Because I think that while the concept of Nexun could conceivably be cool, the way other cabals, especially Fortress, are forced to deal with them is beyond the pale ignorant.

Until such time that ANY cabal/character is allowed to bitch down Nexun at will I ask that no one play the cabal and that all Nexuns killed are fulled and Multi-killed. As well as the first question out of your mouth when asked to group be, "Are you a Nexun or do you want to be?" If the answer isn't an emphatic no, don't group with them.

This isn't a matter of ruining other peoples fun, but a matter of just cutting the #### that is the staff forcing people to throw out common sense because "Sometimes" they do good or what ever.

Nexun = Chaotic evil. Period.

I think one of the main disconnects, and there are more than one, is that most of you arguing against treating nexus as an enemy are focused, really to the point of wearing blinders, on how nexus justifies itself, to itself. That really is a red herring and completely irrelevant to how others should view them. If the scions thought they were doing the right thing, the good thing, would a maran care? Would a rager care if a mage thought he was saving the world? The real world example has been used by me and nep and others, if you're evil, such as hitler, just because you don't think of yourself that way doesn't mean you aren't.

Likewise, you can do all the good in the world you want, do great work with kids, give all your money to charity, build homes for the poor, whatever, but you kill one person and you still go to jail for life. You rape someone and you are still a rapist and you go to jail for a very long time. Doing some good doesn't actually balance evil, to anyone other than the nexun who thinks that way, for themselves. To everyone else, their deeds define them.

So, when you are a mage, you can be the nicest and most helpful mage in the world, and it won't matter a lick to a rager. When you are a nexun, you can raid scion all you want, you still went and killed all those goodies, perhaps including the fortress cabal guardians and pc's, and that's evil. Just because you, the nexun, had a rationale, doesn't mean me, the acolyte, cares. I have my own belief system and that system tells me you are a murderer who has vowed to uphold evil, forever, and who comes and kills me, my friends, my cabalmates and my cabal guardians. Just because you only do it on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays doesn't mean I just ignore what you do on m-w-f, or make you any less evil for the things you do those days.

In the end I think much of the acceptance and tolerance for nexun behavior is ooc. People play characters and thus they influence the choices, and as a player you "know" what nexuns are doing and why they are doing and so you accept it, even when your character really never would. Your character would never just forget the horrible murdering of your cabalmates and guardians, and would never forget that they are planning to do so again one day.

> I have my own belief system and that system tells me you are a murderer who has vowed to uphold evil, forever

But if you actually think that you're being kind of stupid.

I'm sorry. It is what it is.

And how neither one of them can be wrong or convinced they are wrong under any circumstances. I can't believe this thread has gone one for as long as it can. Why does another Pro rant about things he can't understand (but that most everyone else seems to be able to) get any traction?

I don't know, but I am flabbergasted at the time and effort that have been devoted to proving someone who doesn't play (Graatch), and someone who has never had a notable character (Pro) are wrong. Truly this is a waste of resources, including my own, that will never be recovered.

Why is that stupid? You can say it is what it is but really I think you're being disingenuous. Nexus public and widely held doctrine (and many, many, many nexuns have said this, and my one nexun was told this as well as read it in the rift) requires the existence of evil, and not just a little but as close to equal to good as possible. How then is what I said untrue either in letter or spirit? I'm sorry, but I think you're wedded to the system and can't see the forest for the trees.

I just don't feel like your formulation accurately describes the cabal at all.

As well to say that the Judeo-Christian religion of your choice is a cult dedicated to circumcising boys.

Please don't be facile, it's insulting to you and me both. And obviously the cabal has other beliefs, the same general equality of existence is needed for other things - everything, really - but as I said, that's not what matters to everyone else. It's only *nexuns* that care about that, everyone else sees what the nexuns do through their own lenses. And those other people, in this instance fortress people, see the acts through the 'evil vs good' lens, and as I described, nexuns do evil and vow to always do evil and maintain evil in thera, and not just one evil person in some corner, but an amount of evil roughly equivalent to the amount of good. This is antithetical to fortress.

The same goes for tribunal and outlander and pretty much everyone else, for their own particular areas of interest. Only nexus cares about their internal rationalizations. Everyone else sees nexus, hears nexus, and understands that they will always be against them.

I fundamentally disagree with what you're saying. This isn't "I kinda disagree" or "I think you're right but I don't want things to work out that way" -- I just flat out think you're completely wrong.

And that being the case I don't know that there's any point in arguing about it.

Alright. The only thing I'll add then is that there's a lot in there conceptually and you don't really say what is wrong. Nexus doesn't want a generally equal amount of evil in the world as good? And same for the other ideas like order/chaos? If you could unpack this fundamental disagreement to actual things rather than the blanket statement, perhaps that would be helpful.

And after what I wrote?

It's not about the cabal at all. Does that need to be cut and pasted 100 fold?

I'm astounded at your inability to grasp this concept.

I'm going to hang it up here and stop commenting on this thread because I'm really feeling kinda dissappointed with you at the moment and the realization that I am having that some of you can understand morality.

I like nexus, it's a fun cabal. But I kind of agree with you and graatch, that Nexus should be considered an enemy to everyone else. The big thing you're missing is that they should be the lowest priority enemies. For every cabal out there (except battle), there's another cabal that opposes them directly and consistently.

>I like nexus, it's a fun cabal. But I kind of agree with you
>and graatch, that Nexus should be considered an enemy to
>everyone else. The big thing you're missing is that they
>should be the lowest priority enemies. For every cabal out
>there (except battle), there's another cabal that opposes them
>directly and consistently.

I'd generally be fine with that. I mostly found it frustrating and counter-intuitive when my forties were told outright they couldn't hunt nexus, ever, even after all the various negative and "evil" interactions with them. Choosing to hunt nexus over scion or empire? Yah, probably bleh in most situations. Hunting nexus sometimes and when you want? Fine.

Baer gets approached a lot, IC, on how to deal with Nexus.

I have never told anyone who approached me about it "You can't hunt Nexus."

Unless I caught them in the act. In fact doing so got me a virtue.

You were kinda freakin on the Nexus (and anyone else who disagreed with or didn't do things the way you like - as you are wont to do) so I gave you a unique challenge. People who are a little more reasonable get a different kind of answer, generally.

>Baer gets approached a lot, IC, on how to deal with Nexus.
>
>I have never told anyone who approached me about it "You can't
>hunt Nexus."

Yeah, you have. To me.

I don't know who your Fort was that had this bad experience with Nexus, but my guess would be that you were acting like a Pro then.

You can't say "I have never said that to anyone" and then go on to say ok but you must have deserved it. The point is you obviously do say that, and not just once or twice. You're having a big of cognitive dissonance. Fort people get told not to hunt nexus and how they are wrong to even want to hunt nexus all the time. You're part of that, and you've done it yourself. Maybe you don't realize how often you've done it - especially since you think the answer to that is "never" even when you yourself know you've done it more than once.

If what you said were true none of this would ever come up. It is only a problem exactly because you (and the others of course) have made it this way. Make it publicly known that killing nexus is perfectly fine and this never gets raised again.

