Merchant Sub Cabal

1 hour ago, Fireman said:

Since you are using your cabal and Nature RP as an example I will cite two other examples that I, as well as others, have experienced. First examples was when I(and others tried as well) attempted to play a Neutrality religion character according to the help file. We were all met with resistance as it did not fit the opinions of Staff on how that particular religion was meant to be portrayed and therefore was condemned.

Many of us wanted to take the religion and become a force FOR Neutrality and that balance must be maintained. If any one side went too far, the RP was to intervene in war or politics to sort it out. Ithric, if I recall correctly, had this same approach, but unfortunately he disappeared. It was stated that the helpfile was out of date and no longer fit the viewpoints the Staff held for the religion. Staff opinion > player opinion.

Another example is Warmaster. I know for a fact many other players have attempted to provide Warmaster with a more aggressive stance and truly "declare" war on multiple fronts in attempts to live up to a "warmongering" RP. I can not state the reasons why others were stopped, but I was specifically told by Tongar that Warmaster is NOT to be RPed that way as it is a cabal meant to aid and provide newer, rookie, or less skilled PKers the opportunity to learn to PK in a "safer" atmosphere via challenges.

 

Both of which I disagree with entirely. The first because the help file LITERALLY says it and the second because that is not how I personally view Warmaster, but it didn't matter. Staff opinion trumps player opinion in the matters of RP. Kind of like a "my sandbox, my rules" thing - or at least that's how it felt.

On the RP side of Neutrality religion. I agree with you Trick. 

1 hour ago, Mali said:

I have played a stalker watcher demon killer and been told that I must fight tribunal, and tribunals on the other side of it insisted that they must outlaw and kill watchers... Even law abiding ones 

Stalker rp is dead because it inevitably ends in a tribunal war.

---

I had leadership of a cabal and kicked out a player for rp reasons. The imms inducted them again and promoted them back and said we will decide how you lead, who you demote, and who you war with.

 

Imho merchants should decide if they are independent or part of a larger faction.

But as Anume said... She will decide who makes it to positions of power in merchant and who they are aligned with. Rpers need not apply.

Mali Mali Mali. You're right on the first part. That can be hard - do you have a solution for it other then splitting the two cabals apart? (just interested in talking it out here as we have ALL faced this issue in a range of cabals).

I can't comment on other peoples actions or how cabals have been managed in the past. I can only be responsible for my own actions.

I respect your approach in that regard. So, does Watcher have a leader?

1 hour ago, Mali said:

I respect your approach in that regard. So, does Watcher have a leader?

Nope. They have a single elder who is L of the oak.

I also couldn't tell you what they have been doing as I don't keep tabs ;)

I also recently insta-promoted someone from I - V yesterday because they were selected by another cabal to be the spokes person for ongoing agreements and they felt IC (and only IC) that they couldn't represent or negotiate properly at that rank.

Who am I to stifle that?

Back on topic... Merchants..

I posted on the shoutout but here too.  Havent had a chance to remark on this one.   

Merchants being in syndicate makes them immune to bounties.  Imagine if you could bounty a merchant, geesh they would always be wanted.  It also gives them built in muscle for if you screw with them.  Go ahead, attack Shwarzenase, you will have Viruthx and Kotrag hunting your ass down and a huge bounty on you because of it.  

Being in syndicate gives the Merchants RP protection that lets them function, feeds them armor to sell, and keeps them from being bounties over and over for their wares.

I don't see an issue with Merchants being a part of Syndicate.

We'd give grief to any Knight, not even an avatar Knight for dealing with a NEUTRAL Merchant.

If a merchant wants to deal with a vendettaed cabal of syndicate is entirely up to them. Merchants do not take part in cabal wf. If it's all just a little more expensive for the syndi's enemies, who's to blame ;)

What would be not good, is if they actively made the life of a hunter harder, e.g. by selling their cabal enemy a high end vuln weapon to specifically take down that hunter. Though I could even see that as a nice kind or revenge for a past griefance, just don't get caught :) (and have a rp reason if your cabal Imm wonders about this).

34 minutes ago, Anume said:

I don't see an issue with Merchants being a part of Syndicate.

We'd give grief to any Knight, not even an avatar Knight for dealing with a NEUTRAL Merchant.

You don't think that's a problem? Nexus is permanently granted outfits for their troops, weapons, armor, supplies, and everything else because of an alliance that has been going on for RL years?

We have one IMM saying it's okay to trade with Merchant, then another IMM saying you're gonna get grief for trading with a Merchant.

If Merchant were its own entity I think people would almost fight over their benefits and it'd actually allow for swing in power and control instead of Nexus and Knight fighting over land back and forth, with Knight losing out most of the time due to outfits.

Knight RP basically nullifies any shot of deals with Merchant because of their blatant connection to Syndicate. Tribunal as well. Merchant isn't some secret front that no one can figure out, lol. It's obvious.

If the Merchant is evil, no good should deal with them as with any other evil character.

The Syndi - Nexus alliance has only recenlty been reinstalled after having been gone for a while, it's nothing hard-coded. Nor are any Merchants required to give away anything to allies or even hunters.

