Trouble with Tribunes

I would definitely suggest you not.

Goodie gets wanted and has to fight a trib goodie - he kills the trib - now why isnt this tough luck for the trib who couldve left him alone.

Because the trib could not have left him alone. If you are going to be a part of a cabal, you are going to live by the edicts of it, and one of the edicts of Tribunal is that you hunt down wanted people, good, evil, neutral or whatever.

I can definately downgrade the quality of this topic quick.

The quality was low enough earlier; circular arguments, etc. I attempted to bring it back to the discussion at hand. As far as me being "pissy," you couldn't be farther from the truth.

I'm trying to bring some kind of a resolution to the situation. I read your disagreement, noted it, I like to think refuted it, and now I welcome other arguments or clarification of past arguments from anyone, yourself included.

Because the trib could not have left him alone. If you are going to be a part of a cabal' date=' you are going to live by the edicts of it, and one of the edicts of Tribunal is that you hunt down wanted people, good, evil, neutral or whatever.[/quote']

One of the edicts of Avatar or Knight is hunting Vampires/other evils. He kills an evil Trib, gets wanted for it, has to fight the good Tribs. To argue that it's the Avatar's fault for following his RP and getting executed but not the Trib's fault for following his RP and getting killed is illogical.

Here's the deal as I see it with your two ideas. Perhaps I wasn't sufficeintly clear in my other post.

Goods should not kill other goods for any reason. Not for equipment(mercykill looting), not to escape execution(avoid good tribs, surrender, get caught by neutral/evil tribs).

NO GOOD ALIGNED character should be trying to KILL or LOOT another good aligned character, good aligned tribs aren't trying to kill other goods when they attack you they are trying to CAPTURE you. After a certain amount of crimes commited you will get executed(not the good tribs fault).

Your pow idea has merit, because it would allow you(the good aligned criminal) to at least defend yourself and possibly win and still be able to keep the good aligned criminal off your back for awhile. It could be expanded to allow another member of your cabal to perhaps kill the good aligned trib(ie good warmaster takes good trib prisoner and evil warmaster decides for whatever reason to kill good trib while he is in pow camp.

Keep it on subject. If you have problems with Tribunals for another reason other then GOOD VS GOOD, make another thread. This is for that sole purpose.

As for IMM and IMP imput on the thread, it seems nothing will change.

I like the POW idea myself, but I do believe there are other things that need fixing first, ie-raid system(making watcher/syndicate even more pointless right now).

One of the edicts of Avatar or Knight is hunting Vampires/other evils. He kills an evil Trib' date=' gets wanted for it, has to fight the good Tribs. To argue that it's the Avatar's fault for following his RP and getting executed but not the Trib's fault for following his RP and getting killed is illogical.[/quote']

Knights are to clense the land of evil, where and how they go about that is pretty much left up to their discretion. If a Tribunal sees a wanted person in the area, it becomes his mission in life to bring them in or die trying (I'm not even sure death is an acceptable repreive). It's not the same. Avatars might be in a more similar situation, though.

So, here's what it boils down to. It is the goodie Tribunals fault for becoming a Tribunal, but it is at least as much the wanted goodies fault for becoming wanted.

I agree completely. Both and neither is at fault; it's their nature. Which is why I think one of these solutions to bring their allowable actions more into align would be useful.

I don't think it's a question of who's at fault the problem is the consequences of your actions and actually having to pay those consequences rather than being able to do whatever you want and be free and clear. And that is all I will say on this topic.

Sorry if I went off-topic--I read this whole thread save the part I had read already, which was the first few posts saying what the point was. So I was responding to a lot of other things.

In terms of being able to kill good Tribunals per Sneak's suggestion, I think the problem is that it would violate RP. A good Tribunal capturing a good would not violate RP because you don't kill them. Yes they are executed if they are an outlaw, but they're not executed by the Tribunal but by an executioner, and according to due process of law. I.e. you're only being executed because of repeated offenses, after being lawfully captured, etc. Good Tribunals, as lawful, believe that good arises from fair processes. If you violate those processes, then you deserve the punishment you get, even if you think you are doing good by doing so. It's like punishing people for lynching. They may think the person they are lynching is guilty, and he may even really be guilty, but if you're lawful you believe in the process, not just the result.

POW system sounds intriguing, but also a lot of work coding etc. Also would this replace all cabal PKs, or just those that would otherwise break good-on-good align restrictions? If the latter, why have Savant and Warmaster been able to get around this problem? And why don't their approaches apply now? If the former, do you really want to do away with cabal PK? Would those captured lose all their items?

