Hello Mary Sue, Goodbye Flawed RPG Characters

Thanks to Skotos.net for its article discussing the problems of perfect 'Mary Sue' characters in online MUD/MUSH environments. The author starts by explaining: "Mary Sue is what, in writing, is called an author avatar, wherein the writer creates an idealized version of him/herself and sticks the resulting character into the story." But as this is part of playing games, what's the big deal? It's argued: "The herd of people trampling over each other to be the most at something, be it beauty, wealth, or grotesqueness, is going to affect everyone else's characters. For starters, if the standard for beauty has been raised so high that pretty people are average, the average characters are now ugly. If the standard for wealth goes from a million dollars to a trillion, the millionaires are the new middle class. It messes with the game's dynamic, and that's bound to make people who are trying to create reasonable and balanced characters cranky."

Comments

Mary Who

[Killjoy_NL]

Cool, then by that definition, I'm perfect :D
And all you guys are below me :P

(This is a joke people, laugh)

So what they're saying is...

[Anonymous Coward]

people who spend an innordinant amount of time crafting a gritty dramatic version of themselves are displeased when their unreal life begins to go the way of their real life?

And they've been determined to be cranky? My God, what a revelation! New Bibles will need to be printed!!

Wanna know what I think?

[Brutus (moo)]

No you don't, but I'll say it anyway :) First of all, since I am not too familiar with non-graphical (and thus, non-commercial) multi-player dungeons (such as EQ, UO, and Asheron's call on the commercial side) I cannot safely say something along the lines of "but how can they even create perfect characters when there are limitations?", but what I can say is this; if there are no limitations, there should be! This may not be completely relevant but I've played Diablo II back when it was...normal, and I've seen some characters (specifically barbarians, amazons and paladins) that each was unbeatable by anything that you attack it with other than the above three, kind of like rock paper scissors, barbarians would beat amazons who would beat paladins who would beat barbarians, and so the cycle went on. When little old level 87 amazon me tried to intefere, I got as they say...my ass wooped, so I understand what this article is talking about, and sometihng has to be done. On the extreme side a solution might be to just completely erase everything in such games every few months, but that would simply annoy everyone, including mary sues. On the less extreme side, people could be appointed to watch for such perfect characters when being created in various games and to make them a bit less perfect as needed. I wonder if this will even get read.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Anonymous Coward]

gasp, your really should play a mud.
check this one out, blackfire.winterdale.com port 4000
-Deimos

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Derkec]

One solution is in fact to wipe everything out. The mud I used to play did this every couple of years. There were other approaches in place as well, such as progressively slower levelling and pretty much requiring groups to work together to level. It helps, but isn't perfect. More importantly is developing a culture within the game where having the best ___ isn't the most important thing to most of the players. Encouraging people to do creative and interesting things was key. People don't want to be the best, they want to be important. In a game that isn't very interesting, be it gameplay or culturally, the only way to be important is to be super-high level, or really ugly or rich. If a game has more ways to express yourself, there will be more ways to be important. That and MUDs often have the advantage of having a smaller player base than something like EQ. It's easier to stand out among fewer people.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Merkuri22]

On the extreme side a solution might be to just completely erase everything in such games every few months, but that would simply annoy everyone, including mary sues.

If you did that on a Diablo II server I think Mary'd sue.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[TwistedSquare]

Surely the game play should provide rewards for balanced characters? In your situation it is the design of the game that allows those three types to be better than the others - something the designers should fix! In MUDs, they should make characters need all their skills in some way at one point to make sure the characters balance themselves out.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Blakey Rat]

Ok, I'm sorry, but you're utterly missing the point here.

What you're describing is min-maxing... creating characters specifically to ensure that their stats are as high as possible and they can beat other characters in combat. This is a problem because it produces hundreds of characters who are the same race, class and have the same skill set.

What the article is talking about is Mary Sues... they have *nothing* to do with stats, skills, or race in a game. They only have to do with the story telling aspects of the game. How the character acts, behaves and speaks. The coded combat system has nothing to do with Mary Sues whatsoever.

Seriously, if you haven't played a text-based RP MUD, MUSH or freeform chat before, this article simply does not apply to you... your comments here are moderated incorrectly because, really, all they are is off-topic.

And moderators: Please make sure you know the topic before you moderate.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Hamshrew]

I think that's a little harsh. He saw something about Roleplaying, has some experience in a similar vein, and chipped in his opinion in a way he thought was helpful. Insightful? No, not really. But Interesting. Outside viewpoints don't exactly hurt, and it definitely wasn't off-topic.

Re:Wanna know what I think?

[Blakey Rat]

I stand by what I said. When we have an article about min-maxing posted, then I welcome the great-grandparent to duplicate his post in that article where it is more relevant, but here it has nothing to do with anything.

