True reason for the neutral alignment...

[Vertas]

Hmmm, so earlier today I was in my history class kind of nodding off, every now and then nodding and saying 'yes, so true' and stuff like that. It was about world war 1 and how germany beat up this little country belgium to get through. Belgium was neutral or something like that, so england got mad at germany and killed them... So, basically I am trying to say that the neutral guy should not be killed by an evil guy, unless they were attacked/looted/ whatever by them. Neutral means that you choose neither side, and therefor aren't their enemy. I would say its sort of like two evils going at it but... That does happen. So I'll say two goods. Goods do not fight goods, halflings do not fight halflings. SO WHY WOULD A lightwalker halfling druid, attack and kill a halfling thief? I sense bad role playing here. (oh well, he got banned later for multi charing or something like that) But still I think these rolls should be better enforced. I have seen alot of bad roleplay, example...
description of a level 38 monk I once saw last week.

bowing before u stands a... WHY DON't they do anything about this?

[Clifton]

Allow me to explain the concept of neutral on ar. In AR, the neutral path is the balancing path theoretically. They help tip the scales in the favor of either good or evil when the other is abundant. For example. There is a 3 on 1 gangbang, (good 3, evil 1 of course), the neutral is supposed to join the evil to make it 3 on 2, theoretically. But knowing this, the goods might kill off the neutral first so that there is no interference by him. That's neutral, not the I don't favor anyone perception you have.

Oh, for your other part. People are tarded, can't do much...

[Davairus]

[126] IMP [ASSASSIN] Davairus: Complaints
Fri Jan 9 22:50:39 2004
To: all
If you see another mortal in violation of the rules (HELP RULES and HELP
MULTI) you may inform us about it and we will take action on your behalf.
Please do not attempt to punish rule breaking yourselves via methods that
also violate the rules - you as well will be guilty of cheating. There is a
PRAY system for you to report bad behaviour as you see it happen. If no
response is seen from the immortals, then you file a COMPLAINT about the
player. You do this as follows:

COMPLAINT TO IMMORTAL
COMPLAINT SUBJECT (your grievance here)
COMPLAINT EDIT
type the details
COMPLAINT POST

Please include as much relevant information as you can, as well as
the approximate time the events occured. We will then look into
the issue based upon the information you gave us.

[sweet_canadian_mullet]

You are taking the england perspective. IE good. The germans...(evil) said hey...He is in our way...he is neutral so therefore not much of a threat so we will be SURE to move through THEM instead of...england. Or some such nation that would prove a much bigger threat. An evil looks at a neutral as he does everyone...Is he better to me dead? Or alive? a lightwalker in theory needs good reason to attack a neutral and knights need reason to attack Evils altogether. The druid...Yes bad rp. Thoh thieves i would say are exempt from such accusations.

[Talisman]

Damnit, there goes four or five IQ points. Posts like this should come with warning labels or something...

[sweet_canadian_mullet]

I wouldnt worry too much talisman...I burned at least 50 iq points writing it. Notice I dont post like that much...Running out of brain waves.
Ten more back! Woohoo!

[Jerold]

I don't see anything wrong with a lighty attacking a neutral, vice versa or evils and the same. Lightwalkers are pretty much forbidden from attacking each other but thats about it. Neutrals can be anything from undecided fence sitters, or callous indifferent halfling thieves. Travellers of no faith, perhaps no hard beliefs who base their beliefs on passion rather than faith or ideology. Some neutrals could be more 'good' than a lightwalker, or the actions of some might seem barbaric. A frenzied minotaur is not exactly someone any of us would want to be near. It is the interpretation of neutrality through ones ethos that makes this alignment so volatile. Is any of this making sense, or is my coffee just too strong?

I am really friggin bored right now.

[sweet_canadian_mullet]

In my oppinion according to game standards neutrals are innocent untill decided guilty. And with an evil that is well and good. But a lightwalker...You gotta follow your own path not worry about the other knuckle heads path. With goodies neutrals are innocent until PROVEN guilty. Not DECIDED guilty. My oppinion anyway. It is based on rp and that is my Idea of correct rp. Thoh there are many things I think that everyone may or may not dissagree about.

[Weirdo]

[Stephen2]

[Vertas]

[Clifton]

Dude Vertas... Halflings can be neutral... Being a neutral halfling thief means, oooooh, look shiny, me want, me take (see: Gollum - Lord of the Rings). And I'm pretty sure for a thief, that's a pretty damn good reason. People roleplay their own characters, your view isn't final. Remeber that when you're spewing your complaints. Telling people how to act/feel/speak/... just pisses em off.

