Forum Links 

Click to return to main page
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in 
 Current Top Rated Killers 
 Next Event   Voting Links 








Valour's Most Wanted
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Abandoned Realms Forum Index -> Updates
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
gr8mage



Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:21 pm    Post subject:

no, we WERE talking about why a neutral should be outcasted. If a knight gets pissed because some neutral is with some evil, and decides to attack the neutral, and dies, then you're anathemad. So now you have a bunch of knights on you, if you kill them off you join the valours most wanted. Dav was saying that would be deserving of outcast, which was the original discussion here. Im saying how could it be if the knight takes it upon himself to die to you, then to survive you have to kill off more knights as they come at you? Really please read the whole thing next time, both of you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Flying Hampster of Doom



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 429

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 3:58 pm    Post subject:

mage, do you just copy and paste that crap?


People are trying to point out to you that Knights aren't going to ask themselves, "I wonder how the Neutral, who is helping that evil kill things, is going to feel about this."

Quote:
If a knight gets pissed because some neutral is with some evil, and decides to attack the neutral,


When I was Executor of Knights, if that specific instance happend, there would be some reprimands flying.

The idea here is, if you are with an EVIL and you are Neutral, you are (IN THE MINDS OF A ZEALOT) committing EVIL acts. So whatever happens, if you get outcasted, you made your own bed. Now lie in it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Davairus
Implementor


Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 8616
Location: 0x0000

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Valour's Most Wanted

1) Goods DON'T attack neutrals for helping evils, goods attack neutrals for attacking THEM.

I've seen Lightwalkers that go to great length to *avoid* "endangering" the neutral when chasing an evil, and the neutral just goes at them anyway for some reason like "he's slowing my levelling! I'm going to kick his ass because my exp points are being affected!" Besides that, neutrals think its perfectly fine to sit with autoassist on and *let* their groupmate get attacked, then assist for them..

Neutrals think they can be selfish and malicious about their exp points being harmed or having to tank a solace mob for one round by themselves, but on the other hand, they think they can be selfless and heroic about defending their groupmates... now why make any alignment except neutral again? Why pick a side when the "no pick" means you can in fact choose either, depending which party offers the best exp points, and act whichever way you want, and pk whoever the hell you want without consequence. That's the way it is, is it?

2) Don't want to be attacked for being chummy with evils, giving goods a blatant reason for whipping you? DON'T ASSIST EVILS THEN.

That's well within your bounds as neutrality. If you get yourself attacked because you decided to assist a specific side, its your fault, nobody asked you to get involved. You'd be roleplaying neutral perfectly fine if you decided you didn't want to get involved. The anathema flag is an gameplay incentive for that, because trusting players to roleplay their alignment properly doesn't work.

* If you choose to group with a good/evil side, you've made a commitment
* Once you make a commitment, the other side has a right to be ticked off
* If you want exp points, deal with it
* If you dont want anathema, don't autoassist for your groupmate
* If you dont want the infamy for killing a bunch of Lightwalkers in "self-defence", don't kill a bunch of Lightwalkers in "self-defence"
* If you don't want to tick anyone off at all, don't take a side

3) Don't expect any mercy when you fail in neutrality

We've seen how boring the game is when there's only a bunch of passive neutrals & goods logged in. I don't think the direction is going to be making that alignment more convenient than it already is. Matter of fact I think we'd have a much better game if neutrality had to be applied for, instead of being occupied by whining anti-pk-neuts and annoying aggro-neut characters. But that's not goign to happen. In any case, the world has evils for players to spice things up, consequently I don't have any reservations about throwing some unruly neutrals that way. That's why I provided the warning now, because I won't be doing it later.
_________________
AR is on Twitter Facebook
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
0 0 0
Flying Hampster of Doom



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 429

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:32 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
because trusting players to roleplay their alignment properly doesn't work.