It might be interesting, but it's certainly not insightful and it's definately off-topic.

Yes, a Mary Sue character might min-max. But they're just as likely not to. The two behaviors aren't related.

Not just MUDs

[kylus]

This is a common problem in any setting where the individual player has near-limitless control over the abilities of his or her player character. In the IRC Free Form RPG I frequent we have called them 'GodPCs' and they are a recurring and annoying problem. People, especially younger ones, tend to think that the point of such games is to have 'the best' PC and they do not realize that a balanced character with flaws and weaknesses can be much more fun to play and develop in the game's setting rather than one that has nothing to work on, and can kill mighty dragons with his or her left pinkie finger.

Sadly, the article is correct when it says these sorts of characters will always be around. What we've attempted to do is give new players or those we see with potential 'Mary Sue' characters some pointers and advice, along with some educational writing about how to make a good player character. That's really the best one can do.

Re:Not just MUDs

[TwistedGreen]

"Sadly"? Come on. It's a game; it's supposed to be fun. What's wrong with being able to kill mighty dragons with his or her lefy pinkie finger? Sounds like a great idea to me.

Your way is one way of playing the game. There are others. And I wouldn't call the resulting conflict a 'problem;' it is simply a game design issue that needs to be addressed, in order to provide the environment needed for foster many different playing styles. Remember, every person has a different idea of what's "fun."

Re:Not just MUDs

[kylus]

Fair enough, but in this type of game it's not usually about who can blow things up fastest or be the strongest; they're more about developing a character, interacting with other characters, and having fun along the way.

I agree with you that there are infinite number of ways to play the game, but when one person's way--such as being the best at everything, or immune to everything, etc--encroaches on the fun of others, that's a problem. The point to stress to players is to temper the ability to make a character ANYTHING they want with the responsibility of being a good sport towards the other players in the setting :)

Re:Not just MUDs

[Blakey Rat]

Well, that's one of the reason that free-form RP sucks donkey balls. To be frank.

Play on a MUD like Eternal Struggle where the code of the MUD provides structure to the game, and players like this will be much less of a problem. (But not gone! The article *is* right when it says they'll always be around. We can minimize, but we can't eliminate.)

Most of the time, when we get 'free form' chatroom-type RPers on the MUD, the first thing they say is, "wow, this is SO much better!" Some of the structure is coded in, some of it is printed in numerous help files and webpages, but the point is that it *has* all the structure that free-form lacks, and that's what makes it more fun to play.

(Shameless promo: Eternal Struggle MUD. Disclaimer: I write code there.)

Re:Not just MUDs

[theghost]

The problem arises in interaction between two or more different playing styles. The person who creates a balanced, moderate character isn't likely to ruin the fun of everyone else, but the Mary-Sue that comes in and slays all the dragons with a wave of their pinky has just ended that story for all the other players.

If a game was designed to be free-form and one of the players abuses that freedom then it's not the game's fault - it's not a design issue. A game that doesn't cater to all playing styles isn't flawed, it's just not meant for all players.

Mary-Sues are players who are in the wrong game, but the open nature of the games they are in only makes that fact obvious to the other players, not to the Mary-Sue.

Re:Not just MUDs

[chris_mahan]

Personally, I would like to see skillsets deteriorate, just like in real life: if you don't use it, you lose it, and it takes a lot to maintain it.

I would say that clothing, armor, swords, etc need to be maintained, or they get dull, frayed, etc and break.
Martial arts skill too, etc.
Then people would just be average in most skills and good or very good in a few. This would force a balance in the game.

Also, No classes: Anybody can do anything they want, as long as they're willing to train and maintain that skill.

Re:Not just MUDs

[TwistedGreen]

My point is that if a game is designed to be free-form, you can't "abuse" that freedom because it's a part of the game. My idea of 'abuse' is exploiting a bug or hole in the game in order to do something that wasn't originally intended to happen. But if the player is allowed to pump up their character like that, then what's the problem? Perhaps people who want a more "realistic' game should move to another game or stop whining. Perhaps these two styles of play can't co-exist.

But if we step back a bit, this kind of superficial 'code of conduct' that has evolved in these types of games is an example of an interesting social phenomenon akin to what we know as 'morality' and 'chivalry.' Interesting how this pops up everywhere.

Re:Not just MUDs

[theghost]

My point is that if a game is designed to be free-form, you can't "abuse" that freedom because it's a part of the game. My idea of 'abuse' is exploiting a bug or hole in the game in order to do something that wasn't originally intended to happen. But if the player is allowed to pump up their character like that, then what's the problem? Perhaps people who want a more "realistic' game should move to another game or stop whining. Perhaps these two styles of play can't co-exist.

Abuse doesn't just refer to breaking the rules. In this case it's about breaking the spirit of the game. A free-form game is not an anything-goes game. It still has guidelines, they just aren't enforced with mechanics and game-masters.