"Make it publicly known that killing nexus is perfectly fine and this never gets raised again."

Once people think it is perfectly acceptable for fort to kill nexus, how long do you honestly think it will take before people playing fort are just going to treat them as if they were empire and always kill them on sight- which is contrary to the general belief that really fort should ignore them or only go after them as pretty much the last available target when all else is said and done.

If you give people that broad a view, they'll take it to extremes it is not meant to. It's better that fort hunting nexus is more an exception than a rule, which I believe is the current system that is in place.

My guess is that (and I could be way off) Baer takes a stance on a case by case basis for most characters that actually bother to RP with her about it- after all Baer has her own RP, she's not just some admin overseer in terms of the CF realm, and if I were her and I had a maran who I suspected if I gave leave to hunt nexus would generally just do it all the time, I'd forbid him to as well, since it would be the only way from keeping him from crossing that line into being turned neutral.

I'll never understand why people role up fort chars, and then bitch about a policy they know is in place before they role the char. If you don't like the dynamics or restrictions of the cabal, just do not join it. That's why I took a long time to play a nexus char and why I'll never play another trib.

Think of it as being an evil in Battle. Here comes random elf warrior maran that has never attacked you before. Not a cabal enemy, no history of attacking you. You know he might attack you, but if you just run up and bash him, chances are you're going to end up in trouble. You don't always get the option to strike first, even when you know you're likely going to be attacked. Course, evil rager may not make any efforts to avoid being attacked, where as fort may just word or teleport to avoid fighting you. (Eachainn was a perfect example of someone who went out of his way to generally avoid fighting anyone not evil no matter what- even though he probably could have killed lots of them)

But really, you want to PK nexus while in fort. When light tips, just go sit at the Island and they will probably come at you.

And Graatch has explained it in a logical step by step manner.

It's fine to kill neutral Nexus as a Fort character, sometimes, just as it's fine to kill neutral Battle or Outlander as a Fort character, sometimes.

And just like a Fort character with a huge hard-on for killing non-evil Outlanders would probably get cracked on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper, the same will probably happen to a Fort character with a huge hard-on for killing Nexus.

I get that you don't agree with that state of affairs, but I'm not sure why it's difficult to understand.

fetyetetybn

Right... other than you and Graatch that idea doesn't make sense to anyone else.

Because to me a bunch of people running around changing allegiances based upon the rise and falls of numbers they have no control over and who go out of their way to target good purely for good sakes seems both chaotic and evil to me.

If it's not? How is it not?

Chaotic...

Nexuns follow a strict code of conduct based on the output of the gauge balance skill. If anything they are highly orderly. Bit us just the balance that us somewhat capricious.

Evil...

Neutrals do both good and evil. In cf dogma just doing some evil things doesn't make you evil otherwise there Would be no goodies.

>Because to me a bunch of people running around changing
>allegiances based upon the rise and falls of numbers they have
>no control over and who go out of their way to target good
>purely for good sakes seems both chaotic and evil to me.
>
>If it's not? How is it not?

Sure:

1) If we're going by the old school Gary Gygax original definitions of the alignments, True Neutral has to be exactly what Nexus is. Now, I always kind of found that formulation odd because while I think "I religiously try to balance the world" is a way to play Neutral/Neutral I don't see it as the only way -- by the "originalist intent strict constructionist" esque view of alignments, Nexus is certainly that and not Chaotic Evil.

But let me throw that aside for a minute and explain it a few other ways.

2) Always changing your allegiance to benefit by being on the side with the greatest numbers is very arguably Chaotic Evil. The problem is, that's doubly not what Nexus does. First, because they're always switching to the underdog side, the disadvantaged side (indeed, they can get a kick in the ass for killing the 'weak' side, even if they didn't start it!). Second, they're not switching for their benefit at all -- they're switching (possibly -- different Nexus can have different motivations, but let's deal in archetypes) because they see it as the right/proper/appropriate thing to do.

3) Or, look at it this way: is a Tribunal chaotic evil because they attack a criminal? I mean, that guy wasn't wanted five minutes ago. They probably don't even know why he's wanted. Their cabal rules say, now this guy has to die when he didn't before, and they kill him.

From Tribunal's perspective, a guy who commits the heinous crime of breaking the law should forever be hunted by them because they directly violated the cabal's belief.

Just like nexus guy having killed your fort bro, if trib kills your wanted fort bro, they must be hunted forever too.

to clarify, I don't support their retarded belief.

Crimes have punishment. When the penalty is paid then people move on. IRL Murder is often a life or death sentence. The CF equivilant for a Maran would be to never forget and keep in pursuit.

For a Tribunal his duty is fulfilled just by placing the mark. There's nothing in his cabal dogma that says he needs to even pursue a criminal. So he would be free to chose what he wants.

And the Maran argument is that they aren't even allowed to hunt the nexus. Or so it was but there seems to be a slight retraction of that now.

I'm stupified about how narrow the field of view is with so many people here.

Did you even read?

Laxman first: I realize i've only said this 10 times in this thread alon but I'll say it once more for your sake.... This isn't about how Nexun's see themselves. It's how other Cabals should be seeing them.

Nexun is fine, the way we are forced to accept them is not imho. Sorry if you can't wrap your head around that.

Daevryn: What you are describing is Mordenkanin's philosphy. No group should ever be stronger than the other. And I am not arguing that it's not an acceptable angle or cabal. I'm saying it's unacceptable to expect or require goods to forgive and forget any attrocity they witness.

For me the problem comes down to this.
I just watched you rank up on commoners think of what that would entail. A massive bloodbath.

Now I fight you and either win lose or draw time goes on. Later on I come across you ranking with one of my buddies and I'm suppose to give you a nudge and a wink then ask "gorpu?"?

That's comprimising me as a good to over look something for personal gain. In doing so I would say that makes me normal.

What really irritates me is when I as a good (Especially a Paladin) tell another good that they are travelling with a murderer and they say something like, "I wasn't there". ####ing really?

Let's change this. What if my Paladin came up on a Nexun who wanted to shift the balance by raping small children? Should I be forgiving of that latter on down the road?

What if I have been trying unsuccesfully to avenge someone and the Nexun always manages to escape. Thus there's no closure for me in my task. Am I just supposed to say good game?

So again, Nexun is fine. It's #### that a Paladin in the Fortress can't cut them in twain on sight. Yes, raid Empire and Scion first, but if you come across a Nexun he should be slaughtered. And I definitly don't think a Paladin or anyone in the Fortress should be helping them knowing full well they are making them stronger and more able to commit a greater attrocity on down the road.

But, in practice, a Fort paladin doesn't murder a neutral guy he saw getting XP in Darsylon forever after. That's just not the way people actually play it.

So why is it in this case?

I'll actually make a reasonable suggestion for once that Alston would be better served as a bard in this instance because admittedly reading a bard tattling on people for their lapses in judgement is going to be far more entertaining than most of the painful attempts to be poetic or creative we have to read outside of the Poison Pen type behavior. The trick here is that every note he writes has to be firebrand dogmatic public villification and pointedly overlook every good deed these people do, rather than whiny tattling.

