or bad things, but if they are made solely to do good or bad things, the overall experience is stunted.
 
Mufasa Lives said:
We don't need straight out "Villains" so to speak. The term "Villain" entails that there are "Hero's" that exist from the get-go, which means there would be characters that are truly good, and truly bad, something that goes completely against what I believe we're trying to make. In this world, it is doubtless that people have grown isolated from society. In this isolation from normal human convention they'd be forced to view the world in a different angle, an angle focused on them, rather than them and their interaction with society(a factor that even the lone wolf baddie would have to take into account). Unless one intended to roleplay as a character already well acclimated to the land(a task better left to NPC's methinks), then they would be severely limiting how their character would develop, and stunting their overall experience by trying to make their characters sole purpose to be a "Villain".


tl;dr
Its entirely reasonable for characters to do good or bad things, but if they are made solely to do good or bad things, the overall experience is stunted.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Though, I'm curiouse. Would Corruption grow faster in a person who commited more "evil" acts? and would the corruption somehow be beneficial, like say the more corrupted you are the more beast like you become, and thus more powerful as a result?

Also, I'd like to state that the one mechanic i would like to stay is infact the corruption percentage thing. It's sets a limit, and sets a set number of times one can fall.
 
Mufasa Lives said:
We don't need straight out "Villains" so to speak. The term "Villain" entails that there are "Hero's" that exist from the get-go, which means there would be characters that are truly good, and truly bad, something that goes completely against what I believe we're trying to make. In this world, it is doubtless that people have grown isolated from society. In this isolation from normal human convention they'd be forced to view the world in a different angle, an angle focused on them, rather than them and their interaction with society(a factor that even the lone wolf baddie would have to take into account). Unless one intended to roleplay as a character already well acclimated to the land(a task better left to NPC's methinks), then they would be severely limiting how their character would develop, and stunting their overall experience by trying to make their characters sole purpose to be a "Villain".


tl;dr
Its entirely reasonable for characters to do good or bad things, but if they are made solely to do good or bad things, the overall experience is stunted.
Click to expand...
I think you completely missed the point. Obviously there is no good or bad in anything Souls related, everything is grey. Hell even Manus can't really be called 'bad'. My point was, you have the player characters, then the... Think more, boss-like characters. Not really abominations and such, since that's just plain unbalanced. But more like Father Gascoigne, The First Hunter, etc... They aren't evil, your character isn't evil, yet the boss's oppose the PC due to personal belief, corruption, and madness(the humanoid ones that is). Now I can't see much character development in a souls type RP as it is, obviously it would be there. But how much can you really develop emotionally? The first hour in a place like Yharnam is already going to massively twist your mentality.
I also don't agree with the take on NPCs being the only ones acclimated to the land. I'd much prefer that since it would be the viewpoint of someone already well influenced by the corruption and terror within the city, some people may want to RP the 'new hunter' similar to Blooborne's plotline. But then it simply becomes a similar experience, with a slightly different plot, and more people around.
 
We're going to need someone to be the bosses/boss type characters even if just for the fights. However they've not really often been people who moved around or did much. They were simply waiting for the player to get there.

Raider, how would one effectively "RP" a sedentary character? Well, sedentary until another PC reaches them.

Also, for Character Dev, well our PC in the actual games are silent, but in the RP we could slowly twist the characters. Show them falling deeper into the trap that is the city.
 
Auchhior said:
We're going to need someone to be the bosses/boss type characters even if just for the fights. However they've not really often been people who moved around or did much. They were simply waiting for the player to get there.

Raider, how would one effectively "RP" a sedentary character? Well, sedentary until another PC reaches them.

Also, for Character Dev, well our PC in the actual games are silent, but in the RP we could slowly twist the characters. Show them falling deeper into the trap that is the city.
Click to expand...
Bosses are stationary purely for gameplay purposes. I don't think it's a stretch to say that someone like Gascoigne would hunt the PCs down, at the end of the day they're also hunters. So they'd be hunting monsters also, It'd also add interesting match ups, could you imagine fighting Gascoinge, losing, he hunts you. You go fight The Vicar, and then he shows up, I think it'd be likely he'd hunt the beast before the hunter. Little events like that and what not. Conflict wouldn't always be necessary either, you had to fight Gascoigne because gameplay purpose. In a RP you could probably talk them down and what not. I don't know... Seems like a fun idea to me. But I'm on the BB train regardless.
 