It's absolutely true that those play styles can't coexist, but it's not the moderates who need a more restrictive system, it's the Mary-Sues. The moderates use the freedom to explore different possibilities and collaborate on a story. The Mary-Sues abuse the freedom to inflict their fantasies on the other players. They just want attention - an audience for their ego-trip.
Even a more restrictive system won't stop someone from playing a Mary-Sue, it just makes it more obvious when they're doing so.

But if we step back a bit, this kind of superficial 'code of conduct' that has evolved in these types of games is an example of an interesting social phenomenon akin to what we know as 'morality' and 'chivalry.' Interesting how this pops up everywhere.

You're right there, it is interesting, but i don't think it's fundamentally different from the problems all groups of people face when they get together. Codes of conduct, etiquette, ethics, and morality - all forms of social control of behavior.

Funny Mush Stuff

[Anonymous Coward]

I always love the "oneupsmanship" that occurs on MUSHes. On the MUSH I played, you'd have characters who would have a child, for example. Then someone would have twins. Then triplets. Kinda got ridiculous for the low-tech world the MUSH was based on.

real life

[h0mer]

I'm not seeing a problem with anything. If you make your character within the permissible rules of the game, you've done nothing wrong.

There are a lot of people better than you in a certain area in real life, MMOs are no different. Some people want to roleplay and some want to wreck shop, each group pays their $9.95 per month.

Re:real life

[SoVeryWrong]

I agree with this statement to a point, but it's not so much that people are better than you. They just have more disposable time than you do, or they're playing off a template posted on warcry for the express purpose of being all powerful. This wouldn't be a huge problem if the majority of MMORPG players were roleplayers, because each character would be put in context. That isn't the case, however, so it ends up with you ass up in a field somewhere with a 14yo kid in global chat exclaiming how he just 'pwned' a 'n00b.'

This opens up a whole different can of worms. How would you make a MMORPG signifigant for 'casual' players, yet not boring or too easy for the 'hardcore?'

Re:real life

[Eustace Tilley]

How would you make a MMORPG signifigant for 'casual' players, yet not boring or too easy for the 'hardcore?'

• Calendar-based rewards such as rental income, interest, dividends, employee earnings, and factory sales, that accrue whether the player is online or offline.
• Distinct rewards for logistic, strategic, and tactical activities.
• In-game auctions of equipment and pre-built characters, both for hourly rental and outright sale.

Re:real life

[Reapy]

There is no answer to that question. What you are really asking is, why can't a person who playes 5 hours a week be just as good as someone who plays 40 hours a week? The answer is they wont, ever. This is a simple fact of life. If I play volleyball once a week for 5 years, I am probably going to be decent. But joe powergamer plays 5 times a week for 5 years. He's going to kick my ass at it, because he puts more time in it.

Here is the difference though, with a game like EQ, where time is almost the only factor in strength. You can limit the ability to gain power or level/skill up to such a small degree that the casual guy would hit the ceiling in a month or so. But that means it'll take the powergamer about a week.

This questoin just frustates me. It's like, I want to be as strong as the powergamer!!!111 I'm going to put in 40 hours and I want to not die to the power gamer!!! It is going to take me a month to put in 40 hours!

Ok, so the designers make a game that takes 40 hours to max out. Uber gamer puts 40 hours in one weeek and is maxed. "casual" players bitch.

You can limit the amount of time in real life hours. That would suck. "Sorry, you played too much, come back next week." Or they log in and cant make any gains at all, guess what, they'll move on to the next game.

You can have everyone come into the game max skill and power and let them configure their guys before the game starts. This is like rpg quake though, no skill or stat gains isnt what people want, and anyway, causual players would still get owned BECAUSE THEY DONT PUT THE TIME IN!

God damn people, thats how life works, you want to be social, learn to be social, you want to be good at a sport, play the god damn sport, you want to lose weight, fucking exercise, you want to be good at a game, put the time in.

Re:real life

[Retric]

Make time sinks that lvl out with each expantion so that new people lvl faster than old people did though those lvls.

Aka zones that you need to do long quests to enter but lead no where. ect. This way you have the "best" players become more powerfull over time but casual players can meet any of there goals. Geting into the city of gremils takes 30 game hours. And there are 45 such city's. With several power rankings.
Each zone / city has the best item of some type and ok stuff in the others. You can hit them all when they show up or skip over a few. It's all the same in the end. Basicly, people don't mind haveing people 2x there power in the world heck there playing 10x as much. What they mind is people playing 3x as much and being 40x there power.
It all comes down to game design. Are you a master potter? Ok now are you a grand master potter? Cool how about a Great grand master potter?
With each stage have skill up fast but the highest lvl's take farming or some such. Untill the new lvl's are added in which case the something show's up that makes it easer to lvl up to the old max power lvl.