Conversely people know exactly who to kill when this gets out of hand, and it would be people who were going to target him anyway.

Further, Alston by this point probably doesn't give a crap if he gets a negative title out of it, Daevryn and Baer technically can't boot him from the cabal either, but if it gets disruptive they can remove his note to all ability with zero explanation. If Alston gets creative, he can tie the bounty hunting system into things and have an ethical standoff with himself as he goes about collecting rewards for better playerkillers than himself offing these people regardless of alignment.

Prior to that point the rest of us can have a huge laugh and NON-FORTRESS goodies may actually have some extra targets to off because of him. Non-fortress types will never manage to punish enough Nexus and non-evil Outlanders to get turned evil like a chaotic evil gnome shifter would. They will fly completely under the immortal radar even if they outline this behavior in their role and add Alston's bard's name.

I don't know if a key sentence or paragraph was omitted but I honestly have no idea what you're trying to get across here.

What has cured the offense of all the dead elves?

Did he replant them? No, the attrocity is commited and eternal as should the wrath of the Fortress or any good be.

The outcome would be more evil-leaning neutrals if you hunt them forever after one mistake. If you choose to be eternally hostile towards them, then you cannot positively influence them at all. I do not think that relentless hatred is a goodly trait. You hunt evils constantly because they are always likely to commit atrocities. Neutrals aren't always committing atrocities, so they shouldn't always be hunted. By hunting them always after single evil deed, you will effectively lose the bargaining card you have in order to make the neutrals more light-leaning. Sure, teach them a lesson there and then if you catch them hunting lightwalkers, but don't go hating forever due to one individual event. If you are always the enemy, then you are unable to influence in order to make their behaviour more goodly. Neutrals aren't evil, so you shouldn't treat them like they were evil.

I'm not sure what is so hard to understand about that.

And you aren't going to influence a Nexun to do that stop doing evil. And even if you have a small possibility to do that it needs to be done before they join or commit an afor mentioned heinous act.

There's no gray area in this at all.

Every single fort character role should involve the concept of forgiveness to some extent.

How do you have converting one from the darkness as the ultimate accomplishment of a maran and also say that all people should be condemned for their sins, no matter how minor, for all of time.

A goody can fight neutrals, but a goody shouldn't want to fight neutrals. Just like both a chaotic evil and chaotic goody can do whatever catches their fancy. The difference between them is what they fancy.

It is also perfectly rational for someone to act in accordance with what they know about another person. You know their allegiance will swing, you know what will cause that, you can gauge when that is happening accuratly most of the time. Your whole argument about the fact that someday theoretically nexus will oppose you if your faction really starts to suceed ignores the fact that most of the time things are in flux so most of the time it is in YOUR best interest to not be at war with them.

You can't forgive wrongs that happened to other people. Only the wronged people can forgive.

That's what you people are missing.

and yes you can forgive other people for wrongs they did to other people because like you said, its not how they view themselves, it is how you view them.

Hey we also flip flop all the time. The people you were fighting over seas for the army were likely trained by your fathers generation. Who knows who we will be working with/against in the next 20 years.

sdvav

Now, let me preface this by saying I am not trying to insult you at all, but merely offer my opinion on this.

One of the big things about being "good" in alignment like Cf has it is that generally, you are expected to face some of these tougher choices and take the high road. You are held to a different standard in how you are supposed to react and conduct yourself because of being "Good." Yes, you can kill Nexus, especially if they are knocking on your door. Yes, you can kill Nexus in a lot of situations. Are you actually being the best "good" that you can by forever ignoring them and wanting them dead? No, because at that point you are putting your own personal desire over the betterment of Thera. That is a terribly neutral or evil alignment thing to do, at least in the very clear cut way that alignment is defined in CF.

The tough choice good has to face is that they have to kill someone in order to save more.

What would you do if you're a switchman on a railroad track and you realize 5 people are going to die on the track unless you threw the switch to divert the train. The problem is, if you do throw the switch you will cause the train to run over and kill a friend of yours who is on the track.

That's the sort of problem Maran have for me the choice is pretty clear.


No matter how many good deeds you go out and do after wiping out scores and scores and hundreds of good innocent people, you can't come bac. There's no undoing that. And the Fortress knows they will do it again.

You and some others are defending the indefensible.


And now you're trying to redefine what concepts of goodness and justice are to fit your notion of why Nexuns should be given a pass.

I am going to use the Graatchian method of argument right now.

Graatch, You are dumb. You are dumb because you are being deliberatly oblivious to all of the counterpoints to your stated theory and by conveneintly ignoring facts it makes you sound great to yourself but dumb to everyone who isn't Pro.

Seriously when it's only you and Pro championing a cause doesn't that give you a light bulb moment? Especially when Pro is also simultaniously bitching about non leader char interviews?

What you want, the free reign to hunt nexuns as a member of fort, exists. What you can't do is prioritize hunting neutrals over evils (because thats against the nature of maran).

While you hunt neutrals you should expect several goodies in fort, and pretty much all of the acolytes to say, hey you need to think about what you are doing. You will get that because being goody means reflecting on your actions. You may even run into leader characters who have reflected on the subject and decided that hunting neutrals is not acceptable. You will have to deal with that just like you would have to deal with a leader that says hunting evils in non evil cabals is off limits.


This is pretty much the same thing as villagers fighting non mages. You can do it under the right circumstances but the imms generally avoid making that statement because people like jerrokrar misinterprt it as you can hunt them whenever you damn well please. The reason you may have gotten a strict, don't hunt nexuns, answer from raybear is likely due to the fact that you were obviously looking for a thinly veiled reason to expand your enemy list and she was being nicer than just demoting or booting you for believing nexus was more evil than empire/scion.

dgrasd g

I remember that character being a pissy bitch most of the time.

Your warrior though (the one tat'd by Iunna) I liked a lot more. He was quality. Though I don't remember you having any big issue with Nexus with that char.

Somewhere in this thread I posted that or agreed with that sentiment. I concure there are more clear and present dangers than Nexuns for other cabals, but when you've scooped up all your traditional items, I'd like to be able head right for Nexus and get theirs in order to stop them.

In a situation where Light is heavily tipping balance and Nexus strikes goodies due to it would be viable for Fort to take Nexus's item. A brief war between Nexus and Fort due to heavy tipping of Balance. It is sort of a special situation, though, only for the times when Light tips balance heavily.

Unless I am reeading you wrong you are saying the Fortress has to consider Nexus's motivation for why they are commiting a bad act.

"Oh hold on guys, they are only evil light right now. Let's wait until the are evil with extra cream."

Going off what you say though, I would say that as soon as Fortress recieved word that Nexuns were Hostile they would raid Nexun and take their key.

Does that seem legit?

>Unless I am reeading you wrong you are saying the Fortress
>has to consider Nexus's motivation for why they are commiting
>a bad act.

If you don't, there isn't really any logically consistent position you can take that doesn't demand you raid every cabal.

wcwqc

And neutral/evil and even some goodie tribs will hunt fort people with warrants and kill them too. They'll actively save evils against fort people. And they'll go to the fort to hunt criminals, and may even kill the maran at times to do it.

