Can a good-aligned invoker have to kill neutral mobs for a sleek?
Can a chaotic-ethos invoker have to break the law for a sleek?
Can a neutral-ethos invoker have to break the law for a sleek?

Can detect artifact fail to work for sleeks?

>Can a good-aligned invoker have to kill neutral mobs for a
>sleek?

Yes.

>Can a chaotic-ethos invoker have to break the law for a
>sleek?
>Can a neutral-ethos invoker have to break the law for a
>sleek?

Actually break Tribunal law, I don't think so. Do things Magistrates shouldn't do, yes.

>Can detect artifact fail to work for sleeks?

Sometimes.

>>Can a good-aligned invoker have to kill neutral mobs for a
>>sleek?
>
>Yes.

That seems very strange to me. Doesn't this mean that if you actually play your good alignment well that you can't get your sleek? I understand that a good aligned character can kill the occasional neutral mob, and that some roles might give you an excuse to mow down lots of them, but for the most part it is completely awful RP to be repeatedly killing neutrals for personal gain as a goodie.

Are the neutral mobs somehow thematically in the middle of doing something evil thus giving you an excuse to kill them?

>Actually break Tribunal law, I don't think so. Do things
>Magistrates shouldn't do, yes.

Hm. That's perplexing. Would you say killing guild guards/guildmasters in non-protected cities is something magistrates shouldn't do? I would say it's much more excusable RP-wise to do that than it is to kill neutrals as a goodie. I can't really think of anything a magistrate shouldn't do that isn't against the law and doesn't involve travelling with outlanders/criminals (obviously not relevant here).

>>Can detect artifact fail to work for sleeks?
>
>Sometimes.

Are there a circumstances where it will fail randomly? Or will it always fail in certain circumstances (like being a ghost)? Does skill percentage matter?

Does this mean that detect artifact is only good for telling you where your wand *is* not for where it isn't? Because if it's always unreliable, then you're obligated to kill everything you see anyway and it's not really useful except as a way to run through your list of known locations to see if you find it, and if you don't find it to then go back and kill every single mage mob in thera.

Murdering people in protected cities, but ones who aren't officially protected by the law (e.g. a street urchin).

>>>Can a good-aligned invoker have to kill neutral mobs for a
>>>sleek?
>>
>>Yes.
>
>That seems very strange to me. Doesn't this mean that if you
>actually play your good alignment well that you can't get your
>sleek? I understand that a good aligned character can kill the
>occasional neutral mob, and that some roles might give you an
>excuse to mow down lots of them, but for the most part it is
>completely awful RP to be repeatedly killing neutrals for
>personal gain as a goodie.
>
>Are the neutral mobs somehow thematically in the middle of
>doing something evil thus giving you an excuse to kill them?
>
>>Actually break Tribunal law, I don't think so. Do things
>>Magistrates shouldn't do, yes.
>
>Hm. That's perplexing. Would you say killing guild
>guards/guildmasters in non-protected cities is something
>magistrates shouldn't do? I would say it's much more
>excusable RP-wise to do that than it is to kill neutrals as a
>goodie. I can't really think of anything a magistrate
>shouldn't do that isn't against the law and doesn't involve
>travelling with outlanders/criminals (obviously not relevant
>here).

What this all boils down to is the fact that your character must make some choices. Is the wand more important than your morals? If you are a goodie, and you know an item of power you want very badly is being held by a child, do you kill the child or do you find another alternative?

Those whose roleplay is extremely shallow would probably kill the child or at least delete and complain about their wand location. Others who create more fulfilling characters might use the situation as a way to add depth to their characters.

As an aside, there are alternatives to sleeks. There are also alternatives to getting sleeks from a set location.

You will see a lot more of complaining and deleting than resolutions
around it. Which will just lead to the newbies dying and not being
willing to try a mage again. Then again, anyone that has been playing
for a while can find ways around it. (Yes, I realize it is easier
now that mages get their spell at 25 for shield). Part of the
learning curve I guess. Still not very newbie friendly. Or are you
stating that a newbie is likely to kill the child in this example
because they are new?

Honestly this surprised me that a goodie could have a sleek on a
neutral mob. Or a tribunal having to kill something in a town. I'm
sure you had the best intentions for it being this way, as you
stated. But I cant say I agree with the logic of this.

EX: An evil would be able to get any wand on any mob even if they
need help from others. Putting it possibly on a neutral mob for a
goodie is like putting it behind a locked door and no thief can pick
it. I don't see why goodie mages should be subject to this when
neutral or evil can easily kill the mob.

