EFUPW Forums

Main Forums => General Discussion => Introductions and Group Management => Topic started by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 12:40:32 AM

Title: Team Olaf
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 12:40:32 AM
Ever wanted to make a crazy PvP Based Character?

Ever wanted to just go out and challenge the biggest and baddest?

Want to make your place in EfU History?

THEN JOIN TEAM OLAF

- Team Olaf is inspired by Kinslayer -

He gave me the idea to make a group set on just destroying problematic people. (Based on RP completely)

If you want to join, send me a PM and we can make ideas on some plots/characters. I have a few myself so
if you'd like me to send YOU a PM thats   be fine aswell.
Title:
Post by: 9lives on September 30, 2010, 12:49:17 AM
So.. This is an OOC formed group based on FDing prominent characters?
Title:
Post by: Kinslayer988 on September 30, 2010, 12:49:30 AM
The faction is more or less based on having conflict and having a good time. More info will indeed be released.
(Name based on seanzie's love for pvp and Jon (aka Olaf) the persistent fighting Freeman.)
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 12:56:38 AM
Yeah it's not OOC. I would be making a char soon and make a name for a group but the people who would want to join would be starting out in the group, like most player based factions(sea follies mare).  I wouldn't be FDing them. Just PvP. Like it would be a conflict based faction. And it's harder with one person so I made this post.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 12:58:32 AM
It's why I said 'challenging' not inviganking or something. It would be based on IC conflict that we would muster up.
Title:
Post by: Vlaid on September 30, 2010, 01:06:39 AM
QuoteHe gave me the idea to make a group set on just destroying problematic  people.

-_-
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 01:13:47 AM
He gave me the idea but I didn't say that's what we were going to do. I said what we were going to do riiiiighhtt above it.
Title:
Post by: 9lives on September 30, 2010, 01:14:25 AM
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3653/3390182310_df7f0020c7_o.jpg)
Title:
Post by: VanillaPudding on September 30, 2010, 01:15:13 AM
rofl
Title:
Post by: Thomas_Not_very_wise on September 30, 2010, 01:25:50 AM
Haha.
Title:
Post by: Kotenku on September 30, 2010, 01:31:49 AM
http://www.escapefromunderdark.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44331
Title:
Post by: _-Xenith-_ on September 30, 2010, 01:36:49 AM
Owned.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 01:37:41 AM
Funny cause I am not being harsh to any one character. Gf.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 01:38:43 AM
And 9lives. I'm sorry but It's a good idea to me.
Title:
Post by: Echigo on September 30, 2010, 01:44:05 AM
Quote from: Kinslayer988;201988(Name based on seanzie's love for pvp and Jon (aka Olaf) the persistent fighting Freeman.)

I gave him the name. :[

Olaf the Conqueror of the North.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 01:56:03 AM
Props to echigo for Olaf Johnson's name.
Title:
Post by: Kinslayer988 on September 30, 2010, 04:48:38 AM
If RwG an ex-DM can make a faction devoted to getting him lv 11 then people should be able to make pvp and powerquesting factions too.
Remember not to be a troll to some posting here.
Title:
Post by: 9lives on September 30, 2010, 05:09:56 AM
The distinction, I hope, would be that RWG was joking. If not..

PVP-focused and oriented factions are fine, and obviously encouraged.  The motivations and reasoning are what make it, though.The roleplay that comes out of sustained conflict is often the best seen. The crux of the concept should not be "yeah man lets fuck up some proactive prominent pcs", but conflicting goals that bring the characters into conflict thusly.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 06:28:26 AM
It's not like I'm premoting any of that stuff you said. I'm simply trying to start up a faction. If you don't want me to do it fine. Be that as it may. But I haven't said anything about wanting to go kill prominate pcs. I haven't said that's what the group I had in mind was about. Honestly it had nothing to do with that.
Title:
Post by: VanillaPudding on September 30, 2010, 07:21:12 AM
The "biggest and baddest" are quite often prominent. I think part of what Ninelives is getting at in a sideways manner is that you should simply try and be the biggest and baddest yourself, with your goals and agenda that stir up conflict themselves, not aim to simply fight whoever is up there being a bad ass at the time.
Title:
Post by: Random_White_Guy on September 30, 2010, 01:13:37 PM
As mentioned in the same thread, I was being facetious and simply wished to see more of the server. (Underdark, etc). Things that quite simply naturally required levels.

