once the Scales and Codex were secured be in the realm of acceptable or would he soon just find himself uncaballed evil.

I will answer it the best way I can. The improbable isn't impossible. RP and reason would determine it.

I don't get it.

gr

aasfarvgqerfgqe

I think you kind of get being a good Outlander, but neutral Outlander is a little lost on you and evil Outlander is utterly lost on you.

But if you're going to use logic...then it doesn't.

If you think for one moment that I have ANYTHING to do with loving nature, than you really don't get evil outlander or my religion.

But thinks he is an expert.

Unlike nep I wouldn't limit that just to understanding those in context of outlander.

I never said your Imm persona loved nature. I asked how you got to be the Imm of a Nature loving Cabal.

You don't fit. At all.

You need your own cabal/cult, I think you're terrible for the Outlander and it was, in my opinion better off when you were absent.

Nothing about Lyristeon synergizes with the Outlanders. There's nothing in your backstory, your behavior, any interactions I have had with you that says, "Hey, this guy belongs here."

If your IC reason for being in Outlander is to make people do things that go against the cabals stated goals then you keep right on trucking, but I think after this many years you should have done a reveal by now.

I get that you like saying, "You're wrong and don't get it", but that's wrong, I do get it. I get every aspect, and nuance of "IT".

What about Lyristeon = Outlander and not just some religion that revolves around griefing players?

I can' lie, I think this is a terrible character and wish it (Not necessarily you) was not a part of CF.

What part of anti-establishment/nihilism do you not get? Outlander is not Sylvan Warders. And seeing how we all know who your leader was, I can truly understand your not understanding "IT".

As far as I can tell he got leader because wardens went like 4 months without a leader (despite having like 10 active members) and Pro started to backtalk my nighreaver (while hiding like a little girl from him) which was the first time any warden had really tried to stand up to the reavers (aside from Pro's equally terrible invoker that also flat out didn't get inter branch dynamics) and as a result she made him leader. Then as soon as I delete the next evil outlander he had beef with was made nightreaver.

I kinda like the picking leaders to promote inter-branch rivalry idea but Amaranthes problem was that one of those leaders was pro. And pro is so utterly terrible at assessment all he can see is, he got leader once and therefore he thinks he will forever and always be the difinitive source on all subjects even losely related. You will never again ever be able to convince him of anything outlander related.

And Amaranthe pretty much brought in a clone with Azhelak, so who regrets what and who was right or wrong?

Not Amaranthe Auldr or Azhelak.

"Not Amaranthe Auldr or Azhelak."

I'd say it was absolutely those three.

Get rid of the fact that once you pledge that you can suddenly sense when animals/creatures are at home in the wilds.

Get rid of all the powers that correlate with being empathetic to nature and the natural order.

What does that leave you with after you do that Vandalize?

You're clueless.

and I don't know what leader you think I played, but the one I did play, knew exactly what he was doing and played the part quite well.

Perhaps you just don't understand what true leadership is?

You had 1 actual supporter in your cabal (Rostrak) and 1 player that didn't crucify how terrible you were (wrathpupper, who can't say a negative thing about anyone, he even gives jerry praise for his ass backwards villagers).

What is it like to live in your world? How do you tune out like 99.9999999999% of the feedback you get, like to you hear and dismiss it, just not read it, or honestly think every one on the planet is wrong except for you?

sdfbf

>Get rid of the fact that once you pledge that you can
>suddenly sense when animals/creatures are at home in the
>wilds.
That comes from abandoning the use of civilization and from living wild.
>
>Get rid of all the powers that correlate with being empathetic
>to nature and the natural order.
What powers do evil Outlanders have that do that? They can't even call beasts.
>
>What does that leave you with after you do that Vandalize?
They also burn civilization with ignite.
>
>You're clueless.
Seeing how everyone pretty much states you are usually very opposite of correct, I will take that as a compliment.
>
>and I don't know what leader you think I played, but the one I
>did play, knew exactly what he was doing and played the part
>quite well.
I am assuming the worst Outlander ever, Auldr.
>
>Perhaps you just don't understand what true leadership is?
Now I completely understand all of the Anti-Pro posts.
>

Evil Outlanders are immune to beastcall.