What I think is missing is the idea that you can have a sword that's + 300,000 str or one that's + 30 str. It's all about what the game needs. Bronze kills ware wolves but gold kills putties. Yet mithrall kills them both. How about merchants that only trade in sertain types of coin? As the world advances you can keep changeing the old exchange rates and doing quests that give you some capital in the new curancy. But, the old power gamer only get's a 1/100 return on his exchange rate then again he can start over and kill x, y or z. But, that old capital is just not worth what it used to. He is always ahead but needs to keep playing to stay there. But, if you come back after 6 months you can start playing with your friends with in a month or so.

Re:real life

[SimianOverlord]

How would you make a MMORPG significant for 'casual' players, yet not boring or too easy for the 'hardcore?'

This is a troubling question, but there is surely some creative spark that could figure out a workable solution around the problem.

How about, for instance, that you have characters that live and die as game time passes, having offspring which you can then control? Each character reaches a peak in late adulthood, then gradually decreases in power as age sets in. The casual gamer will have just as long at the peak as the hardcore gamer. And a casual gamer at their peak could be a match for a juvenile hardcore gamer.

Characteristics will be passed on, items, feuds, and to some extent, innate or trained ability. The hardcore gamers will get through a huge number of generations and this on its own would have a certain kudos. But they won't become so incredibly powerful that they are invulnerable to the casual player. Anyway, that's an idea off the top of my head, though it would create an interesting dynamic about protecting your offspring, passing on items, retiring characters and reforming relationships. And having sex with other characters.

Re:real life

[Blakey Rat]

I've been MUDding for years, and I've never seen anyone put serious effort into RP on a MMORPG. The best I've come across is Horizons, where people will actually shut up (sometimes) if you correct them on saying OOC stuff over IC channels... but it's still nowhere CLOSE to a good RP MUD.

That said, if you know a MMORPG where people actually RP, I'd really love to hear about it so I can give it a try.

Re:real life

[SoVeryWrong]

I agree there is immaturity on both sides of the fence, but there has to be some happy medium somewhere. In the current implementations (that I've played at least), only one of those groups can have fun at a time.

I kind of see where you're going with your analogy, but for people who equate themselves with their character it becomes personal. The difference between "my character is a level 56 jizzmopper. He's pretty swank," and "I'm a level 56 jizzmopper. I'll beat your ass," can be the difference between a fun escape and ruining the game for yourself and/or others.

I assume that people still play games to have fun, not to impose their superiority on other people, but I'm probably wrong.

I have a feeling that as games become more and more accepted, the percentage of rabidly competitive people will increase with it.

(Hmmm, it seems I started every paragraph with the same thing, but I don't want to spend the time to modify it.)

Who is the what now?

[Walkiry]

I find this rant to be very close to the endless bashing of "munchkins" and "power gamers" you see in every RPG discussion (be it on the internet or somewhere else). Frankly, I don't see the point.

I don't play games to be the star in someone else's eyes, or to try and make people glare at me in disbelief due to my near-god status. When I play a game, I do so because it's fun, and the challenges/rewards it presents keep my interest on it.

This includes multiplayer games. I'm there to play my game, and possibly play it with people I get along with. The power-gamers don't bother me in the slightest, I don't do power-gaming myself, but if someone else likes then who the hell am I to say that's the wrong way to go? Fun is where you find it. My fun is playing the game my way and making my own challenges within the system, and playing along people with similar goals.

The original article strikes me as someone whinning that they want everyone to pay attention to them but they can't because someone else is better at doing that, and then goes on a long tirade about how bad these cookie-cutters are. Perhaps they should stop worrying so much about the others (be it the Mary Sues or the "faceless masses that see them shine") and pay attention to actually playing the game.

Re:Who is the what now?

[*weasel]

It's really not at all like the powergamer/munchkin rants. It's a seperate situation that's really only a 'problem', in games where one person literally can not be more powerful than any other.

You don't mind powergamers, because they don't bother you while you play a game. With Free form Role Playing (FFRP), Mary Sues can and do get in the way of other player's stories.

Mary-Sues are a trend that's only 'a problem' in free-form roleplaying MUSHES, MOOS and IRC RP (FFRP). These games have no hard and fast 'rule' systems, and leave all aspects of storytelling up to the players -- a sort of authorship anarchy. The only rules regarding character design and interaction are social rules.

If you want your vampire to have the BFG9000 that destroys Chicago - you can have it. Players might choose to ignore you, or even warn/ban egregious offenders - but they can't actually stop you from doing it. Similarly, there is no BFG, there is no Chicago, and there is no result of your destruction - unless other players decide to react to it.