Onto topic however-

There are a lot of groups that would "Pursue big troublemakers". Harpers would bust face of criminals and villains, Hoarrans would pursue those of any alignment who mistreated others, and the list goes on and on.

If that was your idea, more power to you.

From what I can see is a lot of the backlash and issue came from your end disclaimer.
Title:
Post by: Porkolt on September 30, 2010, 01:37:15 PM
I came into this topic expecting an interesting concept.
 
Imagine my surpreeze.
Title:
Post by: Talir on September 30, 2010, 02:13:15 PM
Four posts have been deleted from this forum for simply being insulting to the original poster. This is an OOC post to shed light to a group concept in the making that will involve a certain amount of PvP. I am sure more thought is being made into the concept itself.

In all matters it should be the concept and plot that leads to PvP and conflict, not PvP that leads to concept, plot and conflict.

Those who had their posts deleted, rethink what you are posting.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on September 30, 2010, 02:34:15 PM
Okay- so I deleted the disclaimer. It wasn't there to be token seriously. It was there as a joke.

Vp- I'm not trying to go around killing really tough players. But I wouldn't like the group to be mugging newly made characters. Once we go in game and find an obvious good, strong character, I'm going to want to challenge then for IC reasons. No (killing the biggest and baddest) - which I've explained why I posted that -

RWG- if I wanted to just join some group with good conflicts. I wouldn't have made this post. I wanted to try something new and I wanted to accomplish it without havin to join a group. I decided I wanted to be a leader, not a follower.
Title:
Post by: AceOfSpadesX on September 30, 2010, 08:49:42 PM
Quote from: Seanzie;202059Once we go in game and find an obvious good, strong character, I'm going to want to challenge then for IC reasons.

I think the reason for this reaction is the idea that you will contrive an IC reason to fight the biggest and baddest, as you say, instead of letting the conflicts develop naturally.
Title:
Post by: Vlaid on September 30, 2010, 11:22:59 PM
Quote from: Seanzie;202059Okay- so I deleted the disclaimer. It wasn't there to be token seriously. It was there as a joke.

Vp- I'm not trying to go around killing really tough players. But I wouldn't like the group to be mugging newly made characters. Once we go in game and find an obvious good, strong character, I'm going to want to challenge then for IC reasons. No (killing the biggest and baddest) - which I've explained why I posted that -

RWG- if I wanted to just join some group with good conflicts. I wouldn't have made this post. I wanted to try something new and I wanted to accomplish it without havin to join a group. I decided I wanted to be a leader, not a follower.

Perhaps it might be more palpable to players if you came up with a group concept that had leanings towards PVP to begin with, and played that concept to the inevitable PVP that it would be drawn to, rather than a group concept that wants to seek out PVP with the biggest and baddest PC's (without any kind of pre-conceived concrete concept). For example, a group of Malarites that want to hunt down Stargazers/Sylvanus followers for sport, but don't really have any desire to kill random tough-dudes that hang around the ziggurat (unless they are given reason to).

From the way the concept is advertised it just came off as (to me) throwing people together, and then coming up with a reason to go after big-bad PC's after the fact to justify the pvp.

Maybe it's just the way you worded your post that may be causing some confusion. Something like the following might have gotten more constructive replies:

QuoteLooking to start a group concept that will have strong leanings torwards conflict and PVP, if you are not into PVP this concept probably isn't for you. We don't have a concept in mind yet, but we'd like to get a bunch of people who would be into this kind of concept together first, then decide what kind of conflict-oriented concept we'll put together as a group.
Title:
Post by: 12 Hatch on September 30, 2010, 11:50:38 PM
I really hope this group behaves like the Ginyu Force.
Title:
Post by: Seanzie on October 01, 2010, 12:27:00 AM
This thread feels pointless. Nobody is posting if they want to join more getting in my face cause they don't like how I worded it.
Title:
Post by: 12 Hatch on October 01, 2010, 12:47:26 AM
Well, it sounds like you want a group that assembles to seek out battles with the biggest and strongest as a sort of personal test they undertake.  Sounds fun to me.

I just think having some Ginyu flair would make it even better!
Title:
Post by: Vlaid on October 01, 2010, 01:33:01 AM
This would be a great concept for some Garagosians IMO.