I just don't get how Lyristeon the Imm fits Outlander an what are these rules you spoke of, because I pretty much see Evil Outies doing what ever they want.

Really, I see ALL outies doing whatever they want, but there is literally no downside to playing an evil outie except for coins...which they have no need for anyway.

So again, to clear the record. I was speaking about Lyristeon the character not you the player.

Lyristeon and evil outlanders have much in common. They see any construct of law, rules and civilization as bad. The story line was the sylvan warders was too nature-focused and needed an edge to bring things back to it's natural state. That's where outlanders came in. It wasn't about nature anymore, it was about Thera (Thar-Eris) returning to it's beginning. The strong shall hunt the weak because that is how you make things stronger. People in general didn't survive because they were losers. They survived because they outsmarted the losers. So, the races of Thera are there because their ancient ancestors did whatever it took to "win" the right to reproduce and continue the line. In most cases, throughout any history, this required deception, wisdom and chaos. These people were the outlaws, murderers, thieves etc. Good never wins in history. There is always a dark side. I represent the primeval dark side. My religion thinks the nightreavers and orcs have it right. Nightreavers and orcs are very similar. The difference is that my nightreavers won't give coins to an establishment because they don't want to make them stronger. But, their attitudes "could" make them allies. And in the right situation, a nightreaver could aid the orcs in the destruction of types of civilization.

And aside from the fact that orcs aren't natural, that clears up why you chose them over the Duergar.

I appreciate it. I still hate your religion, but I appreciate tat you clarified the concept for me.

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=50&topic_id=6&mesg_id=9&page=

Which is why I always thought that was a weak in into the Outlanders.

Makes sense to me now except for one thing.

What happens to Reavers that say group with Necromancers or slaughter wild things wholesale?

You're still linking yourself to Nature gods. Sebeok and Amaranthe.

I am going to answer your questions to show you that it doesn't have to be nature oriented. The dead had their chance when they were alive. If they failed, why would any Nightreaver want to aid them? It would just make weaker things. I would expect my nightreavers to hunt them down so as not to bring about the losers. (Note* If a reaver used this as his reason why they hated undead, it would be accepted as a reason. If you used this reason as a warden, I would laugh at you.) I haven't run into a reaver who slaughtered wild things wholesale, but I remember a druid who slaughtered the fae in Emerald Forest. If they hadn't used OOC reasons to do such, I would have been fine with it.

But uhm...most of the Reavers rank in Emerald forest at one time or another.

Explain to me why Auldr thought ranking on frost giants was cool but ranking on storm giants wasn't?

That one strikes me more as being Sunwarden, and good aligned...therefore, don't kill my good aligned buddy storm giants. Evil doesn't really care if other evil dies, typically. Neither race really has a horse in the race as far as Outlanders go.

Because they 'aren't the true enemy', made by people who almost undoubtedly ranked on frost giants and ugruks.

Sorry this talk about Auldr has brought out old grudges, I'll leave this here, we all agree on the assessment of that character.

dbsdfbvsdfb

Frost giants, the fluff says, are primitive, don't live in civilized places. They can only be warriors or rangers. Storm giants, live in cities, have fish farms, can be paladins etc. Frost giant seems more outlander friendly than storm giant to me.

And so except when not defending the refuge, they were fair game.

Really? I've seen more thrown out of the cabal for this than I've seen doing it. Which isn't to say that will always get you bounced.

It's never resulted in an outduction and often resulted in an induction.

And aside from the fact that orcs aren't natural, that clears up why you chose them over the Duergar.

I appreciate it. I still hate your religion, but I appreciate tat you clarified the concept for me.

and on that subject, please tell me demonspawn shaman aren't allowed in outlander?