If you feel you should drag ooc knowledge into your dealings as a Knight character that is your choice. Even if your character knows they are a part of syndicate, syndicate is no evil cabal either, so there is no reason there not to deal with them.

Placing bounties is something else, that needs a good rp backup as a good. Buying a cake is not.

54 minutes ago, Anume said:

If the Merchant is evil, no good should deal with them as with any other evil character.

The Syndi - Nexus alliance has only recenlty been reinstalled after having been gone for a while, it's nothing hard-coded. Nor are any Merchants required to give away anything to allies or even hunters.

If you feel you should drag ooc knowledge into your dealings as a Knight character that is your choice. Even if your character knows they are a part of syndicate, syndicate is no evil cabal either, so there is no reason there not to deal with them.

Placing bounties is something else, that needs a good rp backup as a good. Buying a cake is not.

Maybe I misread or you worded it funny, are you saying that a neutral merchant and a knight are allowed to trade without issue even with the knowledge of the profits benefiting Syndicate? You said give grief which means they would get hassled or spoken to about it. I'm gonna assume you actually meant you would NOT give grief to them.

She said she would demote/kill/delay/slay/otherwise "grief" any Knight that willfully traded with any merchant.

1 hour ago, Anume said:

If you feel you should drag ooc knowledge into your dealings as a Knight character that is your choice. Even if your character knows they are a part of syndicate, syndicate is no evil cabal either, so there is no reason there not to deal with them.

Syndicate not being an evil cabal is hard to swallow. A cabal MAINLY known for profiting in the death of others.

That's really hard for how I view good aligned characters even some Tribunals. In my eyes they're supposed to be uncompromising in this. Saviors and protagonists that would never knowingly help support this.

Can you imagine Jackie Chan buying some weed from the Yakuza before trying to take out its leader?

Wait wait...whats the deal with knight and merchant? I got army outfits on Lellialla, ans bought millions im armor...

I sold to anyone that didn't attack Merchants specifically. That includes Knights and Tribunal.

6 hours ago, Anume said:

 

We'd give grief to any Knight, not even an avatar Knight for dealing with a NEUTRAL Merchant.

The wording suggests anume forgot the word wouldn't. "We wouldn't give grief to any Knight, not even an avatar Knight."

Associating the Syndicate with evil because they MUST KILL remains a constant misconception.

Your perspective is skewed.

Think of the special ops asked to go kill high level individuals of some foreign power. Do you think they believe themselves to be evil?

Its not an evil mans job, its just a job evils excel at.

I believe you are right, i have found merchants easy to deal with on any character no matter the align.  As long as they werent evil and me good.

9 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

Associating the Syndicate with evil because they MUST KILL remains a constant misconception.

Your perspective is skewed.

Think of the special ops asked to go kill high level individuals of some foreign power. Do you think they believe themselves to be evil?

Its not an evil mans job, its just a job evils excel at.

Bad example. Operators remove a target for the sake of country. Syndicate kill for the sake of their wallet.

MASSIVE difference.

Neutral syndicate should be conflicted emotionally, they shouldnt enjoy taking lives. They definitely wouldn't go after low paying bounties, or collect the same person multiple times. They'd have sympathy, they're not evil after all. 

They'd be the more precise tool for the job, sent after the tough scores and not overworked.

It would be the evil syndicates job to kill and collect indiscriminately. 

That's my take anyway, being a neutral syndicate is abused way too often imo.

No, honestly that is a very narrow minded interpretation of a neutral chaotic, and true neutral. 

Neither respects life very much.  Nor do they seek to end it of their own accord. Both are very self serving, one though is more likely to just randomly act. 

The idea that a neutral chaotic or true neutral would take contracts for profit is very very sound.  Both are out for themselves and neither buy into any kind of moral obligation towards others. 

I would say the same applies to other motivations too.  Though not trecherous or cruel, a true neut would kill for an advantage without hesitation if it served them.  A barbarian for example, or a mercenary, or headhunter

Here are some examples.

True Neutral 

Quark (actually, all the Firengi) (Star Trek DS:9) 

Boba Fett 

James Bond

Tyrion Lannister (The Song of Ice and Fire)

'Snake' Plissken (Escape from New York/Escape from LA) (CN tendencies)

Jayne Cobb (Firefly)

Chaotic Neutral

Conan 

Merv (Sin City) (a.k.a. Conan in a Trenchcoat) 

Elric of Melnibone 

Q (of ST:TNG) 

Stark (Farscape)

Gollum (questionable-possibly CE) 

Captain Jack Sparrow (PotC) (possibly TN)

Rincewind (Discworld) 

C.M.O.T. Dibbler (Discworld)

Cohen the Barbarian (Discworld)

Venom (Spiderman comics) 

River Tam (Firefly)

Note how the CN category leans more towards people who kill for advantage.  The idea that a neutral should feel guilty is preposterous.  They actually by nature of the ethos would not care at all.   Though they also wouldnt kill just for fun either.  Hence why the headhunter works, or a barbarian skinning people for armor, or a watcher burning down a city and killing a tribunal.

In most cases neutral syndicate RP translates to "it's just business".