I wish I could respond more in depth, but it'd give away the majority of the characters I play.

Warpnow, Behrens posted and described what the help file really meant. Your interpretation at this point is in-valid and does not go against RP. But if you want to think that, sure.

And as stated many, many times in this thread, ETHOS > ALLIGNMENT. Raargant said it several times, and I'm going to believe him. Why? Because I've seen many cases in the past (1.0) where problems such as this arrised. But did we see any problem with it, except that the ENFORCER hounds were extremely buff? No, we didn't.

All I see now is people complaining because they don't know how to deal with a new change. Just like you complained when the IMMs were beta-testing Liches, Warpnow. When in fact, when they beta-tested blademasters, you had no problem with it, because the said beta-tester was a goodie elf blademaster, and in turn had no run-ins with you.

And I sure as hell don't see half the player base against the whole Tribunal/Royal system. I'm personally okay with it, and believe it or not, two of my characters, both currently at 50, and both at 50 when Tribunal was inducted, have had run-ins with the law. I don't see any problem with it.

Most of this is revolving around the fact the Martineius is a vampire, and the first Council in Tribunal that actually did something. Elise didn't write any laws, she just basically sat around in her Watchtower (WHEN she was even AROUND) and got about 9 captures before leaving Tribunal. Has anyone read the COUNCIL help file recently? What would everyone have done if Elise had done just that: Created and enforced laws? Nothing. Why? Because I still think the majority of the player base has and probably still are playing goodies, and have bias arguments.

Now that a vampire is is up and 'kicking butt' in the whole 'Council Chair', people are having problems with it. When my goodie was wanted, did I have a goodie Justice usually come after me if another evil one was on? No, actually, I had the evil one come after me, which makes me believe that they at least mark their offenders with allignment to reduce as much complaining as possible, and gives the goodie justice a chance to take NO part in the apprehension of their 'goodie' friend.

A lot of you are also saying the IMMs aren't doing **** to help or cater to your ideas and suggestions. Read the changes recently made: shouldn't that help Watchers/rangers INCREDIBLY? The archery bug was fixed (THANK GOD!), and several other things fixed / modified. The IMMs are listening, they always have been. Just because you don't get your way sometimes does not mean they're not listening. They just don't agree.

Ethos > Alignemnt?

I can deal with that, just make it apply in all cases.

I am NOT insulting the imms Acerbity. They have done an amazing job as of late and I REALLY like the rp for the Tribunals. My problem is an age old one, with Goods being stuck with nothing to do while being assaulted by a tribunal good.

Another thing came to mind. If a good tribunal comes after a goodie who has stunned him several times...and keeps coming, over and over again...couldn't that be considered not valuing your own life?

If goods can't kill goods who ATTACK them...they should be given another system. Suggestions I have heard so far:

1. Not making killing them autodamn- I like this idea...but not as the solution. I think this should be that way...but it should still be VERY monitored...because good vs good deaths should be very, very rare even if allowed.

2. Allowing people to loot mercy'd people- I like this idea. A trib lies before you, decked...you mercy him...take his bags, weapons...shield. Take what he needs to fight you.

3. Allowing any cabal to execute enemies- Would make a great rp tool and would rock, but I wouldn't have knight executing tribunal healers or paladins.

Now here are my suggestions.

1. A new command, Cripple. When someone lays prostrate before you...stunned and unable to move, they lie entirely within your control, and you are able to cripple their body, hindering it almost useless for combat until they die, and are restored a new body.

2. A timer. After being mercy'd, for say 100 ticks, you are really weak against that opponent. Maybe if you have mercy'd someone in the last 100 ticks, and fight them again...your damage is doubled, while you are given a third defense against them because of your knowledge of their style.

3. Make lightwalkers naturally fight very very poorly against each other. Spells have less affects...you hit less. Make it amazingly difficult for a lightwalker trib to catch a chaotic good. Leave that where its fair, evil/neutral vs good.

4. Make Jailbreaks from the outside easier...and/or make it possible from the INSIDE of jail, even if very very difficult.

Just out of curiosity...

How many of you "lightwalkers" have been captured by a good Tribunal?

I'm pretty positive the number is extremely low.

Been playing lawfuls since tribunal was instilled...even though not traditional lawfuls or Tribunals by any means, they didn't break the law.

