Neutrals PKing Neutrals

This is still a rule in effect is it not? Neutrals shouldn't be going around killing other neutrals for no better of a reason than "I thought you were studying me" or "I wanted your eq" ?

Neutrals -always- need a pretty strong reason to kill someone. Though, if you're a ninja and even seem to be stalking someone, plan on getting attacked.

As Amaruil said, neutrals need a good reason to kill anyone. Not just neutrals and goods.

Good can use the "zealot of purity" excuse at least, while neutrals cant.

It also doesn't help if the ninja follows other player across four areas and opens a door they purposely close on you.

I can think of plenty of other excuses I could make too as a neutral then as well. What if that ninja was coming to RP? What if it yelled out that it wanted to talk? If it stood in a firestorm for 2 ticks trying to say Hey Im here to RP?

As Amaruil said' date=' neutrals need a good reason to kill anyone. Not just neutrals and goods.[/quote']

i would go as far and say that there are no ethos for neutral. everyone should be treated the same.

attacking a evil pc because he is a genocidical murderer is incorrect. you attack him because there a gain. bounty or its your cabal duty

Several people who play this mud play neutral only for the gains. Can't tell you how many times I've run into that halfling so and so who was genocide and unwilling to RP a change that before, forced the halfling to PK someone else because of his/her actions in the first place. Case in point: neutral raiding val miran while a knight is on, isn't at war with said knight, and tribunal is not online.

The imms do their beat to crack down on behavior like this but they can't catch everything. And players will keep trying to do it every chance they get. Prayer forum FTW.

outcasts to evil should flow more often

Its just kinda dumb that you cant walk past someone to go grab eq or to go RP without being attacked because they think you're trying to kill them. C'est la vie I suppose. Don't get mad, get even.

Ninjas suck. That is all.

Several people who play this mud play neutral only for the gains. Can't tell you how many times I've run into that halfling so and so who was genocide and unwilling to RP a change that before, forced the halfling to PK someone else because of his/her actions in the first place. Case in point: neutral raiding val miran while a knight is on, isn't at war with said knight, and tribunal is not online.

The imms do their beat to crack down on behavior like this but they can't catch everything. And players will keep trying to do it every chance they get. Prayer forum FTW.

Why couldn't a neutral be genocidal? What's wrong with a Watcher attacking Val Miran, regardless of a Trib's presence? What, the cities are only bad if a Tribunal official happens to be present in one at the time? If you ask me, it makes perfect sense for a Watcher to kill time while no Tribs are around by walking around Val Miran killing citizens at random.

Case in point: neutral raiding val miran while a knight is on' date=' isn't at war with said knight, and tribunal is not online.[/quote']

Eh, wtf?

Anyone remember when the Know Alignment spell actually gave the alignment?

I propose changing it back and making chaotic neutrals subject to things like dispel evil, + dmg vs. evil, etc...and lawful neutral subject to dispel good, +dmg vs. good, etc...

I propose this, because while these alignments are neutral, they lend themselves to ideals that do not promote balance.

I also propose that True Neutrals not be allowed to join whatever branch of Watcher it is that raids the cities/hates the cities, etc....they should be more concerned with the true crimes against nature, the abominations like avatars, undead, and demons. Chaotic Neutral should be the zealots that hate the cities for being a pox created by the Tribunals and the people who live there. Surely a True Neutral (mainly referring to humans/werebeasts with decent int/wis) wouldn't want to kill every living creature in the city (even children) for being there. There must be some kind of conscience to balance between good and evil.

Its just kinda dumb that you cant walk past someone to go grab eq or to go RP without being attacked because they think you're trying to kill them. C'est la vie I suppose. Don't get mad' date=' get even.[/quote']

Or you could do what I do and try to get to know the person first so they understand your intentions. Theirs nothing wrong with asking permission to speak or rp with them.

I propose this' date=' because while these alignments are neutral, they lend themselves to ideals that do not promote balance.[/quote']

Good align does not equal lawful ethos.

Neutral align does not equal Neutrality religion.

Evil align does not equal chaotic ethos.

Your premises are flawed.

Good align does not equal lawful ethos.

Neutral align does not equal Neutrality religion.

Evil align does not equal chaotic ethos.

Your premises are flawed.

Well said.

I also propose that True Neutrals not be allowed to join whatever branch of Watcher it is that raids the cities/hates the cities' date=' etc....they should be more concerned with the true crimes against nature, the abominations like avatars, undead, and demons. Chaotic Neutral should be the zealots that hate the cities for being a pox created by the Tribunals and the people who live there. Surely a True Neutral (mainly referring to humans/werebeasts with decent int/wis) wouldn't want to kill every living creature in the city (even children) for being there. There must be some kind of conscience to balance between good and evil.[/quote']

Didn't really read this part before...

Neutral neutral characters are not necessarily followers of the Neutrality religion - they are simply characters whose ethical natures fall within the neutral alignment and neutral ethos; again, two separate things. There may be an argument that an N/N Neutrality-religion character should not join Watcher, or any other cabal for that matter... but simply being N/N is not enough to make that argument. The religion and the alignment and the ethos of a character are all different parts of that character's makeup (edit: this line of thinking is a large part of why I've come to support the choosing of religion at char creation - most people have some beliefs by the time they are adults. I would, however, like to see more conversions... with gods that actually can show up and be pissed off at apostates, that'd be some fun RP ).

I can imagine situations in which a neutral would be okay with torching an entire city because he thinks that it is a justified action. He may regret the loss of innocents, but he is okay with their deaths because of the greater goal being serviced - a good character either wouldn't be okay with it and would fight to save these innocents or should be feeling an incredible amount of remorse for such a steep price being paid, and an evil character wouldn't even consider their suffering in the first place (or he may do so because he enjoys said suffering). The neutral doesn't kill them mindlessly, but he's also not overly concerned with their welfare.

All I know is it sucks making a friggin Druid and I can only fight like 1 or 2 people or wait for evils to attack me. Also WATCHERS USED TO BE ANTI-KNIGHT! What happened to that? The crown is as much about land control as the Tirbunals are.

WATCHERS USED TO BE ANTI-KNIGHT!

since when?

if anything is knights anti raiding butchring watchers

Every cabal is, to some extent, intent on controlling all of Aabahran. Sometimes they ignore each other, sometimes they're friendly with each other... but in the end, none of them is ever truly on the same side as another.