Yes, some players.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Davairus
Implementor


Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 8616
Location: 0x0000

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:34 pm    Post subject:

Some players, right, sorry about that.
_________________
AR is on Twitter Facebook
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
0 0 0
E-ant



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 439
Location: Estonia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:37 pm    Post subject:

Do you get outcasted for killing a goddie after they have attacked you?
_________________
<_pip_> i'm bicurious your bicurious, i like to taste all flavours of the world, spicy latino to crazy japs, sometimes i eat the dick sometimes i eat the flaps.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Davairus
Implementor


Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 8616
Location: 0x0000

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:53 pm    Post subject: Re: Valour's Most Wanted

From my original post:
Davairus wrote:
I will be VERY suspicious if I see anyone but evils on this list

I said this because I've observed characters like Grimp that tooled around in Valour for some supposed "exploring" while he had anathema flag. With Devorast and Taere conveniently lurking nearby. This turned into ganks because of the Justice Immortals saying they can gank anyone who "aggravates them" (applies to anyone trying to collect a Justice's flag - and incidentally, is why I didn't get involved when people worked together because one of their buddies is wanted). I don't expect to see any neutrals but Justices on it, so when I do, I'll certainly think there's something fishy going on.

You know the answer to your question so I wont bother typing anything out for that - this is to clear up any confusion about what I originally posted. It will definitely be investigated. I will not apply strict scrutiny here ..just don't toe the line like Grimp and you should be fine.
_________________
AR is on Twitter Facebook
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
 
0 0 0
gr8mage



Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:11 pm    Post subject:

Which means outcasting for trying to get more goods killed, and no outcasting for simply outliving someone who attacks you if you're anathemad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
formalism



Joined: 03 Jul 2005
Posts: 83

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:43 pm    Post subject:

gr8mage wrote:
Which means outcasting for trying to get more goods killed, and no outcasting for simply outliving someone who attacks you if you're anathemad.


Of course you just ignored Dav's first and second rubric points. Solution to your problem, don't autoassist when the Knight comes knocking on the evil's door. He won't attack you, the neutral, so don't worry about having to defend yourself from a Knight.
_________________
Iriqeous NEWBIE chats: 'I'm so pretty.'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Flying Hampster of Doom



Joined: 16 Jan 2004
Posts: 429

PostPosted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:50 pm    Post subject:

One more really good piece of advice;

Quote:
Really please read the whole thing next time,


listen to your own advice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
gr8mage



Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:17 pm    Post subject:

Actually he just said that as long as you're not trying to bait them, you're fine.

take your own advice about you telling me to take my own advice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Vhrael
Immortal


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 928
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 5:19 pm    Post subject:

The RULES wrote:
The RULES

- DON'T attack (ad hominem) other users of the forum. Address the subject or point of view, not the person.

- DON'T "thread hijack" - stick to the topic at hand. Some natural topic drift is anticipated for long threads, we can tell the difference, so can you.

Take your disagreements elsewhere. This thread is supposed to be about the update, not your personal conflicts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
 
0 0 0
Viggs



Joined: 10 Mar 2004
Posts: 385

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 6:23 pm    Post subject:

Is this the right place to ask no wait , I DEMAND a hellstreaming thief?
_________________
Official Member of the BonBon Eaters Fanclub,,,,,member
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
trance_monkey



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 199

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:33 pm    Post subject:

Here's an odd scenario, and I think I'll answer my own question in this..

Are neutrals not aggressive? Ever? Just because they don't hold any strong moral or ethical codes either way?

Or would a neutral be justified if everything was even? Like, he gets 30 Goodie Pk's, gets wanted, but also has 30 Evil Pks? Like, would the evil pk's negate the suspiscion or chance of outcast?

Or is that just not something Neutrals do? This is a broad subject, lots of different types of neutral, aside from the different ethos's.

Neutral's never been of any interest to me to play. Guess I'd like a better understanding.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
 
0 0 0
gr8mage



Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:49 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
Neutrals derive their name from the fact that their behavior is marked by
neither philanthropy nor malice, or perhaps both in equal proportions.
Although some may choose to engage in violence as part of their chosen
profession, no one who is truly neutral would have the callous disregard
for others to murder without a clear justification for the killing.
Neutrals who kill excessively without reason, or for reasons considered
purely selfish or malicious, will be turned to the path of Darkness.

