Mar 30, 2017, 8:25 PM

@faraday said in PC antagonism done right:

Antagonism makes for good stories, but in a MU* environment I think it's a lost cause. Mostly for the reasons you mentioned, but it's even more than that. Let's pretend that there's a totally mature player who won't start OOC drama, needs no encouragement to play antagonism, and is an awesome RPer. I don't want that person playing my character's antagonist, I want them playing my friend. Because 95% of MU scenes are social in nature, and who wants to hang out with their antagonist? Antagonists are best metered out in small doses, and that runs contrary to what you want to be doing with your awesome RPers.

While I know I'm five internet-years behind on this thread, now, but I did want to say that this kind of player is exactly who I want to play against.

The word "antagonist" was unfortunate in its connotation to this discussion, but let's look at President Roslin and General Adams's relationship. They had aggressively different agendas through most of the early seasons, and in many ways they were antagonistic. Dr. Baltar was almost textbook antagonist, and your player description would thrive in that role.

In Amber, antagonists share the same space. In World of Darkness, you have people against you because it's Tuesday; a game of Vampire can be chock full of antagonists you can't kill even without bringing in the groups that are usually thought of when someone says "antagonist".

We don't need Cylons, we don't need Shadow, we don't need Sabbat, we just need two people whose goals oppose, and for this I want a million of the kind of person you describe.