So why would Tribs get a pass? Because they are following their cabal beliefs and don't actually have evil in their hearts when they are doing it? After all, some tribs are only hunting goodies and harboring evils in cities because it is their duty, though some evil tribs went around killing anything they can outside of cities and then just use their jurisdiction as a safe house. Trib has people who are more inherently evil than nexus, so if anything they are a greater opposition to the fort than nexus, since nexus has no definitively evil people.


Herald just does not really count as a cabal in that sense since they have no item to raid for.

Tribunal's purpose is to protect people via the laws.

Thus there's typically no reason (Though I suppose it's possible they could on rare occassion) for Fortress to raid the cabal it's self.

Killing individual members = Fine.

Raiding the orginization = No Go.

Trib's purpose is also to punish those who break laws- there are no rehabilitative, restorative or reconciliation functions in trib's justice system generally speaking. It's based entirely on harsh retribution. Death, loss of possessions.

And Trib protects people that do all the things the trib forbids in cities, but just because they don't happen to do it within four small areas trib still guarantees their safety. Hey, I just murdered this elf paladin on Eastern Road right in front of two other Maran who begin chasing me, but now I walk into galadon and this other elf paladin will protect me against the Maran that come for my head.

If thera was filled with only people of the light, trib would not really need to exist, because light people generally would not break laws anyway. Trib protects evils, and by harboring them it only encourages them and prevents their destruction. To me it sounds like they have an agenda that goes against the Maran idea of destroy evil everywhere. However, since Tribs apply their law indiscriminantly to all they are not inherently evil in so doing. They do have to be evil at times so as to apply the law evenly to all. They have to harbor a known murderer against retribution because he murdered someone outside their town and now stands next to him openly singing how he killed this elf paladin right outside.

Now you can look at Nexus.
Nexus's purpose is to protect all Thera via the laws of balance. (trib's views are no more valid than nexus's in where they originate from.) These laws have no boundaries, they apply evenly across the realm, making them far less ineffectual than trib's who have that jurisdictional handicap. So Nexus applies their law indiscriminantly to all, which also does not make them inherently evil in so doing, though at times they may commit acts of evil, they are not motivated by inherent evil within- it is evil forced upon them by necessity of duty- same as the tribs engage in, as well as Maran do. Maran know killing is wrong. They know it is evil. They do it anyway, because that is their duty. Why is it you don't condemn other Maran for the atrocities they commit against evils and forever hunt them as well?

If as a Maran you think it is okay to go after one, you should go after all, otherwise you're making rationalizations to differentiate them. Saying they raid me more often to distinguish them? I'm sorry, but there are far worse things in terms of evil than raiding a cabal.

Oh, and trib will raid other cabals too. That's a decision largely left to mortal leadership, not a set in stone policy. Pretty much all of those ideas are left to the mortal leaders, as Imms like to encourage flexibility and RP in characters instead of rigid monotony.

Each balance meter in Nexus has five stages. Let us assume that stage 1 is heavy tipping od darkness and stage 5 heavy tipping of light. Stage 3 is actual balance, and that's what Nexus wants.

1 - Nexus is ally of Fort as the two cabals have the same goal of reducing the darkness. Nexus might raid evil cabals and hunts evils.

2 - Nexus is ally of Fort, but only provides retrieval assistance. Does not necessarily hunt evils, but does deny them any aid.

3 - Balance. Nexus doesn't meddle in other cabals' affairs.

4 - Nexus denies goodies aid and helps evils to retrieve or in other ways. Does not necessarily hunt goodies and doesn't go for the orb.

5 - Nexus might hunt goodies and potentially raids for the orb.

In stage 5, Nexus may be hostile enough to warrant raiding. In this stage, it is viable to strike Nexus in retaliation if the state of the Balance hasn't changed to 4 or below. The exact when depends of the current crop of Nexus and how aggressively they react to different states of balance.

What you must understand here is that Nexus is not evil, and therefore Nexans are never hunted due to Fort objective to "kill evils". However, sometimes Fort objective to "Protect the Light" may require hurting Nexans or possibly even striking the Nexus itself if the situation gets bad enough. This is, when people who aren't inherently anti-Nexus and view killing Nexans as a bad, regrettable thing, but do so because they think it is lesser evil than letting them run rampant in that situation.

What comes to Nexans attacking you when Light holds sway, you should discuss the attack with Nexans and try to talk things out. You should also find out the state of balance (4 or 5) during each individual attack. After turning the other cheek for a couple of times during that state of balance, you can attack that particular Nexan during that particular state of balance. However, you should also acknowledge that Nexan A might behave differently as function of Balance than Nexan B, meaning that the pattern you've observed only applies to that particular Nexan. Thus, witnessing Nexan B repeatedly attack light during balance state 4 doesn't mean that you should attack Nexan A during balance state 4.

If you're "being Pro" about it, to use Raybaer's wording, and demand that either you can attack Nexans or you can't attack, no caveats, then the answer is that you can't attack Nexans. Attacking Nexans is an exception, not a rule.

That means Nexus stays how it is.



And none of your arguments seem solid into why Nexus is a fail.













And yes I actually read them.

Everyone seems to think that is a valid excuse when people bash ragers, so please... Enlighten me to your awesome Nexus character so that we can all see that you have seen the other side of it as well. Thanks

At what point do you think my argument had anything to do with how great this character or that was?

Basically I'm 100% in line with Graatch.

The cabal concept is fine. How other cabals are forced to deal with them is ####.

The way that other cabals deal with Nexus varies far more then you think. It is not nearly as cut and dry as you make it out to be. Without actually playing a Nexus to get the nexus side of it, you can't really make a full arguement about the dynamic as a whole.

I'm not talking about playing a Nexun at all. So playing a Nexum has no bearing on my argument at all.

And therefore aren't qualified to make any statements about Nexus.

of it, and honestly I think it's the wrong interpretation.

Expand your mind.

When Gary Gygax invented the Alignment System what was he doing?

He was inventing Heroes, villians and those who fell somewhere in between or those things that couldn't realistically (Even in a fantasy rsetting) be affixed with a system of morals and ethics, I.E. animals.

So you had the forces of good wich included the elves and dwarves and various others, and the forces of evil such as the goblinoids and the like. Then you had races such as gnomes that were too busy or isolationist to involve themselves in the affairs of others and thus were catagorized as Neutral on a group level.

When it came to "Balance" such a notion was typically a notion of a Natural cycle and preservaion of the natural order and so you had things like the Druids.

During creation though that went out the window and individuals were allowed to be what ever they wanted. (Unless you were a Druid "True Neutral" or an assassin "Had to be Lawful")

What the Nexuns are as a cabal is perfectly fine (Sorta). I get it.

But when I say they are Chaotic evil I mean it. But since I have failed to make my point clear there I'll spell it out for you...