If you've never seen it done, it likely seems entirely arbitrary, or at least, off-the-wall. Even after you've seen it done - most wonder how it can be consistantly fun. But that's neither here nor there. People do enjoy it - but it relies on everyone to cooperate. It's more communal authorship, or spontaneous play-acting, than traditional game playing.

Mary Sue's are unavoidable in FFRP, because while everyone likes to play games - not everyone is a good author. Free-form Roleplaying relies on players to not step on each other's toes and to be at least decent storytellers.

It's for that reason that 'idealized' characters are looked down upon. Not because they're 'best' but because those characters have been done to death - and their stories are old hat.

Even well-behaved 'perfect' Mary Sues are considered undesireable because their perfection denies the opportunity for character growth through storytelling. Their flawless moral compass removes any chance at dramatic tension, or emotional weight to conflict (because the perfect Mary-Sue will always win).

Archetyped Mary Sues (E.g. knockoff Drizzts, Rasputins, and Sherlocks) are considered undesireable because those characters have been done to death. Few people want to read yet another story where Holmes catches the villain whilst everyone else bumbles about. So in the average social setting, most people won't want to cooperate with the stories such players want to tell.

Much of the 'fun' people have in FFRP, is in the creation of their own character, and the discovery of other characters. With Mary Sue's - this entire aspect is lost.

In other persistent worlds that have rule systems (MUDs/EQ/UO/etc), at the worst Mary Sues becomes snicker-worthy. Someone might roleplay a Mary Sue in EQ, but just because they want to be the greatest warrior ever doesn't mean anything. They have to work through the system like everyone else. They don't automatically have the power to completely derail the story being told by others. (arguably because there isn't one, not in the same way as in an FFRP)

Re:Who is the what now?

[Ayaress]

You're not making the right distinction between MMORPGs and MUDs/MUSHs.

MMORPGs make you do all the work with character development - you're actions determine your experience gain and income, your reputation and "background" doesn't extend before you clicked "Continue" on the character creation screen.

That's one cup of tea.

MUDs/MUSHs tend to work more like table-top pen-and-paper RPGs. How would you like it if you were playing D&D, and you're friend insisted on being Lotar - the rich, dashing, heroic Warrior/Wizard/Fighter/Cleric/Archer/Shaman/Priest /Barbarian/Healer/Paladin/Thief, son of three or more assorted Gods and their unholy union with the Queen of someplace-or-other who seems to suddenly know the exact skills he needs suddenly every time he gets into a new situation?

It's annoying in MMORPGs, but they're mostly marketed to that kind of player, and they usually make you spend years making a functional Warrior/Wizard/Fighter/Cleric/Archer/Shaman/Priest /Barbarian/Healer/Paladin/Thief, whereas specialists who accept weaknesses (by not leveling every skill in the book) will have a functional character in a fraction of the play-time, and can then go on to master other skills as well.

In MUDs, where interaction between players and continuing storylines are the top priorities, one or two characters like this can really fsck up the game as a whole. Also, those characters who take weaknesses initially often can't diversify later, or are limited in their ability to do so. There the main reason I quit playing those games.

Some of them even give players the power to *create* characters already on the road to the aforementioned ludicrous state of being, and lets them do whatever bizzare thing the player can type (like, to continue the example used in the article, having quintadecituplets, only to have somebody else have twins without the help of a wife just to outdo you), and leave the "rules" to be enforced by GMs or even the players as a whole.

Re:Who is the what now?

[Walkiry]

>> You're not making the right distinction between MMORPGs and MUDs/MUSHs.

That's because I think it's unnecessary. I don't see much difference between someone who puts a demi-god in a MUD or someone who has munchkined his character so that he's untouchable in an RPG (be it a MMO or a Pen & Paper). I've dealt with the "All 18/00 with more artifacts that you can count and knows the rules books to heart" player in real P&P RPGs, they're not nearly as annoying as portrayed there.

So this character is in a "ludicrous state of being" because he's an all-mighty son-of-a-god-and-married-to-a-goddess, but he's ruining the game because the only way you think you can keep playing is outdoing him? Hardly, that shows lack of imagination by the rest of the people who just try to outdo them.

Re:Who is the what now?

[Walkiry]

What I wonder is why in such case would the MS be a problem. In a free-form Role Play (I've seen this in plenty of places, I frequent a board where there is a forum dedicated to it exclusively), as you said, it comes as a collective effort, and having one player come in and destroy everything with a Deus Ex Machina or an Uberpowerness as the Favoured Child of the Gods is as disruptive as typing /ignore in the IRC channel, or letting the post be buried in the thread as you continue ignoring it.

I understand pretty well why for some people having these characters in their stories is undesirable. I don't understand the cheese about one of them single-handedly destroying the game in a multiplayer environment. If the rest of the players give that MS support for their story and you can't come up with anything better then it's too bad for you, but the rest of the players seem to prefer that.