There's still only so much you can do with one character who spends their time hunting down the party, and that's usually limited to either "stalking the party" or "actively fighting the party". I think if we went down that route then we'd have to have two seperate parties, one as the newcomers to the city who are here to hunt monsters and save the day, an the other party who lives within the city and wants to prevent the other group from fulfilling their task, otherwise the one or two "villains" we have would have very little to work with. While I'm not against that, it would be a lot more work for the GM to manage and I wouldn't want to force that on them without discussing it with them first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perfect Neglect
What Grif said. Unless we want the villainous roles to be more Hunters who came to the city to intentionally be lost in it, or whatever the opposite of those there to save the city are, the boss type villains would be limited in their actions, even if they stalked the party.

Plus, they stalk the party, it'd get old after a while, either you catch them or not, and even if you catch them, fighting the same RPer could get similar after a bit right?
 
Having party that live sin the city and is hunting them down creates a clear evil here. I say there should just be veteren hunters, sometimes pc's sometimes npc's, that are at varying levels of corruption and madness. Each one will be unique in how they handle and interact with the party.
 
BurdenKing said:
Having party that live sin the city and is hunting them down creates a clear evil here. I say there should just be veteren hunters, sometimes pc's sometimes npc's, that are at varying levels of corruption and madness. Each one will be unique in how they handle and interact with the party.
Click to expand...
I disagree. There is no clear evil, especially if the 'veteran hunters' hunt the newer ones because of a greater motive, from their point of view they'd be saving the city, since being there for so long would have twisted their mindset. There is nothing evil about them, or even what they're doing, I mean, is Eileen evil? No. She can be called more good than evil, and she's a hunter hunter.

Also, I'm liking Grif's ideas regarding this.
 
That was my point, I didn't want a clear evil. I wanted hunters that could be ambiguous. I want that feeling where you can walk up on another hunter, and not be sure weather they will strike up a conversation or just strike you for some unknown reason they likely have to kill you.
 
BurdenKing said:
That was my point, I didn't want a clear evil. I wanted hunters that could be ambiguous. I want that feeling where you can walk up on another hunter, and not be sure weather they will strike up a conversation or just strike you for some unknown reason they likely have to kill you.
Click to expand...
It's just that hunters hunting hunters is in no way a clear evil in my personal opinion.
 
After a particularly exhausting weekend, I'm back :D

In terms of villains/bosses, the only thing we need are antagonists. An antagonist wouldn't be 'bad' or 'evil', just rather they'd be against our characters. We all know Bloodborne/Dark Souls is a world of grey, where good and evil sometimes blurs, so we just have to keep the RP somewhat along those lines.

While our characters go to the city with the intention of being 'heroes' or 'saving the city' that, ultimately, may not be the case.

Onto the other things:

Based on popular opinion, the personality section on the CS will be entirely optional.

Now, this is still somewhat up in the air: The Shard Integrity/Corruption part. The main reason I put that there was because I was thinking that dying may not be the only way for a Hunter to become corrupted.

So, thoughts on that?
 
I think making corruption unavoidable would fit into the Souls/BB style of world particularly well. Just being in the city and exploring it would lead to a measure of corruption. You can't be surrounded by the stuff and avoid it after all.


Astoic, like Yharnam or previous worlds is a old and thoroughly corrupt city after all. All the "When you stare into the void, it stares back" jazz.
 
Ive been reading so far, but I´ve been wanting to ask. Could there be space left for two more people in this? Me and a close friend of mine that is.
 
Kingofheart said:
Ive been reading so far, but I´ve been wanting to ask. Could there be space left for two more people in this? Me and a close friend of mine that is.
Click to expand...
Of course! And feel free to drop any ideas/suggestions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kingofheart
Planning for the lore is going swimmingly for all those curious! I suspect it'll be done sometime around next week, tho thats probably an overestimation.
 
I think corruption would be limited if we made it a mechanic. I'd rather have the process just be something we personally keep track of, and change the way our characters react and respond to situations accordingly. I've never been a fan of too many strict mechanics in roleplays though, so I am bias against it.
 
I actually second this. But i´ve also been wondering to ask what "corruption" entails exactly, is it just a mental change? or is it also physical? Can a corrupted being never pull back from corruption?

Another question i´ve been wanting to ask is if Hunters all belong to a same organization or they are all freelancers pretty much? In the case they belong to a same group, what kind of training they´ve received?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back