But...like...I want to. heh. I want a knight wannabe who is an outcast of a society lead by vampires and necromancers and sees the entire Tribunal as nothing but filth. I want a vampire who sees Alexa, Ceqia and Raniku as poor, misguided souls whom he will try to save, but he will NOT go against his beliefs to cater to theirs. I want a chaotic good who is a true rebel...who will never surrender to a corrupt goverment! Who will fight til the end! Til he is dead! He will never surrender to the forces that be because they are! He does what is right, godammit. People who don't see him as right will call him CRAZY! When he is chasing a drow, that drow DIES!!! Drows don't get refuge in a city from the hundreds or thousands of murders he has commited! He cared nothing for the laws of men! Death, Honor and Glory!

Heh.

Seriously, though...that Rp is what I LOVE but doing it is soooo hard because you have to dance around good Tribunals...

I put forth a bunch of ideas I think are feesible...wouldn't damage RP(might even help a little) and would allow goods SOME form of protecting themselves rather than their current options: Surrender or Don't commit crimes.

What's the problem with those options?

Well, my char is Chaotic...he doesn't care about the laws. If the laws need to be broken, he will break them.

Well, my char believes he has a DIVINE task beset to him by his god to KILL ALL EVILS...yet this other person, endowed by maybe the same god...is getting a message to catch him and execute him?

Yep. People never percieve different messages from the same God.

That's why we have no differences at all between the Lutherans and the Catholics.

Let alone the Jews and the Lutherans.

Then we add in different gods, and perhaps there might be a reason two goods have entirely different philosophies?

I can't explain why so it's so clear cut to me but I'll try. Definitions are from the help files.

Good = people (society) over the individual, others before myself, "altruistic" ambitions

Evil = individual over society, me first, "selfish" ambitions

But ethos begins to muddy them each a bit.

Lawful = Order is right and needful for safety, protection of all from random danger paramount, chaos breeds destruction

Chaos = Order is wrong and unnecessary repressing of society, freedom from restrictions in life paramount, law breeds oppression

Add them together and it looks like this:

Lawful Good = Order is right and beneficial to all in society, protecting citizens from dangers of certain individuals, even at risk of one's own life, is paramount, revolution and chaos endanger everyone

Chaotic Good = Revolution is right and beneficial to all in society, protecting society's rights to make their own choices and not be repressed, even at risk of one's own life, is paramount, law is oppressive and threatens everyone

Lawful Evil = For one to rule, government must exist to keep the rabble in line, if laws can be crafted to concentrate and amplify my power, I can be untouchable, while I form society to cement my rule, anarchy which threatens my system and my will must be suppressed at all cost

Chaotic Evil = No law will restrain my will, my choice, my goals. Those who seek to hold me down will only feel the sting of my retribution as I exalt my power over them.

Just out of curiosity...

How many of you "lightwalkers" have been captured by a good Tribunal?

I'm pretty positive the number is extremely low.

The ROLL call says a lot about this. What's Raniku have? 30+? And Pominsu and Martineius? 150+?

Yep. People never percieve different messages from the same God.

That's why we have no differences at all between the Lutherans and the Catholics.

Let alone the Jews and the Lutherans.

Then we add in different gods, and perhaps there might be a reason two goods have entirely different philosophies?

Course, the Jews and Lutherans aren't categorized onto the same side by an omnipotent greater force...which is where the problem arises. So...the catholics back at the formation of the lutherans were PUNISHING and CRIMINALIZING the lutherans. We could, very much, consider them the Tribunals. They were a very empire like church. The Lutherans did, in turn, fight back. Did they get damned by their god for it?

According to the Catholics they did. Hence, excommunication being very popular among the Catholic church's punishments.

Course' date=' the Jews and Lutherans aren't categorized onto the same side by an omnipotent greater force...which is where the problem arises. So...the catholics back at the formation of the lutherans were PUNISHING and CRIMINALIZING the lutherans. We could, very much, consider them the Tribunals. They were a very empire like church. The Lutherans did, in turn, fight back. Did they get damned by their god for it?[/quote']

Talk to the Catholics

And yes, Jews and Lutherans both claim to worship the same deity, they just disagree about the person of one man who claimed to be that particular deity's son.

(Not getting into a religious debate here)

Also, remember that deities are a lot more active in the lives of regular folks in FL.

I REALLY like the cripple command idea. Instead of making it last till their next death though, make it last like... 24 hours. They need a day to heal from the wounds they took. If you think that's too long, think of it this way... after dying while well equipped and full looted, are you really ready to take on the guy who just smashed you within 24 ticks?