And I'd be very impressed if someone can come up with a Sherlock Holmes knock-off and solve a mystery puzzle I create in a purely deductive way. See, it's not all about role-playing in the "trying to gain power and outdo you" way, I've found that in the FFRP forum, the people that create situations with clever puzzles and situations that cannot be solved with a BFG are much more successful.

Re:Who is the what now?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if you even read the article sometimes. For that matter, have you even played an MMORPG and a MUD to see that they work in fundamentally different ways? I (being most of the players, since I don't play MUDs anymore) don't try to outdo the characters who damage the game. It's the same group of players doing this. Secondly, the largest MUD I ever played had about 150 players. They aren't big, and there's a reason for that: Everything that takes place is intended to follow a relatively narrow-scope storyline. Third, MUD's aren't usually designed to make you play 50000 hours and level up your character. You basically make a character, and he's more or less like that for as long as you play him(advancement in most of the ones I played was equipment, spells, and limited skill advancement. Not the allmighty level treadmill that MMORPGs universally employ). Thusly, making a demigod character is not a matter of picking a starting class with good advancement/income and then powerleveling every skill in the game. That, I'm not even that bothered by. It's in the game mechanics, and they're the ones wasting three million hours leveling 50 skills, maybe two of which they actually use. MUDs, it's the work of an hour at best to make a character like this. And 55 minutes of that hour is spent looking at every other character in the game and adding 1 to everything they've ever done. Then, the entire game process is a matter of taking what the last person said, and incrementing any numbers in it. (Hence, back to the article example: "I had a baby!" "Oh yeah? I had twins!"). At least in an MMORPG, if one person says, "I have 25 skills maxed." You have to go out and actually level 26 skills before you can one-up him, and everybody's leveling skills anyway, so who cares? MUDs don't work that way. We're back to the D&D argument again (If it feels like I'm going in circles, skip to the last paragraph). You set up a character, and that's basically it. You have a few skills, and that's what you have to work with. I make a mage, so I have some magic skills. You make a warrior, so you have weapon skills. That guy over there's a thief, so he has a nice little set of stealth skills. Then somebody else comes by, and says, "Hi. I'm OMGFU69BI*TCH. I'm a mage/warrior/thief." and has all of our skills. Why? He didn't level them all, he just said he does - that's how they do this shit. "OMGFU69BI*TCH attacks Enderic, killing him." Well damn. Did he level his skills so he was uberly more powerful than us? No. He just started today. He just threw every usefull class in the game together with /'s between them and started killing people. See, you can't do that in an MMORPG. OMGFU69B*TCH just started today, and his level 1 mage/fighter/thief is hitting for about 6 damage meelee and he doesn't even have any attack magic - plus, he didn't start his character as any of those things. He actually started his character as a blacksmith, because blacksmith's get better exp at low levels than combat-based classes. He'll get around to leveling those other skills later. In the mean time, he's fodder for the warriors, mages, and thieves that he just annoyed, so he's now going to get killed every time he shows his fool ass outside of the town safe-zone. What was the point of all that you ask? The point is that, in an MMORPG, game mecahnics A. let established players fight off the morons like UMGFU69BI*TCH, and B. everybody has pretty much the same route to demigod status. MUD's, on the other hand, have strict rule systems. Once somebody breaks them, and gets away with it, there's not much that can be done about his warrior/mage/thief/paladin/archer/vampire/fuckwad character, because every time you think you've outmaneuvered him, he just suddenly uses some spell he doesn't know and kills you.

Re:Who is the what now?

[Anonymous Coward]

First off, paragraphs. Look into it, that was painful to read.

Second, article. I've read it, I've understood it, I just don't see the problem. See, a P&P RPG player who has all stats at maximum, all the artifacts in the game and has the combination of skills/feats that maximizes the gaming potential hasn't done that through gameplay either you know, he's opened the book, done the numbers to see what the best combo is and written in a sheet of paper that it's his character. But I disgress.

What is in to you to compete with the person that has just said "I have all my skills one level higher than you!"? Don't you have anything better to do in the game than competing with him? Doesn't the game offer anything else for you to do? Find the other people who don't care about such things and play with them. Being the most powerful player in the game loses its charm real quick when noone gives a damn. Making such a big fuss makes you part of the problem, not the solution.

Re:Who is the what now?

[*weasel]

They're considered a problem because they can walk into a collaborative environment and disrupt it. Sure it's not always catastrophic, and it's often times just a temporary diversion until the pre-existing cooperative decides to tune her out through whatever means. And if those bothered just roll their eyes and work in the MS, everyone might well wind up having a great time.

But the disruptive events are a frequent enough occurrence that FFRP players see it as a serious problem. Essentially, it's the only problem FFRPers can ever have with their game - so by default it's the most serious one.