Because they are servants of neither the Gods of Light or the Gods of
Darkness, neutrals are more free from bias in their adherence to their
ethos.


helpfile.

either have a true neutral, who impartially kills off people, a pacifist, or someone who is a simple man just trying to live and adventure, making friends and enemies along the way, no matter their path.
clear justification for killing, no excessiveness without reason. nothing PURELY selfish or malicious.
Neither servants of gods of light or dark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
_Clifton_
Emissary


Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 1432
Location: your and you're are not the same. they're, there, and their are not the same. learn to english.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 11:41 pm    Post subject:

A Knight sees a guy with 30 goodie kills. Period. End of Discussion.
_________________
just because you're allowed to talk, doesn't mean you should. obviously this doesn't apply to me because i'm not you. i'm me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Burzuk
Implementor


Joined: 20 Jan 2004
Posts: 530

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:40 am    Post subject:

Killing evils to "negate the suspiscion" (sic) from killing goods doesn't make one neutral -- it makes one evil, i.e. murdering others to attempt to draw attention away from one's own (alleged) wrongdoings. Being neutral doesn't mean you that kill both sides, but being evil does.

Helpfiles are more detailed and accurate, but my personal rules of thumb for the alignment "stereotypes" for PKing are:

Goods: "Live and let live, as much as possible."
Main PK reason: Protecting the weak.

Neutrals: "Don't mess with me -- an eye for an eye."
Main PK reason: Vengeance.

Evils: "Ph33r m3, 373 pwn j00."
Main PK reason: Anything.

Obviously some goods are more willing to forgive and forget (hence the room for interpretation on the "let live" part), while other goods see a peaceful coexistence with evils and/or those who harm their brethren as being fundamentally impossible (difference interpretations of the "as much as possible" part). A truly good-aligned person, however, kills for society's sake, not his personal vendettas. Some will argue that in a world where "precrime" (a la Minority Report) is as loud and clear as a red aura from a detect evil spell does obligate any good person to take immediate action against the offender, to protect the victims before the wrongdoer has a chance to act (or, more likely, to act again). Other good-aligns may believe in giving evil ones time and space enough to let them damn themselves through their own actions (i.e. let them hang by their own noose). Either way, placing one's personal motivations above doing what is temperate and right for all is the main pitfall for good-aligns.

As for neutrals, though they may kill out of necessity (or perceived justice/vengeance), they still harbor a fundamental respect for life and do not take it lightly, especially by attacking and killing unprovoked. Neutrals who instigate conflict or extend it unnecessarily (for example, by carrying on with with senseless killings long after they've "gotten even" with their opponent) are viewed with deep suspicions. However, harmless conflicts for personal amusement -- tricksters, pranksters, telling scalacious rumors and the like -- do not endanger one's neutrality, as long as no life is endangered. Likewise, there is a difference between violence -- such as in sport for Warlords, or as an occupational hazard for thieves -- and senseless murder. That said, neutrals who attempt to cause as much death as they can try to get away with are definitely outcast material, including by using PKs as their sole response to any perceived slight. Think about being asked to take the stand in court to testify about what offense against your character that he's seeking to correct through PKing and why your character felt that alternative methods were insufficient, since that's more or less what will happen to neutrals who get too trigger-happy with PKs.

Other than those above, almost all other reasons for PKing are intrinsically evil. Exceptions are very rare, and almost exclusively apply to things like cabal duty and so forth. Chances are very good that if you have to ask about your PKing rationale, it'd almost certainly be considered evil. This means that playing an evil character gives you by far the most PK latitude, but the tradeoff is that there are many specific gameplay effects that target evils. Hence, breaching alignment with PKing (specifically with regards to acting too evil) is not only an RP breach, but is also viewed as an attempt to circumvent the fundamental alignment checks in our PK system -- and will therefore be treated accordingly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
0 0 0
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Abandoned Realms Forum Index -> Updates All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group