Demonspawn is one of my shaman paths, but you are correct. They will not be outlanders. Demons are from another plane and are not from Thera. APs use demonic/satanic forces and therefore are not part of Thera's beginnings.

I'm just saying.

Their lifestyle of living like a nightreaver has earned them my backing in the storyline just like the dwarves earned Amaranthe's backing.

...You remind me of one of our programmers working on a site for one of the sports leagues we deal with.

There was a bug on the leaderboard and I'm talking with them about it and they're like, "The scoring data they're sending us is wrong."

And my response was, "They're the authority on the topic, whatever they tell you is by definition right."

The same applies here, you're not going to tell Lyristeon what evil outlander is about any more than one of my programmers is going to tell a major sports organization the rules of their sport.

>Get rid of all the powers that correlate with being empathetic
>to nature and the natural order.
>

Which of those powers does an evil Outlander get?

deleted, don't care

Good outlanders = sylvan, more or less.
Neutral outlanders = part sylvan, part entropy.
Evil outlanders = entropy.

It's not quite that cut and dry but that's a lot closer than thinking that an evil outlander is all about nature. Evil outlanders are not about nature, they're anarchists.

Evil outlanders see things as "For Thera to be perfect, it should be in a state without rules or laws and only the strongest survive. I will be the strongest and do whatever it takes to make that happen." They do have guidelines that they have to adhere to because going against them makes the rules and laws stronger.

Why do evil outlanders have immunity to Outlander things like Beastcall? Why do they benefit from Empathy? Why do they see "At home in the wilds?"

If what he says makes sense, then what I said holds true. You need your own cabal/cult.

Lyristeon does not fit outlander at all.

And I think "Part Sylvan" for the harbingers is a leap, a leap in the wrong direction.

Lyristeon was involved with creating Outlander, so saying he doesn't belong as Imm of the cabal would be like saying Shokai has no business being in Maran.

Additionally, have you read the helpfile?

The Outlanders of Thar-Eris are a motley crew of wildmen, brigands,
barbarians, and freedom fighters who seek to spell the end of the pox
civilization has brought upon the world. Those who heed the call of
Thar-Eris walk many paths, from the cunning outlaw to the wily trickster
to the contemplative naturalist. None, however, follow the orderly path,
and those too closely linked to civilization or who wreak havok upon the
earth are hunted or shunned.

---------------------------

I don't know where from that you get that they *aren't* anarchists, it's spelled out really, really clearly.

"Why do evil outlanders have immunity to Outlander things like Beastcall? Why do they benefit from Empathy? Why do they see "At home in the wilds?"

Being familiar with nature doesn't make you a "nature lover" any more than a narcotics detective knowing about drugs makes them a drug addict. The fact that they can't use a lot of those powers should be the first clue that those aren't aligned with their beliefs and the second clue being that their powers are explicitly about doing anarchist types of stuff.

sdvsfv

I don't say this too often but there's something seriously wrong with your ability to read and comprehend and absorb what you're reading.

And I don't mean that in a sarcastic or mean way. I mean that literally - you and I are reading the same paragraph and I'm getting an interpretation that mirrors the author's opinion and the opinions of other people. Your interpretation however is not backed up anywhere in the actual words we're both reading together.

Given that being what it is, you can either beat your head against the wall trying to tell me that 2 + 2 = 5 or you can just take everyone else's word for it that it equals 4 and move on with life.

That you are making my point.

Read the paragraph again and step back. It supports exactly what I am saying Outlander is. A nature cabal.

There is nothing in it that says I am wrong. There is something in it that says I am right.

So again. Thank you for making my point.

What you posted

"The Outlanders of Thar-Eris are a motley crew of wildmen, brigands,
barbarians, and freedom fighters who seek to spell the end of the pox
civilization has brought upon the world. Those who heed the call of
Thar-Eris walk many paths, from the cunning outlaw to the wily trickster to the contemplative naturalist. None, however, follow the orderly path, and those too closely linked to civilization or who wreak havok upon the earth are hunted or shunned."