[Vertas]

[Stephen2]

Not especially. And definetly not in the way you try and argue it. Certain races have 'siblings'? That's retarded.

What were the reasons he gave for attacking you?

[Flying Hampster of Doom]

I got a few problems with your constant chacing away of the newbies around here Stephen2. You sit here and tell this guy that it was right for a halfling to attack a halfling. Read the halfling description;
1)Stryth introduced a new peaceful, highly sociable race to the realms.

2)Halflings are sturdy and industrious, generally quiet and peaceful.

3)Halflings are more open and outgoing than any of the above races, so they get along with other races far better.

These are just a few examples, and as a pre-emptive strike I know it says generally in a few of those points but all the same I see more halflings attacking 'cousin's than I see halflings helpin other races, being nice, quiet or even remotely peaceable. People have it in their heads that thievry is a job, its not. For most thieves of the centuries when this mud was based off of, you thieved because you didnt have another choice in life. For some its the joy of stealing, hence evil thieves, but for most it is because you dont have another option. I dont think I have ever seen someone go for that type of rp'ing. Mostly always its because they want shiny stuffs! Woohoo Shiny stuffs! Speaking of shiny stuffs, I seem to remember you saying, 'Hey shiny! Me like, Me take!'. How in the sam hell does that equate to hey me like me fuck your shit up bitch! It doesnt.

In general I see problems with the halfling attacking anyone unprovoked, but like the case of Renzel. There is always a bad apple and from what I hear he had a pretty good reason, but they cant all be bad apples and not everyone has good reasons.

Okay so I just read the last post by Vertas and I notice one more thing I have to add on to here. The other dude was good and you were neutral? Unless you attacked him, or tried to steal from him, in accordance with most standards of role play he had NO RIGHT to attack you what so ever. And like dav stated at the top, send in whatever you need to, to get this buy busted. He deserves it.

[Stephen2]

[Lydana]

This is the first worthwhile thing I have seen in the new forum to post on... so here goes..........

1) Halflings should 'not' be aggressive (as mentioned earlier).

2) Neutrals CAN be aggressive.

3) Goods should NOT attack Neutrals without good RP reason (like--they help Legion, attacked before, etc).

Let me elaborate a bit on point 2 because it seems like people aren't quite sure 'how' neutrals should be aggressive. The idea of neutral ethos and alignment is this: they have their own best interest in mind. Some of you seem to think this is what evils do... but keep in mind, evils do mean things without reason. Neutrals only do mean things if they have to, for some good reason. This means that they won't want to just kill someone for the sake of killing them. Really, the hardest alignment to PK with is neutral, because a neutral has to have a good reason for EVERY PK they make. They can't just use the good vs evil excuse. It has to be some personal grudge or something of that sort.

There is, also, no 'brotherhood' among the races. Just because someone is human/halfling/dwarf/etc does not mean they have to be buddy buddy. Thats the same thing as thinking that just because people are evil that they should ally with each other just like goodies do.

[Flying Hampster of Doom]

An implication is as good as saying it dumbass. Secondly next time you quote me, use the whole fucking sentance you ass reaming butt pirate. I dont have time to argue with someone who is going to use Dick Cheney Esque arguements. So suck my flying hampster like cock you piece of shit. This is what I said;
Unless you attacked him, or tried to steal from him, in accordance with most standards of role play he had NO RIGHT to attack you what so ever.

So. BASICALLY I said exactly what Lydana just said, so shut yer damn yap.

[Vertas]

[Simpleton]

I would agree that halfling are suppose to be non-aggressive. I play a couple of halflings and have changed my view on how they should act. For the most part, I am very peaceful and do not look for trouble. However, there are a couple of classes that I will openly attack with no questions asked. I will attack any necros or evil illusionists on sight. This is probably against the rules but I do not wait for these classes to come pick on me. Most necros will attack pretty much anything on sight! Enless they are a part of herald, which is a rarity. Why should I wait for anyone to attack. If I see these classes in my general area, I can pretty much with 99.9% accuracy say that they are probably going to come after me. I do not stay in fights that I do not start, because the attacker is going to be more prepared that I will. I could be wrong and get bitch slapped by the imms for this playing style, but I will not change my ways until that happens.