We don't get to judge how people see us, they judge us based on how they see us. Nexuns go all out against the other Cabals and even non-cabaleds based on their dogma. If the Imms want to leave them as neutrals that's fine, but I don't think it's right that everyone else has to treat them that way and suffers penalties for taking vengeance on them. (Vengeance is not an evil thing Baer but that's another argument)

Let Nexuns do their thing but let that Paladin or Good shaman do their thing and destroy them like the lawless dogs they are.

Cavalier, maybe.

But certainly not assassin.

I'm not trying to derail this thread, but your post got me a bit nostalgic and I'm trying to jog my memory.

They had to be Lawful and So did Paladins. Paladin = Lawful Good always.

So is Nexus (Lawful Good). Since Thera will be destroyed if the balance isn't kept. Everyone else is chaotic evil since they want to kill off the "other side" thereby destroying Thera. ; )

after commiting genocide, you will always be guilty of your sins.

Not sure whose side you are trying to prove now, but you kind of shot yourself in the foot.

nt

After wiping out Darsylon or the Orphanage you're not getting a pass because you run a charity car wash. With or without college girls.

My question is (I decided to number them to make them easier to answer):

1. What is the difference between Maran wiping out the Goblin Village (to include children) and Nexun wiping out Darsylon? Both are genocide. Genocide is evil isn't it?

2. If not, why is Nexun genocide worse than Maran genocide in regards to alignment?

3. What sets the blood thirsty Maran apart from the Nexuns?

4. Why is the Fortress "good aligned" when all they want to do is murder and/or kill, but the Nexus is "evil aligned (according to you)" for wanting to save Thera from destruction via the balance being broken?

5. Why can't people look at things from various angles instead of one very strict angle?

Must it be: Fortress kill all Nexuns because they are always evil.

or

Fortress can kill Nexuns situationally, but never to the point they stray from their main goal?

or

some other strict definition of how my character HAS to act.

Why can't it be: My character does what fits his personality/role and if it doesn't mesh well with the rules of Fortress, then I don't get to be part of Fortress. I could hate and hunt Nexuns, I could love Nexuns, I could be allies sometimes and enemies others with Nexus. My character's role and personality dictate it.

What is the difference between Maran wiping out the Goblin Village (to include children) and Nexun wiping out Darsylon? Both are genocide. Genocide is evil isn't it?

Not if the gene pool you are wiping out are Aliens that lay eggs in your stomach to propagate. The orcs, goblins, and Ogres are around so we can have guilt free racism and zealotry, which is at the heart of the game. The goblinoids have a Red Aura because it is in their very nature to take the most selfish and self serving road possible. Want what your brother has? Kill him. Want what your cousin has? Rape her.. wait that’s Arkansas.. Anyway that’s that. They are born evil.

Conversely I see the Red Aura-ed sinners such as the hookers in Voralian as trapped into an evil life and thus tainted by it, but slaughtering them for personal renown would be cruel and wicked in its own right.

I think a Paladin raiding the Goblin village and killing pan wielding goblin mothers is a pretty sad assed Paladin by virtue of the example he set. Killing off their military class would be fine.


2. If not, why is Nexun genocide worse than Maran genocide in regards to alignment?

Nexuns are just plain evil. You are never going to convince me otherwise. There is no other rational way to describe them. And again, No to Maran genocide.

3. What sets the blood thirsty Maran apart from the Nexuns?

A maran should consider his actions. He may have killed Madam Suzzie Rotten Crotch and her girls with the red auras and the (Herpes) flags, but is that really an epic canticle that represents Maran values? Or does throwing himself at the Orc Chief and his horde?

4. Why is the Fortress "good aligned" when all they want to do is murder and/or kill, but the Nexus is "evil aligned (according to you)" for wanting to save Thera from destruction via the balance being broken?

Killing isn’t in and of its self evil. There are many good reasons to kill. Killing a Nexun would be one example. Killing a home invader another.

5. Why can't people look at things from various angles instead of one very strict angle?

I do, but Nexun is so obviously should be an enemy of Fort, Spire, Empire, Outlander that it’s crazy to have to even argue about it.

Must it be: Fortress kill all Nexuns because they are always evil.

Yes.

or

Fortress can kill Nexuns situationally, but never to the point they stray from their main goal?

Yes. “Situation equals this: Nexun Logs on.

or

some other strict definition of how my character HAS to act.

You can act however you want. If you want to ignore that cruelty that Nexun perpetuates to balance out your good, then that’s fine. But I would think that if your life means less to you than the life of some innocent soul somewhere, you would wack that Nexun, or take your own life so someone else doesn’t die in your place… to a Nexun.

Why can't it be: My character does what fits his personality/role and if it doesn't mesh well with the rules of Fortress, then I don't get to be part of Fortress. I could hate and hunt Nexuns, I could love Nexuns, I could be allies sometimes and enemies others with Nexus. My character's role and personality dictate it.

I’m not saying it can’t. I’m saying that eventually, if you want to do the right thing and kill Nexuns, you get canoewacked out of the cabal.

First, this post is meant to be insult free. However if one slips in it is purely by accident. You are misreading or I miswrote.


>Not if the gene pool you are wiping out are Aliens that lay
>eggs in your stomach to propagate. The orcs, goblins, and
>Ogres are around so we can have guilt free racism and
>zealotry, which is at the heart of the game. The goblinoids
>have a Red Aura because it is in their very nature to take the
>most selfish and self serving road possible. Want what your
>brother has? Kill him. Want what your cousin has? Rape her..
>wait that’s Arkansas.. Anyway that’s that. They are born
>evil.

So genocide is ok because of their alignment. We have established now that the Carrion Fields alignment does not directly correlate to real world morality. Since in real life, it doesn't matter if it is aliens, fish, or black people. Genocide is generally seen as wrong and/or evil. This of course can depend on the person, as morality is subjective. Morality is not subjective in CF. We have set definitions and only nine different choices.

>
>Conversely I see the Red Aura-ed sinners such as the hookers
>in Voralian as trapped into an evil life and thus tainted by
>it, but slaughtering them for personal renown would be cruel
>and wicked in its own right.

Ah, see now we are deviating from the standard "evil aura dies." This is where our RP has an affect on how we interact with the world. It creates the individual stories of CF. This is good, but not everyone agrees on it.

>
>I think a Paladin raiding the Goblin village and killing pan
>wielding goblin mothers is a pretty sad assed Paladin by
>virtue of the example he set. Killing off their military
>class would be fine.
>

Again. Your subjective interpretation of it. I doubt Baerinika (the God, not the player) would have a problem with a paladin slaying evil babies to prevent them from becoming evil adults.

>
>Nexuns are just plain evil. You are never going to convince me
>otherwise. There is no other rational way to describe them.
>And again, No to Maran genocide.

Yet they aren't evil. Clearly only true neutrals can be Nexuns in the world of Carrion Fields. I respect that you changed your opinion on whether or not Maran should commit genocide. However, that doesn't change the murderous bent of the Maran that would never be considered "good" by your own standard of morality in the real world. It's ok though, because we have an out for that. Morality works different in Carrion Fields. Yes, it's arbitrary and may not make complete sense to everyone. That's up to the individual and likely colored by their own perception of real world morality. No way around it, thus we have a group of people to set the rules (rules which, by the way, still remain flexible based on roleplay). I'm not trying to convince you that Nexuns are not evil by real life standards of morality. By my own real world morality, Nexuns are far from evil and in fact are more "good" than the Maran. That's my real world morality coloring it much like yours does the other direction.


