What exactly is fun/fair about tribunal right now? I mean you commit a crime when no one is on. Five minutes later a trib logs on and wants you, (something that used to be against the law back in the day ) then the out of range vindicator flyto ####s your world up. WORD? Feel free to delete if its flamish, discuss if its not.

Your biggest complaint with Tribunal seems to be that they are strong right now (possibly the strongest they've been in the last decade since the Arbiter days), with lots of active members, a Provost, 2 Vindicators, and a Justiciar. This is a very bad time to break laws, as the chances of you getting away with literal murder are pretty low.

For most of the playerbase, this is a good thing as safe cities give newer players and rp-intensive chars a chance to avoid bloodshed. Habitual or impulsive criminals just need to be mindful of the consequences that breaking the laws will bring, as they are clearly stated in the helpfile and enforced with only one punishment... death. If you are careful with how you break the laws, and know how the legal system works, you can greatly improve your chances of getting away with a crime.

Tribunal gets raped like wet tissue paper everytime that happens. Even the paladins, and the air shifter and transmuter (which is the two dudes that give them the most of their power right now) will instantly become pathetic and useless for the majority of fights.

It's funny as ####, too everytime it happens. Both sides bitch up a storm about laws and parity. Tribunal loses a ton of CON, village loses no more CON than usual.

War on Tribunal for protecting mages more openly than any other cabal and keep it permanent.

"I have to admit I hate pretty much all of these ideas. " - Nepenthe, on New Ranger Skills

I brought this up on the unofficial board. They don't exercise common sense. I can understand a lawfully evil tribunal adhering to the letter of the law exactly in almost a prickish way, but you would think that a lawful good might have some benevolence in him when it comes to people defending against themselves.

I was recently wanted by a lawful good tribunal for defending myself (I was a low level invoker at the time) against an orc. The only way that this DISMEMBERING and MASSACRING Orc could be beaten was by taking advantage of his wimpy. If it weren't for this fleeing, he could've slaughtered the whole party.

Either way, I defended myself, caught the flag for initiating combat (even though he started it in the middle of the market), which is ultimately a death sentence at any level besides hero or someone who can camo.

I'm not expecting any changes, and I just wanted to voice my opinion. I've already been badgered enough on the unofficial forums for "not knowing the laws" despite having an Arbiter in another life. I just think that maybe there should be some sort of Castle Doctrine where if you're attacked in town, you have the right to respond with deadly force for up to 5 minutes without consequence.

There is a point where defending yourself, becomes striking at them, and taking law into your own hands.

>Either way, I defended myself, caught the flag for initiating
>combat (even though he started it in the middle of the
>market), which is ultimately a death sentence at any level
>besides hero or someone who can camo.

I've kept flags indefinitely with low-mid level characters with no concealment power many, many times, FYI. Lots of people do. (Indefinitely = until I die in some way that in no way involves Tribunal or guard mobs.)

I've done this several at times as well, i.e. kept flags at low/mid levels, and I'm likely two or more orders of magnitude a worse player than you, Daevryn.

That being said, this complaint is originating because currently there are a lot of strong and active characters in the Tribunals, and the ability of a lower level character to survive is dependent in part on the willingness or lack thereof of the justiciar and provost to chase him down. Current set up has a lot of active, dutiful characters with strong allies that are willing to invest a lot of effort in chasing and locating low level characters. I've had warriors wanted for 30 or 40 hours and never seen anyone chase after them, but the current climate is different. I've no doubt it would be still possible to survive, but it would be a major effort requiring many teleport potions, etc.

I guess the question is, are there any people who are currently keeping wanted flags in the mid levels indefinitely? I don't think there's anything wrong with both numbers and skilled players making a cabal stronger than usual, but I don't think it's likely one could last long in the tribunal prime time these days without concealment.