What Pro read

"The Outlanders of Thar-Eris are . ...... .... .. ........ .........
........... ... ....... ........ ... .... .. ..... ... ... .. ... ...
............ ... ....... .... ... ...... ..... ... .... ... .... ..
......... .... .... ...... .... ... ....... ...... .. ... .... ......... .. ... contemplative naturalist. ..... ........ ...... ...
....... ..... and those ... ....... ...... .. ............ .. who wreak havok upon the earth are hunted or shunned."

But the last sentence is all that you need to read to know that I am right.

It says it all and there is no arguing with it unless the Imms themselves say they don't mean it.

Which brings me back full circle. Why is Lyristeon an Imm in a Nature loving cabal.

is that outlander is both a nature cabal AND an anti-establishment cabal and that those 2 things are not the same.

Everyone is telling you that outlander is a peanutbutter and jelly saandwhich and you keep throwing your hands in the air saying, nuh-uh its a peanutbutter sandwhich! Can't you see the peanut butter! Just ignore that grape stuff between the peanut butter and the bread, obama obviously slipped that #### in there.

Another valid way to look at it is that they follow the ancient's, whose desire is to rid the world of the plague of civilization.

This might mean they love nature. This might mean they hate cities and law. This might be some combination in between.

The Maran seek to rid the world of evil. They contain paladins. That doesn't mean the Maran is a paladin-only cabal. It's impossible to be evil and nature loving at the same time - you can't be selfless and evil, the two concepts are inherently opposite.

To be evil, you have to put yourself first - thus the only way to band with other people in a cabal format at all is to either hate something that these other people also hate (outlander, village, tribunal) or as some kind of dark alliance (empire, scion). Evil outlander is based on hatred. Good aligned outlander is based on selflessness. Neutral is based on some rational middle ground between those two.

If they want to raise the anciets because they liked the recipie for ancient pumpkin pie, fine. But don't forget it's a nature cabal and that sets you apart from the other cabals.

If the Imms don't want this, they need to put that in writing or in C's history or whatever. They haven't, so their isn't any justifiable IC freason for seeing it this way. There are plenty of IC reasons to realize Outlander is a nature cabal.

Easy fix. Change the help file. Change the bark. until then. It's not Entropy...Something Lyristeon specifically told one of my characters years ago. And something Amaranthe herself stated.

"As long as it's connected to nature" is not mentioned anywhere - that's *YOU* saying that and *ONLY YOU*. It explicitly says "You cannot be orderly" and you must be "against civilization".

Which line would you change in the helpfile to convince you that Outlander is not a "nature lover only" cabal?

Show me where that is written though?

It's not. All Outlander material says it's a nature cabal. Period.

Nothing supports what you are saying except Lyristeon.

I get that he's the head honcho for the cabal, but theirs nothing that logically ties the Character Lyristeon to the Cabal. Period.

I kno you desperately want to think I'm stupid and oblivious but I'm not and I'm sorry to disappoint you.

So back to the original question.. Why is Lyristeon connected to a nature cabal? I've read all the material and those few ephemeral threads that link him to it don't really jive.

Wow...I'm speechless.

1) If you're trying to cover up the fact that you're not pro, you're failing miserably.

2) Selective reading isn't reading the entire thing. Just because they want to destroy civilization does not mean that they are nature loving. Just because they "shun" people who like to destroy nature does not mean they are nature loving. Nature loving means that they are nature loving. That's the beauty of RP and of a game where you can immerse yourself - there are various takes on what makes an outlander.

If you were to make the argument that Lyristeon does not embody ANY aspect of an outlander, there might be some coherent argument behind that. But you're saying that because Lyristeon is not nature loving, he shouldn't belong to the outlanders, which is extremely different.

Outlanders are NOT NECESSARILY nature loving. Seriously think about this for a moment.