> A maran should consider his actions. He may have killed
>Madam Suzzie Rotten Crotch and her girls with the red auras
>and the (Herpes) flags, but is that really an epic canticle
>that represents Maran values? Or does throwing himself at the
>Orc Chief and his horde?
>

I've played both Maran and Nexus. The Nexuns have to consider their actions far more than a Maran. Their dilemmas are hundred times more complex. By Maran dogma, killing Madam Suzzie Rotten Crotch is just as important as killing those orcs. Maran don't kill to have songs written about them. That's battle ragers. Maran kill to eradicate evil in all its forms. I see it that way and everything I've read about cabal dogma seems that way. However, one can still apply their own views on it and play as they wish.


> Killing isn’t in and of its self evil. There are many good
>reasons to kill. Killing a Nexun would be one example. Killing
>a home invader another.

I thought Nexuns were evil because they commit genocide. Which is a form of killing. This argument makes me think you simply don't like the cabal. Which is fine.

>I do, but Nexun is so obviously should be an enemy of Fort,
>Spire, Empire, Outlander that it’s crazy to have to even
>argue about it.

If it was so obvious, I hope I would see it that way. You yourself said I'm an intelligent individual. Perhaps it is only obvious to you because of how the concept interacts with your own personal, real-world, moral code. Which isn't the same as how mine interacts with it. I honestly see the Nexus as far more "good" in a real world sense than I do the Maran. It's like when you kill an enemy combatant. It's an evil act by my morality, but sometimes it is for the greater good. Nexus fights for the greater good. No, I'm not a liberal hippy. More of an open-minded libertarian.


>You can act however you want. If you want to ignore that
>cruelty that Nexun perpetuates to balance out your good, then
>that’s fine. But I would think that if your life means less
>to you than the life of some innocent soul somewhere, you
>would wack that Nexun, or take your own life so someone else
>doesn’t die in your place… to a Nexun.

I don't think it should be ignored at all. Most Maran that I play would kill a neutral committing an evil act. However, my Maran would also recognize that one evil action does not make one evil. Because in Carrion Fields it doesn't.

>I’m not saying it can’t. I’m saying that eventually, if
>you want to do the right thing and kill Nexuns, you get
>canoewacked out of the cabal.

That may be so. The reason is because in Carrion Fields the Fortress, who is lead by fictional gods with a fictional set of pseudo morals deem that their mortal followers should act a certain way. I don't agree that "killing Nexuns" is the right thing to do. I also don't mind a Maran that thinks "killing Nexuns" IS the right thing to do. With the caveat that he realizes he won't be a "Maran" for long (because he isn't one). The true test of the mettle is if that player continues to play their character out and becomes a righteous Nexus hunter.

Let's not also forget that killing a Nexun won't get you booted from the cabal. Hunting a Nexun (who is neutral, whether your personal moral code agrees with that or not) should never come before hunting an evil (red aura guy).

I get that people are upset the administration just can't see the "obvious" truth that Nexus are evil (by real world standards). However, there are many, many things in Carrion Fields morality that doesn't stand up to real world morality (ie. murderous "good" Maran).

I think there is no excuse for Maran not Hunting them down. For the other cabals I am less concerend because there are other dynamics involved.

I am channeling some of my hatred for real life enemies into my desire to kill in game enemies.

I can't get passed that even here.

I want to martyr every Nexun.

Okay. Agree to disagree. Your post was well written how ever wrong you are about Nexuns and Dry quicksand (IRL)

None of the other cabals have an aversion to killing sentient neutrals, just Fortress.

Your personality and outlook on "good" also seems to veer towards lawful evil or lawful neutral. Which means you would not had to alter your "roleplay" or personal philosphical outlook much.

So go play an Imperial and hunt Nexans all day long. You would not have to change your views in any way and can take out your real life frustrations and disappointments in a therapeutic manner where no one gets hurt.

Hopefully, once you learn how to PK, you'll stop making posts like these on OOC forums with empty threats, and instead actually accomplish what you want to in game.

dbadrb

If you'd followed through on your threats, this manifesto would be a ROLEPLAYED, IN GAME note, rather than a OOC forum post, and your non-caballed character would be trying to align like minded people rather than coming here to an OOC forum.

The fact that you need to make threads like this strongly suggests you should reevaluate the way you approach CF and try to work things out in game.

Seriously, play an imperial, I think you'll be well suited for it. You'll enjoy it much more than trying to slam your head against a wall with your own interpetation of what you want Fortress to do. And try really, really hard to leave your frustrations and disappointments IC.

nd nd

Evils run around constantly committing evil deeds, and are thus constantly hunted by Fort. Neutrals do not constantly run around committing evil deeds, thus Fort doesn't hunt them constantly. Red aura is where Fort draws the line. Every cabal has their limitations, Fort doesn't hunt neutrals. Neutrals that constantly act like evils get turned evil and you get to hunt them after that. If you need to protect the Light from a neutral guy, you will do that, but you don't hunt him otherwise.

My Forties and goodies won't travel with Battle (Unless I'm not relly serious about the character)

But it's not the dogma of those cabals to go out and kill to be evil for evils sake.

Also, you're implying that each and every good character you play has the same outlook towards Nexuns and Neutral Ragers.

In short, you're doing it wrong.

Firstly, each character should have their own (not your own) point of view. If not, you'll not only provide yourself with a stale roleplaying experience, you'll provide the rest of the players with it as well.

Secondly, I'd normally never tell another player that they were roleplaying incorrectly, but as you're the one who's drawn a line as to what is or isn't "correct" regarding attitudes towards Neutrals and Nexuns, specifically I have little problem throwing some of the same back at you.

Thirdly, you're cheating yourself. Some of the best RP experiences I've had playing this game have been between my characters and their mortal enemies. If you're closing off RP avenues to anyone you're doing yourself a disservice. Hell, Eck (a long-lived Villager) was best friends with and in love with Allysia (Leader of Nexus.) That beats "i kill u, u kill me" any day of the week. If you want that sort of crap, go play X-Box.

n/t

How do you treat them when they do that? Just treat Nexus the same way.

Also, Nexus going all out against cabals other than Battle is fairly rare. If one side isn't dominating heavily, Nexus is not allowed to take their item. During the time I played Gnuff, I remember only one case when Balance tipped so badly that I'd even consider taking a cabal item*. That is hardly going all out against other cabals.

*Battle is excluded from this statement.

As for what comes to taking your vengeance, it is a dish best served cold. Try doing this:

-Ask a Nexus guy about the state of Balance. The fear of you turning hostile when darkness holds sway over balance is a good incentive for the Nexan to answer truthfully.

-If Light is holding sway over Balance, ask Nexus guy to promise you that he won't kill any Lightwalkers because of the current state of the Balance.

-If the Nexus guy refuses, you have a short-term reason to kill him while Light holds sway over Balance.