As someone coming back from a 6 year break from CF, and finding that I have to relearn basically everything from level 20 onward, I am very intimidated by a (WANTED) flag because I don't think I could survive as easily as you. (mainly, I dunno where to go for food outside of the galadon butcher, heh)

You learn a lot of that stuff if you play an Outlander-aimed character that can't make their own food.

(Alternately, you could ask existing Outlander PCs for advice on this, if it's not anathema to your character.)

getting wanted is really not a big deal. instead of sitting idle in cities you find somewhere else and accept the fact that walking through some areas may be a little more time consuming. If there is a vinidicator then other things become tougher but as long as you can beat them straight up shackles isn't a big deal.

My highlight with drovis was killing people steps away from the provost and 2 provincials and getting away with it, multiple times as mid level. I mean ohh no worse that happens is you get wanted and die and lose a little gear and get a lil xp hole, just more time to pk before you advance through the ranks in my book.

With two air shifters, one being the vindi, you are screwed even if you can camo.

Bryan

A skilled vindicator changes that quite a lot. At least if you still wants to funktion normally and not hang around in xvarts lair the entire time you are logged on. For example a wanted level 30 rager warrior will have a boring time if the wrong type of vindicator is on.

I can understand a lawfully evil tribunal adhering to the letter of the law exactly in almost a prickish way, but you would think that a lawful good might have some benevolence in him when it comes to people defending against themselves.

You are allowed to defend yourself. Once the attacker breaks off the fight, though, pursuing him and re-initiating the combat is beyond "defending yourself", unless you've been deputized. The law is clear on that, and the cabal is based around Order. Can't complain about Tribunals making the correct calls, and it doesn't reflect poorly on their "common sense".

Re: Castle Doctrine: If someone breaks into your house, you can defend yourself. If that person retreats out of the house, and you hunt them down and shoot them, good luck avoiding jail even if you thought they were going to attack again.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>You are allowed to defend yourself. Once the attacker breaks
>off the fight, though, pursuing him and re-initiating the
>combat is beyond "defending yourself", unless you've been
>deputized. The law is clear on that, and the cabal is based
>around Order. Can't complain about Tribunals making the
>correct calls, and it doesn't reflect poorly on their "common
>sense".
>

In this particular instance, one of us was going to die, unless we used his weakness to drive him off. He was hitting so hard, a single bash and a lucky round would've ended any of us. Arguably, I wasn't going to die, because I had teleport and managed to flee rather quickly. However, I felt obligated to my group since he saw me on the Eastern road and initiated combat against me and that dragged my groupmates into it.

This is just one of those instances when Tribunal doesn't have enough information about the incident, and would rather flag everyone so they have someone to hunt (and not think). I would have guessed that a orderly goodie might have thought "Ok, 1 Orc, at least 4 levels above the highest person in the group, attacks a group of 3 in town... and dies for it. Looks like a warning and a 'Justice has been Served' is in order." Instead he was in our room within 4 rounds of combat with 2 guards to quickly dispense "justice" which looks more like a 'order all get all corpse;order all put all Tribunal donation pit' to me.

The orc simply hit too hard to reactively fight him once he initiated it. He gambled and lost, but he dragged us all into it, and I suffered also because he chose to do it in town.

I think what you did is perfectly justifiable as, say, a good character.

But that doesn't make what you did lawful. At best, it makes you a smart vigilante. Feel free to dress yourself up like Batman as a consolation prize.

.
"I have to admit I hate pretty much all of these ideas. " - Nepenthe, on New Ranger Skills

But he's not Dr. Strange either, so there you go.

This is just one of those instances when Tribunal doesn't have enough information about the incident, and would rather flag everyone so they have someone to hunt (and not think).

And despite your claims, the Tribunal called the scenario correctly, and flagged according to the law. I'd argue he or she had enough information and forethought, based on the results.

We'd have far, far more complaining if Tribunals flagged people based on what "feels like" a crime, instead of enforcing the laws as written. This whole incident, as presented, is merely evidence of a competent Tribunal doing their job correctly.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

nt