And please, if the staff thinks I'm wrong, correct me.

Orderly in cf is a character that is just that. Orderly. Not lawful. Methodical in action, structured in thought.

Specifically for you Thuul, since you seem to think there is only ONE right way.

1. arranged or disposed in a neat, tidy manner or in a regular sequence: an orderly desk.
2. observant of or governed by system or method, as persons or the mind.
3. characterized by or observant of law, rule, or discipline; well-behaved; law-abiding: an orderly assemblage of citizens.
4. pertaining to or charged with the communication or execution of orders.
–adverb 5. methodically; regularly.
6. according to established order or rule.
–noun 7. Military. an enlisted soldier assigned to perform various chores for a commanding officer or group of officers.
8. a hospital attendant having general, nonmedical duties.

What do you know, multiple meanings for the word.

There is a standard for having the ethos orderly. It is that you are orderly. NOT LAWFUL. Besides the fact that trib law is not the only law or even conceivable set of ideas of laws that you could use in CF. Apparently playing a trib has ####ing ruined you.

Please, for the love of all that is holy, can an IMM either shoot me down or chime in so we can put a ####ing end to his infuriating trolling of people's deletion threads? Please?

If you are Orderly and your role outlines what Orderly means to your character and in what way he's Orderly, I'll go by that.

Otherwise, if your character is Empire or clearly aimed at Empire, I'll assume Orderly includes 'obey Imperial Law' to him/her. Let it be noted, Imperial Law is simultaneously more and less restrictive than Tribunal Law depending on the circumstance.

Otherwise, I'll assume Orderly includes 'obey Tribunal Law' to him/her.

This is sort of a simplified version; I also have some additional 'unless the role says otherwise' assumptions. For example, I feel like most Orderly characters generally shouldn't lie. Even archetypal Orderly Evil to me is more the 'I'm going to kick your ass and take your newbie breads, but it's beneath me to tell you I'm not going to kick your ass or that I didn't take your newbie breads when I will and did.'

1) If your take on Orderly doesn't make any sense, of course a role won't save you.

2) There are lots of other simple, valid takes on Orderly. For example, a solid Battle one is "The tablet is the 'law' to my character; he follows it himself zealously, and will get upset if he sees other Battleguys trying to skirt around it." Even in a case like this, a role is a huge help -- in just one or two sentences you can give us immense help in understanding your RP and rewarding it appropriately.

The main point I was trying to get across was just that respecting Tribunal law and/or their protected cities is far from being the only way to play an ORDERLY character.

Although I do need to make the point that Daevryn and I don't see eye-to-eye on the lying bit. I've never thought lying was unjustifyable on an Orderly Evil char. Or an Honor char *fistshake Tharena*, but that's a whole other conversation.

I had typed up a couple of examples of Orderly Evil and lying going hand in hand but decided to junk it. It's really not all that important.

To me, orderly evil has more to do with believing in structure and discipline. There are certain rules, but "no lying" isn't really one of them. Generally orderly vs chaotic is more about the overall personality of the character than the character's views with regards any particular ruleset. Does the character behave methodically, calculatingly? Orderly? Does the character go about helter-skelter without a lot of forethought and planning? Chaotic.

Only for certain characters (tribunals, outlanders) does the orderly/chaotic distinction relate to explicit philosophical principles.

>Although I do need to make the point that Daevryn and I don't
>see eye-to-eye on the lying bit. I've never thought lying was
>unjustifyable on an Orderly Evil char.

I wouldn't say unjustifiable to me; more on the scale of, say, killing good characters as a good character. There are some characters of that alignment that will never do it, there are probably mostly characters of that alignment that will do it in certain special circumstances, and a character who does that thing constantly probably isn't actually that alignment.

Put it another way: I can't conceptually come up with a compulsive liar OE character, but I've definitely seen some compulsive liar characters that picked the OE alignment/ethos.

I'm Captain Replies To His Own Posts today.

As a demonstrative example, let's look at what's basically an example of the archetypal deceptive Orderly Evil type character, the corrupt congressman. Ostensibly serving the interests of the people, his vote and voice can be bought by powerful businesses or interest groups. He's all about exploiting an Orderly system for his own benefit, so I think he's pretty likely within the OE camp.

Now, if someone asks the politician if he was bribed to make a certain vote, obviously he's going to lie (except to the people paying him, of course!). But there's a nice, Orderly pattern to this: He'll always lie in that fairly specific situation. There's also a lot of planning and forethought around this whole deception: not only does he have to not tell anyone he was bribed, but he has to put on a reasonable facade of having not been bribed, in general.

Probably, in most other matters, the corrupt politician will tell the truth, or at least, try very hard to create the appearance of telling the truth. His credibility and appearance of virtue are important to him; without them, he can't stay elected. Even when he tells another lie (e.g., a campaign promise he never intends to keep), he must have a credible plan for how he will present his "change of heart" so as to appear to have not lied.

He's not going to be out on the street corner trying to defraud people. He's not going to run around telling lies for no reason. The lies he tells are always going to be in fairly specific situations, and almost always in situations in which he thinks he can pass them off as having been truth all along.

Watch how the trib plays things out, before giving the boot.

My ap Fazril got the boot (he was rp based too, not pk based). The reason was because an imm saw him agree to take a bribe to leave town so that an imperial could attempt a mummy quest.

I don't really have a massive problem with this, as I think policing trib is a good thing.

However, had said imm watched it out, they would have seen that despite me agreeing to leave town (for 20 gold) until I GAINED A RANK, I would have been back in time to stop the criminals, and would have gained 20 gold into the bargain.

Instead, I was booted for corruption. I was not intending any corruption.

Yup, that about sums it up.