Cabal requirements

Is it possible to get approved admission to a cabal even though you do not meet the formal requirements. I know sometimes nonstandard characters can do different things, but I was wondering if this was one of those times. For example.... a paladin in syndicate... not really my idea, but just an example. If you had really good rp for him maybe only collecting bounties on terrible heathen scum...

It's possible, yes.

But expect things to get worse before they get better.

Cool. I dont know if I will ever make the character, but it might be kinda fun.

Any member of a cabal has to fullfill the cabal's duties. Syndicates have to collect bounties. Not just those of evils/people they don't like. Therefore you wouldn't get a goody Syndicate. So your paladin would be outcasted to neutral. That would mean he looses ALL spells as he can't commune any more. So you end up with a rather gimped warrior. Why not roll one from the start and rp him as a former paladin who was kicked out of his guild?

Well that was just the example. My idea would be more possible.

I mean this in the least conflict-causing way, Eshaine, but that's really the discretion of the cabal IMM and the mortal leader. I would think that, just like an evil Tribunal can turn a blind eye to crimes that benefit him, a goodie Syndicate could find a way to get out of collecting a bounty on a fellow lightwalker. Now, if they get caught, particularly if the then-leader is evil (IE - Messalantha), that this would not be a viable option because they would be punished/expelled. However, if they were able to successfully avoid detection, I don't see why it couldn't happen.

PS - Don't hurt me?

Edit: Granted, Messa or Malanith could just assign you the task of bringing them a goodie's head before you'd be allowed in, which cuts your rope short from the beginning.

Ijust like an evil Tribunal can turn a blind eye to crimes that benefit him

I'd say that's a sure-fire way to get kicked out of Tribunal. Evil Tribunals can use the law for their gain, but they cannot a) allow laws to be broken break laws themselves.

I say this because, while they are evil, they are still LAWFUL. That Ethos alone means that they hold Order and Law in the highest regard and think it is the way to get what they want. Breaking the law or allowing others to break it with your knowledge is against that Ethos, and thus nullifies your character's lawfulness (and their ability to be in Tribunal)

Well, I tried, but I was kicked out for blatantly working with Syndicate, not for turning a blind eye to other crimes.

So I guess we'll never know.

I did once try to get a Tribunal/Syndicate alliance. I still say it makes sense to some degree.

Well Im thinking of something more possible. Certainly something with a conflict of alignment would be tough, but its going to be avoided certainly. I might have to roll it up soon, because I think it could be pretty interesting.

I can certainly see lawful evils manipulating the law to their advantage. They still have a respect for a law, but in their own evil, the law is what I say way. Im suprised I have not seen more evil tribunes take the route, but I suppose my characters might not even know if it was really going on. I can see pardons given to characters that pay alot to the evil tribune.

I dont know how the imms feel about this, but why couldnt you play a lawful evil at selection, but rp him to just have this be a "front" for his character. He pretends that he is a law abiding citizen, but really uses his Royal position in tribunal for his own personal gain? I could see that making more sense than playing it the other way and having him be neutral evil/chaotic evil and pretending that way that he is lawful. The later kinda screws you out of the chance, while the first seems to be very acceptable as long as your rp is sound and you dont get caught by other tribunes etc.

i think you should be able to rp a character that starts off lawful evil, and rp him well enough to take full advantage of the law for his own personal gains. This way, although most see him as a lawful character, his rp when not dealing with other tribunes/prax is chaotic in nature. It makes sense. The imms would probably know, and maybe even prax when just looking about the lands from his perch, but when in view of tribunes, he plays like the lawful evil that they think he is.

The tribunal/syndicate thing makes sense to me. When I first started playing, I always though of syndicate as the citizens arrest brigade. They get the guys that dont fall under the jurisdiction of Tribunal. I can see that happening, but it might be against syndicate requirements too. Some lawful neutral operating syndicate as an arm of tribunal or capturing those that commit crimes on areas not protected by syndicate. The bounty system might have to be changed, to where the leader has to approve of bounties or something, but i suppose its all feasible in this crazy world

Martineius WAS a lawful evil who took advantage of the law to his fullest ability. That's not a dig at his character either - it was good RP, and very well done.

Your ethos isn't what you as a character, want other people to percieve you as. It's what your character actually is. A character who pretends lawful but actually has hidden, chaotic tendancies, is of chaotic ethos.

If you roll a lawful character and you're actually playing as someone who isn't really lawful, but just wants people to think he is, then you're breaking roleplay - again, your ethos (same goes for alignment) isn't what you want people to see you as. Technically, alignment and ethos in this sense doesn't actually 'exist' other than from a game mechanics point of view.

EDIT: Martineius may have taken advantage of the law to his fullest ability. He did not, however, breach lawful character roleplay.

Dey

Martineius WAS a lawful evil who took advantage of the law to his fullest ability. That's not a dig at his character either - it was good RP' date=' and very well done.[/quote']

Which was pretty much the angle I was going for with Vhalen. Wish I could've continued it longer.

I don't see the possibility of Tribunal/Syndicate alliance, and here's why.

I see Tribunal as a ruling empire, lording power over all others. For most Tribunals, they use this power to protect the populace and maintain order. For some, it is an excuse to exercise superiority (evil Tribs). Regardless of which, Syndicate undermines Tribunal as the dominant power. ANY empire, when faced with an organization that undermines their supremacy, will view that organization as treasonous. As such, they are to be put down.

On that same note, I also do not see Watcher/Syndicate alliances being viable - but they have been done. True, Watcher and Syndicate both share a common enemy in the Tribs, but when you think about it, Tribunal isn't Watcher's primary enemy - it's the cities. I see Tribunal as a representative of the cities, and I see Syndicate as the crime organization that manipulates the cities to further their crimes (ie., drug trafficking, prostitution (which doesn't happen in-game, but is always considered part of Syndi's business), and hired hits.) BOTH use the cities, and therefore BOTH should be considered friends of the city, albeit opposite spectrums. Therefore, BOTH should be enemies to Watcher.

Just my two sense - but then, I also want to play a Watcher zealot that views anyone who lingers to long in the city to be a friend of the city, and therefore killed. So maybe I push the envelope too much...