-The Nexus guy you attack must be someone who has killed or repeatedly attacked a Lightwalker before. Your character must know of these events IC.

The reason for you to attack the Nexus guy is simply the valid concern regarding the safety of Lightwalkers. It is a regretful event, you don't really want to kill a neutral guy, but you lash out in order to protect the Light. When the Light no longer tips the Balance, you cease hunting the Nexan, since he is no longer a threat to Light at that moment. I think you can avoid the boot if there are enough valid concerns for the well-being of the Lightwalkers.

Striking the Nexan later, when darkness holds sway and he is on your side is not acceptable and might earn you that boot. Also, inquiring about the Balance often will also allow you to be wary when the Light is holding sway and Nexans are potentially aggressive towards you. Being nice to Nexans may also make them a bit light-leaning and less aggressive towards goodies when Light is slightly tipping the Balance, just because they don't want to upset you as their goodly friend.

Unless there is someone who manages never to commit an attrocity along the way.

If you're friends are hunted by someone, they should be your enemy.

Hell, Dwarf RP practically precludes forgiveness. Read the help file.

As I wrote below, if I catch a neutral commiting evil, they are always evil in my characters eyes. At best, my goodies will avoid them.

It is not difficult for others to utilize a Nexan's help in retrieving your item when the odds are against your side in global scale. During these short alliances, the members of the other cabal can try to sway the Nexan to be more sympathetic to their cause and generally less aggressive when their side holds the sway over Balance.

It is written in the cabal that Nexans help to retrieve when balance is lightly tipping and raid for the other cabal's item when the balance is heavily tipping. It is not written in the Nexus dogma at which point Nexans start attacking the PCs that represent the overdog alignment/ethos. This is something varies wildly between individual Nexans and this is something interactions with the members of other cabals can affect with their own behaviour. Gnuff reserved this kind of extreme measure for the times when balance was tipping heavily, while some others would attack when the balance tips lightly.

Those who haven't played Nexus don't really understand how rare it is for balance to tip heavily in favour of one ethos/align. In Gnuff's lifetime, this kind of tipping happened only once or twice. People who haven't played Nexus do not have as good perspective as others on how rare this kind of heavy tipping of Balance is. If you look at Cabal wars statistics, you can see that Nexus doesn't take the items of Cabals not Battle often.

It is obvious that Nexans cannot maintain the balance well by flipflopping between being good and evil. Nexus isn't either, and Nexans are generally always less hostile towards your overdog than your true enemies. For this reason, I find it difficult to understand why some people will adamantly keep beating the straw man they have constructed based on their oversimplified, black and white view of the world. Nexans aren't good/evil flip-flops they are neutral. This means a Nexan is the same neutral guy that acts the same way he usually does, only the duties for maintaining Balance change. I think that these people should try to play Nexus and make the best RP sense out of it before making their everyone's enemy comments. There are many ways one can play a Nexan.

When I began CF and for pretty much the first two years, I hated Nexus, I hated the cabal and how it was dealt with, since these random people would just come after my uncaballed char and gang him down because I was a storm giant and light tipped. (I started playing around Ilix/Cyrn time). Yeah, light was strong because my 0 -50 PK record uncaballed storm giant was wandering around alone exploring- and I always got weak or no justification beyond you're of the light. So I pretty much held to that view for a long time- screw nexus, it's moronic and stupid (in large part because I did not care for the chars in the cabal- not because I really knew much about the cabal).

After about 2 or so years of CF, I created Allysia, primarily to do two things. One was to try a more pk oriented character, the other to experience a cabal I hated but had never played so really did not fully understand.

Having played it, the general arguments people make about everyone should hate nexus are just wrong. Oh, they will inevitably do bad things as defined by the eyes of the fortress so they are evil. Really? That's just such a narrow short sighted view of things. I always loved fort people trying to tell me how when I killed someone it was murder and it was an evil vile thing I was doing, but when they killed an evil it was some righteous holy thing that only proved their virtue. A maran's own actions are more inherently evil than a Nexun's, since a Maran will ALWAYS exterminate an evil or try do, where as in nexus you are never faced with the position of always kill X. To me, having permanent kill on sight orders is more evil than what nexus does. (This is of course a simplified view- but that is what gets posited by the I hate nexus people so why give them anything more than what they use in their own justifications?)

In my time I saw all sorts of power swings. There was fort o'clock, empire happy ganging hour and the roaming village hordes. Yeah, I fought against all of them and generally I noticed two approaches. Some cabals, notably outlander, made a point of hunting me when they saw me and never asking for aid because we downed the spirit a few times. Evils generally used us when they could to even things against fort power swings. Fort pretty much ignored us, though would occassionally take some help from us when they were badly outmanned. In so doing, outlander and fort really only hampered themselves, but that's fine, that's for the char's RP and mortal leaders to decide.

On a char level, some characters held grudges, others were pragmatic in handling us. That's for an individual's RP to decide. However, as Rhyme I pretty much told every Nexun that they could tend the balance however they saw fit. They did not have to PK. They did not have to raid or help retrieve. If light was in power they could run around and help young evils. The only thing you could not do was aid the side that was in power. In my later years (reinduction period) I became far less involved in raiding and fighting anyone that was not in Battle because I had developed personal relationships with people and those actually would be a reason for me to not hit the maran, nightwalker, huntress or whatever. Only when things were heavily swaying would I be forced to get involved, and generally I tried to be apologetic about it.

I suppose it is easier to justify taking aid from someone who has harmed you in the past as an evil than as a goodie. (mainly because goodies are far more black & white in their approach- you are not light means you are bad- sort of stupid if you ask me) Maran were notoriously stubborn, acolytes however you could engage and talk to. They would preach and try to convert. When I got booted, the acolytes all told me to try and become a member of the fort for example. If part of being good is seeing the chance for redemption in all people, that is part of the reason why as a goodie you do not wage war against nexus. Because they have within them the capacity for good or evil, and are motivated by both sides at one time. The narrow view is to see only the capacity for evil (while ignoring the other side of them) and base your entire view off of that. You struck the Maran once, die forever nexus scum! Yeah. That's really great Goodie RP.

If any cabal raids nexus and makes war on them, outside of Fort and to a lesser extent Tribunal, I don't think it is really much of a problem. Those cabals have agendas to follow that Nexus does not mesh well with (but at the same time they see the appeal in having the occassional ally when they are weak- and when they are strong they're not afraid of them so it's a win-win for them) Part of the Fortress idea though is to redeem as well as purge evil. If they take the view anything not goodie must be destroyed, they're just a flip side to empire and that is not really how most people see the cabal. Nexus is not inherently evil, but it takes an open mind to see it I suppose, and some people either can't, or more likely, just don't want to because of their own past experiences with the cabal. Anything can be justified or rationalized after all.

Basically, the nexus haters want CF to be team good vs. team evil, and that is just a bad approach that eliminates a lot of the intresting RP from the game.

####, I helped bring the cabal back too. We all thought we were bringing back Masters at the time. After everyone realized it was Nexus, there was a resounding "meh" on the boards.

Vhaile, Ixralleinda, a couple lowbies.