Frankly, I don't do FFRP with strangers, so I don't have insight into whether anyone's actually get worked up about it, or if its just a slight annoyance in practice. I also likely don't know the extent of the friction they might create in a persistent online community (E.g. a MOO/MUSH, where their presence wouldn't be as easy to /ignore).

I was just outlining what they are, what they do, and how I feel that makes it a fundamentally different situation from the munchkin/powergamer arguments in rules-based RPGs.

Re:Who is the what now?

[the_ed_dawg]

How would you like it if you were playing D&D, and you're friend insisted on being Lotar - the rich, dashing, heroic Warrior/Wizard/Fighter/Cleric/Archer/Shaman/Priest /Barbarian/Healer/Paladin/Thief, son of three or more assorted Gods and their unholy union with the Queen of someplace-or-other who seems to suddenly know the exact skills he needs suddenly every time he gets into a new situation?

...or the 1st level mage with a magical sword that only he can equip that does damage in multiples of his level and the ability to double the number of first level spells he can memorize. Yeah, that was the last time I played in that group. Before I left, I used all my money to stock up on "love potions" and lock this guy in a room with a half-orc looking for some lovin'.

It's a sign of immaturity, of course...

[Crash Culligan]

Some people haven't thought through this "roleplaying" thing enough to realize that it's not just about them. People who try to play the absolute bestest of the bestest need to realize that what they're doing is not just aggrandizing themselves, but putting great effort into upstaging others with their wishfully wondrous accomplishments.

On the Bartle scale, I'd have to qualify someone like that either as a KS- or a SK-. They couldn't care less about the world, all they want to deal with is the people, and the preferred form of dealing-with is "oohing and ahhing."

These people need a dose of balance, and not necessarily administered orally either. There are no shortage of point-based systems (like Hero or GURPS) which will enforce power level restrictions through scarcity. They will try to build their ubercharacter, fail, and then say that this is a stupid game, of course. (Sour grapes make the best whine.) Coerce them however you can to build something that fits in with everyone else, and then remind them repeatedly that it's an ensamble game, and that everyone else has a part in it too.

Yes, I know, those aren't MU* systems. But there are places that run them. As I run one of them, I won't publish any links; I don't want to slashdot myself!

Yeah Right

[nes11]

"and that's bound to make people who are trying to create reasonable and balanced characters cranky."

does anyone seriously believe that anyone out there doesn't try to make the best characters possible?

Re:Yeah Right

[arkanes]

Absolutely. You're being kinda blinded by the gameplay mechanics of 'computer' RPGs. The article is talking more about freeform social stuff (the computer part is incidental, really), where theres plenty of people (and the point of the "game", really) is the RP, not the game mechanics. You'll also find people who, say, aren't willing to exploit cheats or macros because they don't find that fun and get cranky when they get beat on by people who do.

About role-play, not stats

[th3walrus]

I think some of you have it confused. Mary Sues aren't about using the game mechanics to build the perfect character. People skilled at tweaking out the rules to max their character are fully in the right to do so. Lame in my opinion, but in the right.

Mary Sues have standard character stats (or no character stats in games that don't use them), but role-play as if they're perfect. Every girl is a hot, catsuit wearing, sexy but independantly strong woman. Every guy is a bad ass trench coat sporting, dual pistol weilding, mysterious assassin. Blah, blah, blah. What Mary Sues don't realize is that by playing that sort of character they're wearing out the things they love most about the character. Now, whenever my characters meet the seductive temptress or the mysterious assassin I get to go "That's nice. I think there's a booth for you guys over there. Go sit with them" because they're played out.

In games that use character stats, Mary Sues are really about people saying to hell with those stats and not role-playing appropriately. They need to be reprimanded by whoever is in charge of the game. Games without stats and poor leadership are just asking for Mary Sues so I'd say they deserve what they get for not laying down the law.

I agree with the arguments of people who whine about them. Whining doesn't get you anywhere though. Good role-players will use them to their advantage. The real world has Mary Sues; kids who think they know everything, who think that they're invincible. Fantasy worlds should have them too. They're fun to proove wrong.

Interesting read...

[gamgee5273]

...my wife made an observation that my "avatars" always look like me (a South Park caricature, my Final Fantasy XI character, and some other items that I've drawn or had drawn in the past) in some way: white guy with brown hair (receeding, if an option), beard or goatee. Not really idealized, IMHO.

She's a psychologist and believes that it means I have a positive self-image. I'm not sure if she's right (who am I to disagree with a psychologist, though?) but I has made me think about the dynamics of character choosing in something like an MMORPG. A male friend of mine on FFXI chose to be a Mithra (the "catgirl" race). His view was that he thought the Mithra would be good as monks in the game... but he's also a huge anime fan and I wonder how much something like Outlaw Star (or the thousands of other "catgirls" in anime) may have subconsciously informed his decision.

