>Is it illegal to retrieve from the spire.

From HELP LAWS:
4. Participating in an assault upon the Spire itself is considered a
criminal act. Specifically, this means striking at the Tribunal guardians or aiding others to do so is illegal, as is passing beyond the Tribunal outer guardians and into the Spire itself at any time. If you are standing at the entrance to the Spire without attempting to go beyond the guardian or harm members of the Spire, you may be warned to leave by a Magistrate, then you will be flagged if you remain beyond a resonable time required to obey. The only time an assault on the outer guardian of the Blood Tribunal is legal is if the Tribunal holds your cabals item of power.

>Its illegal to attack somebody but its ok to autoassist, how
>is tghat justifiable.

If a group attacks someone, everyone in the group is responsible and can be made WANTED (as long as they are in each others PK range)

>Can tribunals use guards to loot the corpses of non-criminals,
>if so must they return anything, can they use them when
>fighting at the spire against non criminals.

Within their Jurisdiction, yes. If they don't return your things, they are breaking the law. From HELP LAWS:

1. Murder, Theft and Looting in a protected city are against the law. This includes looting the pit of equipment that is not your own. You will be held responsible for your groupmate's actions.

>The law says no-offensive area powers in protected areas, mind
>rewording that to include songs, as cold be sleep falls into
>that realm.

We'll see.

>ok so only vidicators hunt outside the city, and sometimes
>justicares, why then are magistrates expected to hunt people
>outside the city, why should they even care as long as the
>criminals stay away from the cities.

Vindicators hunt outside the city. Justiciars and Magistrates are not expected to. They can, but are not expected to.

>Is tribunal ever going to be more order orriented, in reality
>they have nothing to do with order just maintaining laws and
>protection.

Maintaining the laws isn't orderly? A specific chain of command isn't orderly? Feel free to explain more...but Tribunal IS about order.

>why can tirbunals manacle and guardcall as ghosts?

After some recent changes, they can't.

>why is it special guards and conscripts can see camo, yet
>through truesight tribunals cannot? The leaders should be
>better trained then the hired help I would suspect.

Because they were designed that way.

>I always thought it would be cool if the guards from the
>cities were all a little different. Like seantryn guards
>could be minotaurs or something, and actually do minotaur
>things, this would make guards in cities other then galadon
>more powerful and interesting especialy cause these other
>cities usualy have fewer tribunals on duty.

A couple ideas like this have been floating around.

>Anyways good job drunsthol I like seeing an imm take on a role
>like yours, not so touchy feely, a very resbonsible sensible
>no #### kind of thing, but you still get actively involved, no
>matter what anybody else says props to you for bringing some
>diversity to immteraction.

Thanks, hope the response helped.

the nt ment no text, don't read me!!!!

Seems Zaklotel and Oblain are just targetting villagers now, just for the hell of it. That's fine, but they are never "off duty", now that they are vindicator and justiciar. Do they get reined in or it's no problem?

Is it "looting" to take stuff from a corpse at the request of the person whose corpse it is?

I would say no. However, I have been flagged for this in the past. (Note that my current character is not affected by this, so I am not trying to rid myself of a flag.) But I was flagged for grabbing my groupmate's stuff when he was pk'd in Galadon, and then he was flagged for being in my group and asking the tribunal to remove my flag. This was by a neutral tribunal and was backed up by another neutral tribunal.

I have even seen a log of someone grabbing a tribunal's disarmed weapon and handing it to them (and not after a long delay) being flagged for it.

I really hope that looting gets changed to become "robbing the dead", and that it is made clear that taking from the dead to return items to the dead person is not robbing them.

Also, I would like to second the query about whether a tribunal is entitled to keep the stuff from a non-criminal victim's corpse when they die in the city, as I have had this done to me as well. The tribunal looted my corpse with guards, and then said that the stuff wasn't mine anymore since I'd died, which sort of defeats the whole anti-looting rule.