I've never been a big fan of the cabal unless it has good players playing in it. When there are crazy n00bs or just asshole players, Nexus becomes really really ####ty.

However, when you have good players playing Nexus, it can be a great cabal.

I hate the cabal for the same reason Lightmage does though. I was really hoping MASTERS was coming back and all we got was ####ing NEXUS

I still have trouble getting over that. It's all my fault. We should have won! Azilaph was never the same after that.

I, personally, believe how any char, even Maran, treat Nexuns, is up to them.

There will be a man in a grey cloak there to keep you from going too far, yes, but he will also be there to catch you when you start to spiral out.

Whoever said Nexuns will kill babies to balance out light did themselves and Nexus a disservice. Though this is a fantasy world, the archetype of a Nexun would combat the Maran, people who chose to dedicate their lives to fighting evil, or aid the villainous Empire, etc. They would not go out and kill innocent babies. They're a political entity, not a secret police.

DO i think there are Maran who can and should have zero tolerence? Sure thing. Could I think of Maran roles who could accept Nexus for what they are? Sure thing.

Battleragers will always consider Nexus their mortal enemies. Nexuns will always work to inhibit the Village - but if the Village suddenly disbanded, Nexuns wouldn't go out and get drunk on potions and cast a magic all day. They would have to find another way to keep the Veil from getting too thin.

My long winded summary is this - every char can chose how they treat Nexus. There is no right, no wrong - simply interpretations of roles WE ALL MAKE for our chars. We're making up a story about an individual, about why they do what they do and how they got there. If your char hates Nexus and has zero tolerence, well, that's because you wrote them that way.

I don't play Nexus myself because they aren't chaotic evil. They are true neutrals who cannot pk anything 95% of the time simply because there is all around balance.

That abuses Nexun's own dogma for their own advantage? It is almost entirely simple to use and abuse the #### out of them when you need them and avoid them when you don't. Fort character should be using them like unpaid mercenaries of questionable morals. Sure you aren't going to hang out with them at the pub, but you can sure as #### use them to strike down some evil when they volunteer to help you. The fact that they are working for the other side sometimes isn't that big a deal... Especially since you can pretty easily know when they are going to work for the other side.

You hate Nexus? Cool. Now go make a char to ruin the cabal.

Blaming the staff? Hah! You give them more credit than they deserve. Psst. They're not really omniscient gods.

The Balance guides the actions of a Nexan, they cannot do whatever they want like a chaotic evil does. Fort should treat Nexus characters just like it treats any other neutrals.

-When Light holds the sway over Balance, Fort members can treat Nexans like Fort vokers treat neutral Ragers or Fort dwarves treat neutral Outlanders.

-When Dark holds sway over the Balance, Fort members can treat Nexans like Fort dwarves treat neutral Ragers or Fort vokers treat neutral Outlanders.

Much of it should depend on the individual and how he behaves. It varies how aggressive Nexans are as a function of Balance shifting.

You keep falling into the same trap that it matters what they think. It doesn't matter what they think for themselves. As nepenthe has said many times over the years, it doesn't matter if you think you are good, hitler thought he was good, what matters is what you do. The fact is nexus is everyone's enemy, and always will be. People completely let their ooc acceptance of the illogic of the staff enforced system for nexus color their ic behavior. You "know" that nexuns are playing their roles, that it's a nexus thing, blah blah blah, so your char justifies it for them. But you would never do that ic. You would see them killing you and your friends or taking your cabal item and you would know them as your enemy. You would see that if you and your faction/cabal were to start winning, they would keep coming after you, and be your enemy, always.

The bottom line is there's no logic to the way things are now, it's just how the staff wants it for whatever reason. It makes no sense but it's their world.

I'm not having this argument again with you, either.

Has anyone but villagers had their item taken recently?

Every time I have seen Nexus kill an inner (excluding village), they only do it to free a held item and drop the inner's item. This is clearly not the same behavior as an enemy cabal.

I don't know how you play your Fortressites, but when I played Fort, I didn't kill neutral ragers, even though the ragers were hostile to me since I was a mage. They weren't evil, so they weren't hunted. From a Fort mage's perspective, Nexus is less of an enemy to you personally than Battle, as they aren't hostile all the time. There are many ways for Fort to interact with Nexus, not just your boring black and white approach.

The point is that Nexus would only be your enemy when your cabal is winning. When you are losing, they will in turn offer to fight on your side. If you suspect that a Nexan is hostile towards you at the moment, you may clash defensively. No-one is saying that you have to let yourself get jumped on. You could always be smart and ask Nexans how the Balance sways. A smart Nexan wouldn't lie to you about it as the loss of credibility would mean that you'd be hostile towards him all the time. It all depends on what happens between individuals and how things play out. However, you shouldn't make stupid generalizations about Nexus being your enemy all the time because that is not the case. Evils are the true enemy of Fort, not Nexus. If Empire is dominating, then Fort has other things to worry about than Nexus, that isn't currently doing evil things even if left unchecked, due to the state of Balance.

"You keep falling into the same trap that it matters what they think. It doesn't matter what they think for themselves"

I totally agree

"The fact is nexus is everyone's enemy, and always will be."

More or less correct (a fair number of nexuns won't make individual mages or the scion cabal enemies despite the moral balance but your statement is close enough to true)

The fact that you are missing is that the opposite is also true, Nexus is everyone's Ally, and always will be.


That fact leaves it open to every individual to make a decision about how to deal with people you know may be here to help you one day and out to get you the next. You know a group of people like that IRL? Lawyers... Do you believe that all lawyers should be hated and stoned Mr. Graatch because they are not always on your side?

Now when it comes to cabal relationships they are managerd by mortal leaders. There is a lot of percieved off limits policies that are not off limits. Any cabal can enter into a war with nexus and treat them as enemies at all times if their mortal leader gives the thumbs up.

You don't see fort do it because that is what the nature of fort is, The maran might be totally down for it but the acolytes certainly wouldn't be. Whichever group holds more sway in the cabal at the given time will dictate that policy so if you want fort to raid nexus, roll a fort and get leader and make it policy.

Nexus is NOT everyone's ally, and will NOT always be.

Whoever you are, you have a goal. The moment you start actually succeeding, nexus is your active enemy. And the more you get your way, the more they oppose you, until eventually they are literally exactly the same as whoever your other enemies were, because they choose to be. The more fortress does well, the MORE EVIL nexus must be. They WANT evil in the world. Always. Always. THere must always be evil in the world. And if there isn't enough of it, they will do more and more evil.

This isn't really an argument, it's simple fact. The staff just decides to have the cognitive dissonance on it because they've decided they want the game to work a certain way, which is their right. It's illogical and makes no sense, but it's a game dynamic they want, so there you have it.

Are you trying to say that all nexuns are evil?

Fort should always be at war with nexus?

Everybody should be at war with nexus?


You keep repeating the same fundamental point about nexuns (they fight against the side tipping the balance) and seem to address that fact as if the balance never changes and they never end up both helping out a guy one day and hunting them the next.

You also never state why having a cabal whose alliegance is in flux is neccesarily a bad thing.