It is about as logical as a villager having to quaff a potion -
without the nasty side effects. There are other ways of giving
characters choices that are "hard" to see how they roleplay it. Like
fortress quests. ^_^

As a side note, I remember with my first hero fortress mage. I never
found my sleeks. I died about 73 times, with only 23 pks. If I had
found out my sleeks were on a neutral mob somewhere I would have been
so annoyed. Just saying.

Edit: I was wrong about the PK stats. They were worse than I remembered... lol
Total PK Wins 21 (18 at level 51)
Total PK Losses 77
Total Mob Deaths 37

>Or a tribunal having to kill something in a town.

If you mean protected city, then no they can't.

nt

goodies can kill neutrals
goodies can kill neutrals
goodies can kill neutrals
goodies can kill neutrals


baerinika paladins/fort members shouldn't kill neutrals

note that there are conditions on the goodies who should kill neutrals. It is not a rule that should be applied to all goodie roles and you people who can't understand that drive me freaking NUTS!!!!!!! Next thing you will be saying that villagers shouldn't eat seaweed.


if you happen to be playing one of those super floofi goodie roles that treats neutrals as untouchable and your wand winds up on a neutral mob then TOUGH LUCK!!! If your skill level doesn't allow you to compensate for that fact (either by having flexible RP or going without, and don't forget there is an edge to get a new location) then you shouldn't be playing roles with those kind of mechanical restrictions.

The point is, they shouldnt be forced to kill a neutral mob to get THEIR sleek location. It begs the character to break RP. As a goodie, you shouldnt kill a neutral unless you have a good reason.

Edit: It being your sleek location is not a good reason.

The idea of a minimum standard is that it is the most wide and accomodating.

you say
As a goodie, you shouldnt kill a neutral unless you have a good reason.

I say
As a goodie you should be fine with killing a neutral unless you have a good reason not to.

The crux of this disagreement comes down to weather or not you agree that the mere fact that someone is not evil is cause to leave them be. My argument is that the no kill clause specifically only applies to goodies which is distinctly different than not-evil. You need to be neutral and something else like a child, peace loving, a guard, or something else to qualify for the no go label.

Let's say I'm a goodie invoker. The mob is a neutral transmuter.

I ask myself, if that neutral transmuter person wanted a wand I had, would he hesitate to kill me for it? Sure he wouldn't.

So unless I'm total peace-loving hippie, who most good adventurers certainly aren't, I'm slaughtering him and taking my precious sleek wand! And there's no doing anything about it!

>The crux of this disagreement comes down to weather or not you
>agree that the mere fact that someone is not evil is cause to
>leave them be.

True or false:

An uncaballed neutral good elven invoker can hunt gnomish transmuters in tribunal for the sole purpose of getting gear, and they can do so as much as they want?

Is the only difference between good and neutral to you whether it's okay to kill good-aligned people?

Is this how you see alignment:
Evils can kill anyone for no reason
Neutrals can kill anyone for no reason
Goodies can kill any neutral or evil for no reason

That seems totally wrong to me. Haven't neutrals sometimes been turned evil for being rampaging murderers? Isn't this what people hate about gnomish air-offense shifters? That it's ####ty RP to be randomly killing people on a consistent basis as a neutral?

To me it goes like this:

Evils can kill anyone for no reason
Neutrals can kill evil or neutrals for no reason or goods with reason
Goods can kill evil for no reason or neutrals with reason, no goods.

Occasional exceptions for one-offs possible (like village elf defending/retrieving vs goodies, etc).

I'm fairly sure a few of the Imms have supported goods killing neutral npc's before, stating that it just would be too great a handicap for good chars if they could not. I don't think goods should rank on Gnomes or anything, but if they've got something you need, take it and put it out of your mind. It's simply shooting yourself in the foot if you don't.

P.S. - To me, PvP should go like this:
Evils can kill anyone for no reason.
Neutrals can kill anyone for a reason. Greed, pride, etc counts.
Goods can kill evils for no reason, neutrals for a good reason, and other goods for an exceptionally good reason(cabal raids, etc.)

You see. Honestly, I believe this is what sets aparts good RP from bad RP. Questionable decisions really are ment for neutral. To truly be good, you have to play good. Yes, your character may believe in other things but at heart if a character is truly good they shouldnt kill neutrals unless they have a good reason. Just as the Maran believe, do not become like your enemy unless the wrath you once called upon will be called upon you. It is evil to just kill neutrals. If your character has others factors in their RP (such as they are a villager) they might have exceptions.

But in my honest option it is not acceptable to kill anyone neutral unless they are doomg something evil (have a history of being evil). Unless they are a natural enemy.

