>I don't think Entropy has a unique identity right now, and I
>think you demonstrated that by saying it's easier to define
>what Entropy isn't, than what it is. If the Immortals running
>the cabal can't define what the cabal is about in simple
>terms, how can you expect a player-run character to live those
>ideals?
>
>It's pretty easy to define every other cabal in very simple
>terms:



Entropy is a loose affiliation of philosophers, arcanists, and creatives who seek to explore the depths of their field of interest without being held back by convention, tradition, or societal pressures. They are unified by their belief in the ideals of personal and intellectual freedom.

The truth is you have a tremendous amount of latitude to explore this definition, so it's easier to say what they aren't, rather than what they are.




>Two problems though:
>Entropy's first priority seems to mirror that of Outlander.
>Why do we need a second organization that wants to destroy
>civilization?



Both EMPIRE and SCARAB want to wipe out goodness and embrace darkness. Why do we need a second organization that wants to make everyone evil?

Both EMPIRE and TRIBUNAL want to impose law and order across all of Thera. Why do we need a second organization that wants to wrap everything in red tape?

Entropy is set apart from Outlander because Entropists have no qualms against breaking the natural order of things and committing horrendous crimes against nature in the pursuit of their goals.

"#### rules. Do magic."


>Entropy's second priority is hypocritical. They want magic to
>be free, except they don't like binding magic. So all magic
>but that kind should be unrestricted? Seems like they are
>creating artificial barriers on the practice of magic, yet
>still fighting against OTHER artificial barriers.



Following that logic, if I hunt down Imperials because they are oppressing the freedoms of others, then I am infringing on the Imperials' freedom to enslave people.

Freedom is relative. You need to look at the big picture.

Just because we don't condone the use of binding/mind controlling magic in our cabal, doesn't mean we want to put some sort of permanent interplanar moratorium on it. That kind of magic is distasteful, and we might kill you or screw with you or teach you a lesson, but banning it is the sort of act of hubris we are not fond of.



>I get that they're all about freedom, but freedom to do what
>you want (except things we don't like) is an ideal that's
>already taken by Outlander


You could define every cabal as "Freedom to do what you want (except things we don't like)".


>My recommendation would be to remove that first priority (ie,
>ending civilization), and double down on the whole magic
>thing. Make them about freely practicing and researching all
>forms of magic, and actively destroying all barriers to that
> ie, cabals that would hunt them). That would make the cabal
>still interesting but with more clearly-defined goals, and
>also place it smack in the middle of cabalwars, rather than
>far on the outskirts.

What is stopping you from rolling an Entropist that does that?