And seriously, go back to making arguments 101. "I'm right because I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't make an argument. Just makes you seem "stupid and oblivious"

And you speak of arguments 101? I'm debating, not arguing.

I have a point to make and I'm going to make it. 1st rule of debate, never concede. Sorry man, them's just the rules.

The other 99 rules of debate talk about knowing your stance, knowing the opponents stance, having coherent and intelligent points, doing your background research/due diligence, preparing for the "debate", presenting the information in a way that people understand where you're coming from and what your point is, etc.

This isn't a debate. This is you being stubborn while following the "first rule of debate" without adhering to the other rules.

If you really want to make a point, before posting, take a moment to read over what you wrote, think whether it gets your point across and whether it's a necessary and a productive argument. Not something like "Tell us again why you are a nature loving immortal? I don't get it."

sdfvadsv

>I have a point to make and I'm going to make it. 1st rule of
>debate, never concede. Sorry man, them's just the rules.

But you don't win by repeating yourself when you're wrong and everyone but you believes you're wrong.

And so far, I'm really happy.

Its kind fair since he does not read anyone else's posts but constantly asks questions.

But I get it, you are trying to help out without things turning into a flame fest. And your job here is appreciated. ^_^

I'm just saying.

It's true.

I won here. I leaned something new.

(n/t)

I learn from everything.

Secondly, the sheer fact that you're so arrogant to assume you're clearly better than everyone else and proclaim such strongly speaks towards the opposite. Technically, I have a genius level intelligence and I can probably name a dozen players that I actually know that I considered as smart if not smarter than myself.

Between your refusal to accept any viewpoint beyond your own (despite an ASSORTMENT of different people agreeing otherwise) and your sheer arrogant, I would assume you're probably above average intelligence but hardly to the level you believe.

After all, the people who have it (whether it be money, skill, intelligence, etc) don't need to show it off.

I hope he doesn't ever have to sign any contracts in his life, he's going to get taken to the cleaners.

If a help file states something, you can consider it a law in the realm that is CF.

If you think I'm wrong then feel free to ignore the help files. as a practical exercise imagine CF without the structure we have. what would we have?

So again. I'm not stupid or naive or shallow thinking. Sorry to disappoint.

I said you are reading something and having a different interpretation of it than what's written warrants.

That doesn't make you stupid, it's a legitimate problem that people can have.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/misunderstoodminds/readingdiffs.html

"Comprehension Difficulties
Comprehension relies on mastery of decoding; children who struggle to decode find it difficult to understand and remember what has been read. Because their efforts to grasp individual words are so exhausting, they have no resources left for understanding.

Signs of comprehension difficulty:

confusion about the meaning of words and sentences
inability to connect ideas in a passage
omission of, or glossing over detail
difficulty distinguishing significant information from minor details
lack of concentration during reading"

I had asked a specific question. I did not get a specific answer which led to a long drawn out thread.

Eventually the question was answered. We can move on now.

You asked a loaded question by saying that Outlander was a nature loving cabal.

He just explained their is something else to it I had never known and that I honestly think most people never knew.

Loving may be too strong a word, but empathetic wouldn't be.

were bad for outlander and bad for the game. I know you were just doing what Amaranthe told you, but it was never meant to be a cabal with just one outlook and one direction like Empire or battle and your implementation sucked. You can't get over someone might have a different opinion than you, which is why you are still harping on this 9 months later and cling to having been a leader to try to make everyone else think your thoughts are right.

It is a bit amusing that two of the three most hated characters in CF this year were Sunwardens.

dfbgbb

nt

Just as an evil Battle player would be...

Not sure about an evil Tribunal, as far as I remember those had quite a bit more leeway, it being more of a job than a way of life. And furthermore the cabal philosophy says you can do what you like as long as it isn't against the law.

Nt

He is implying will he be outducted for constantly raiding the fortress(not putting orb in tree but rather orc village).

Once upon a time this would have been basis for out-duction for being focused on the wrong fight. Now, I don't really know anymore.

Are you an Orc or an Outlander?