Finally, any chance that you can make it so that tribunal guards don't spam yells when standing next to a criminal ghost? I've had people con'kill themselves on guildguards. Each time I made them wanted, my special guards started spamming yells, but couldn't harm them.

It is rather up to each individual tribunal. This is one of the points where a tribunal actually has a choice. (much like in how much eq to return to a fallen criminal).


Is looting defined as "taking items from a corpse" or "Taking items from a corpse with the intent of keeping it" ?


The problem comes....say...when some poor sap is killed in town, and the magistrate witnesses 4 out of pk lowbies loot everything before he can order his guards to get anything.


The problem with what you propose, is that every single one of them (without fail) will claim that they are taking the items in order to give it back to the fallen person. Unfortunately, it is my long experiance as arbiters and tribunals...that this is actually the case aproximately 1 time out of a hundred times that it is claimed to be true.


The whole question is of the word "Intent".


Some good tribbies will NOT flag a tranny who hastes a groupmate when the groupmate forgot to put up trustgroup.....because the intent wasn't to break the law, Others will place the flag, because the LETTER of the law was broken. And in the past I have been told by leaders and imms of both arbiters and tribunal that both judgements can be correct.


If I see 4 chars in their teens loot a hero who dies in town. I am more apt to just flag them all and try to kill them fast with my guards.....than to ask each of them to tell me honestly what his intent was for taking the items....giving them all a chance to run to a place to stash the items incase they are wanted...so they can keep it anyway.


In short, I don't believe that everything should be spelled out to the point where an automoton or mob can do the magistrates job. I like the fact that there are a few points that are nebulous and up for interpretation by the magistrate on duty.




"Death awaits ya all, wit nasteh big pointeh teeth!"

Picking up your companions possessions is not robbing the dead.

Military personnel are not taken to military court for collecting dog-tags.

>Its illegal to attack somebody but its ok to autoassist, how
>is tghat justifiable.

>If a group attacks someone, everyone in the group is responsible and >can be made WANTED (as long as they are in each others PK range)


On the flip side, what if you group was attacked by someone and the group member autoassists. Should that groupmate be made wanted? This has happened to my character a few times and always wondered about it.

>>Its illegal to attack somebody but its ok to autoassist, how
>>is tghat justifiable.
>
>>If a group attacks someone, everyone in the group is
>responsible and >can be made WANTED (as long as they are in
>each others PK range)
>
>
>On the flip side, what if you group was attacked by someone
>and the group member autoassists. Should that groupmate be
>made wanted? This has happened to my character a few times and
>always wondered about it.

If a group is attacked by a person, only the person who initiated the attack is a criminal. If a group is attacked by another group, the group who initiated the attack are criminals.

>If a group is attacked by a person, only the person who
>initiated the attack is a criminal.

Furthering on this, if a group is attacked by a person, but the groupmembers do not auto-assist, but then attack by means which are not auto, such as casting a spell, or doing some kind if attack to initiate combat.. are they flaggable as criminals even then, since their group was attacked? or does it require them to do an 'autoassist' and be drawn into the combat to be able to fight?

I thought that tribunals only gave back which items were appropriate, depending specifically upon how often the criminal in question had been a criminal.
Has this changed with the Spire's recent changes? Must ALL be given back? Including weapons?

>I thought that tribunals only gave back which items were
>appropriate, depending specifically upon how often the
>criminal in question had been a criminal.
>Has this changed with the Spire's recent changes? Must ALL be
>given back? Including weapons?

It is up to the individual what to return. Weapons are typically taken as a form of punishment. However if the Tribunal in question has looted a non-criminal's corpse, they must return it all else they are guilty of breaking the law.

The Vindicator help file says its never illegal to attack one, does that include within a protected city?

I would suggest re-reading the helpfile a little more closely before testing that one out.

Yeah, seems my eyes missed the second half of that sentence. Thanks.