This whole "it is okay to kill neutrals" in general makes you no better than a neutral alignment. Tell me how killing random people for no good reason is not neutral or evil? The maran may kill neutrals but they better have a good reason. Hell, if I hero immed I would put it to use for fortress. It is how good rp should be. Too many people want to do whatever the #### they want in a goodie outfit. It is really not an excuse.

This arguement really makes me want to become a Fortress IMM and change alignments. Seriously. Maybe I have a higher standard of good than others but damn. Killing IRL for no good reason is EVIL. How is CF any different?

>
>This arguement really makes me want to become a Fortress IMM
>and change alignments. Seriously.

You'd do that for a week, and then you'd be the empty cabal IMM.

Regardless. I realize that it is a game.
People just want to have fun. And apparently kill neutrals...

As far as game mechanics go, not being able to kill neutral mobs
would mean that goods would not be able to access a lot of gear.
Which breaks peoples fun sticks. PCs however shouldnt be killed for
no good reason as a goodie. As long as you can justify your reason I
think its perfectly acceptable. Especially if you justify it in
your role.

People play how they really want to anyway.
I dont really care all that much.
-Zephon

>goodies can kill neutrals

Only if they have a good RP reason to.

>freaking NUTS!!!!!!! Next thing you will be saying that
>villagers shouldn't eat seaweed.

No, because it's well-known that water breathing as a result of eating seaweed is a nonmagical effect. It's part of the physics of the game, so it's not breaking a rule. I was never in favor of villagers wearing magic-flagged items though.

>if you happen to be playing one of those super floofi goodie
>roles that treats neutrals as untouchable and your wand winds
>up on a neutral mob then TOUGH LUCK!!! If your skill level
>doesn't allow you to compensate for that fact (either by
>having flexible RP or going without, and don't forget there is
>an edge to get a new location) then you shouldn't be playing
>roles with those kind of mechanical restrictions.

It's not just super floofi people who shouldn't be killing neutrals. So what you're saying is the only people who should play serious (as in, care about being good to some extent) goodie roles are people who don't need sleeks? Guess what? Most people who play this game fall into one of two overlapping categories:

A> Someone who can't reliably get barrier.

Or

B> Someone who is competitive and experienced enough to get non-sleek barrier

Group A you think shouldn't play fortress or other actual good alignment roles and Group B is going to be too competitive to voluntarily play with a handicap. So who is going to play these roles?

>That seems very strange to me. Doesn't this mean that if you
>actually play your good alignment well that you can't get your
>sleek? I understand that a good aligned character can kill the
>occasional neutral mob, and that some roles might give you an
>excuse to mow down lots of them, but for the most part it is
>completely awful RP to be repeatedly killing neutrals for
>personal gain as a goodie.

Almost no good-aligned characters won't kill at least some neutrals. If the culture of the game shifts on this, the code will too. Right now it's hard for me to change it to accomodate probably 1 in 1000 good PCs.

>Almost no good-aligned characters won't kill at least some
>neutrals.

Well if that's true then, yeah the culture needs to shift. Basically, people shouldn't be treating NPCs wildly differently than they would PCs. If a PC good-aligned character routinely attacked a gnome shifter for no reason but gear, would you consider that okay? I'll venture that the answer is no.

Maybe the culture of the game currently says that NPCs just don't count, but not only is that lame immersion/rp wise it's not even true. Good PCs will get in trouble for habitually killing good mobs, for example.

There are some mobs that have neutral align that you can make obvious excuses for killing, like animals, or non-sentient beings (like the butler in the chessmaster's tower or various golems) or basically any non-good aggro mob. And the occasional neutral might be obviously doing something evil that you could excuse killing him for. But for run of the mill humanoid mages, no, there's no excuse for doing it on an ongoing basis.

It's perfectly reasonable to have a goodie role that supports killing some neutrals in some particular situations, like sunwardens beating on dwarves, but without a serious role-based reason, it's not a good-aligned thing to do to kill neutrals for personal advantage.

Depends on the neutral. Some are fine. Some aren't. Though, in the case of wands, I would imagine the neutrals that have sleeks probably aren't kosher. Since I can never find wands anyway, though, I can't speak for specific mobs.

Here's a stick.

This dead horse is 'goodies shouldn't kill neutrals'.

This was probably being discussed while you were still in middle or high school and the fact of the matter is no matter how much you lecture on the soapbox it'll always be a case by case basis. If this bothers you, don't play the game, or at least don't play roles that necessitate you witnessing goodies sinning like this.