Then I look at the diminutive Tarutarus in the games and wonder how many of them are males. They're so small and "cute" that I don't know how many men would choose that race, or how many women would choose the huge, hulking Galka race...

The only MMORPG I've ever played is FFXI, so I can't speak to EQ or any of the others... but have people had similiar questions about their online companions? Is there more of a chance for idealizing a character in one of those?

Re:Interesting read...

[Anonymous Coward]

First with your wife: Next time she says something like that, shout, "Stop trying to analyze me!" and just run away. You know to see what would happen.

Now your friend, episode two of Super Cat-girl Nuku, he's Ryunosukay's uncle, 'nuff said.

Re:Interesting read...

[lucas teh geek]

white guy with brown hair (receeding, if an option), beard or goatee

for a moment there i thought you were saying you were the guy from goatse

Re:Interesting read...

[Anonymous Coward]

for a moment there i thought you were saying you were the guy from goatse

Impossible, considering that he is DEAD!

Re:Interesting read...

[Joe the Lesser]

I'm male and play a tarutaru, but I chose it more for the humor value, which may or may not speak about my subconscious(Do I have low-self esteem, or am I confident enough in my sexuality to play an innocent looking character?). Who knows. But chicks dig /panic ;-)

Re:Interesting read...

[Tofino]

I'm 6'6", 220. I played a Tarutaru for two reasons: first, in real life I'm tired of hitting my head. Little (har!) danger there. Second, I've played the large races before, specifically in DaoC. Not being able to see around your character is EXTREMELY annoying -- with a Tarutaru there's little (snort!) to get in the way. Yeah, and there's the /panic :).

Not just games

[Anonymous Coward]

>if the standard for beauty has been raised so high
>that pretty people are average, the average
>characters are now ugly

Doesn't this and all other points (unfortunately) apply to the current society we live in?

Well that's a limitation of imagination....

[Anonymous Coward]

Their flawless moral compass removes any chance at dramatic tension, or emotional weight to conflict (because the perfect Mary-Sue will always win).


Oddly enough The new Texas Chainsaw Massacer comes to mind. I nearly laughed out loud at the begining when everyone who's going to die is at least a pot smoker, possibly a drug dealer, or groping someone they esentially just met. And then Erin (Biel's character) has a monologue that boils down to, "I didn't know about the drugs, I never did drugs, drugs are bad." and she throws the drugs out the window. It's funny.

But she esentially extorts her friends into following through on the death of the hitchhiker they picked up, when they can and wish to make their getaway. This of course eventually leads to all of their deaths. She survives of course, and at what cost? Not so perfect after the fact.

Google "Mary Sue Litmus Test"

[Anonymous Coward]

How irritating is it when writers on the Web tell people to Google for a set of specific terms and then don't bother to provide a link to click on?

Writers: please learn something about the medium you're using! Hyperlinks have proven to be quite useful!

Anyway... Google "Mary Sue Litmus Test"

Like Penny Arcade right?

[Anonymous Coward]

The people of Penny Arcade are a good example of this. On their comic both themselves and their girlfriends or whatever look like decent looking, healthy young people. One can also categorize the girls on the comic as being "cute" due to the artist's depiction.

Then you see the REAL pictures of all of them. Bunch of lanky and pasty white faced geeks with ugly ass girlfriends. For example, Kara doesn't even look remotely close in person as she does in the comic. Pathetic really.

But hey its the INTARWEB and people aren't who they always say they are.

Re:Like Penny Arcade right?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's so totally true. Megatokyo is just the same. Seraphim? Fugly as hell.

Re:Like Penny Arcade right?

[Anonymous Coward]

That is so true. Probably cuz the good looking people are having their lives outside the computer and spend time having sex and social parties instead of hunching over a computer monitor talking games and drawing unfunny comics.

Re:Like Penny Arcade right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, this is a case of "it takes one to know one." I'm no movie star, I don't do much outside, I've dabbled in comics. But I know my own kind...I can call it when I see it. Plus, a fugly chick is a fugly chick.

Re:Like Penny Arcade right?

[ChibiTaryn]

You realise you're talking about CARTOON CHARACTERS right? Cartoon characters are generally pretty stylised, I don't know if you can really say if a character is good or bad looking based on a stylised cartoon character design. Particularly when it's something as stylised as Penny Arcade, where there is not a great amount of detail used in the characters themselves. Are the characters in The Simpsons good or bad looking? Plus, I'm sure the guys at PA probably DO feel that their girlfriends are good looking. Just because you don't think that Kara's good looking, doesn't mean that they agree with you. Most people feel that their significant others are good looking.

Re:Like Penny Arcade right?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyway, where can I see pix? Searched the whole PA site, couldn't find any.