If you attack someone who is attacking the captain of the guards, are tribunals allowed to kill you or flag you for it? Are tribs allowed to attack you in the tribunal hallway if you are fighting people raiding tribs?

They sure are.

I'd like to see tribunal more into cabal wars and less into being a nuisance. It's tiresome to keep a running tab of anyone who may have ever had the word magistrate next to their name in the off chance I need to kill someone in town. If a magistrate's not in town the town isn't protected. Get the magistrates out there taking cabal items and killing people in their PK range instead of reducing the violence in the most common places in the game. *shrug*

>I'd like to see tribunal more into cabal wars and less into
>being a nuisance.

>Get the
>magistrates out there taking cabal items and killing people in
>their PK range instead of reducing the violence in the most
>common places in the game. *shrug*


The very ic, rp PURPOSE of tribunal isn't to dominate other cabals, though. It's to make certain places (that ic have asked for help) more peaceful.

The change you are proposing is to turn tribunal into "empire lite".

There is a REASON Tribunals are usually prevented from taking other items.

If they were to be constantly taking the head/scepter/orb/codex, then they would be INCITING those ragers/scions/maran/imperials to come to town and break the peace.

HOw would that be following the IC purpose of the Tribunal, which is to help the citizens of those cities maintain peace...because the citizens of those cities ASKED for help maintaining peace.


Let's look at it IC, from the perspective of the Galadon town council...


Let's say my neighbor's a cop. There are some kids in the neighborhood that like to tp my house. So I ask him to help me keep the kids from doing that.

So, the cop goes into their houses, and beats up the parents of every kid in a 3 mile radius.

yeah.....that didn't make my house safer much, did it. it probably put a huge ####ing target on my house.

Actually I think most Galadonians view tribunal much the same way most American view cops, as a necessary nuisance. They're necessary in that they capture murderers and stuff but they're a nuisance because they sit around most of the time handing out speeding tickets. In the CF world an attack in galadon is essentially the same as speeding, whereas the Scion of Thera is the serial rapist/murderer. As a citizen I'd much rather they spend their time dealing with Scion than handing out speeding tickets.

I disagree with this statement

most American view cops, as a necessary nuisance.


Just about as vehemently as I can.

Maybe if you said "Most immature Americans" or "Most Americans under 25" or "Most single Americans" or "most liberal Americans".....just Maybe.


and if you must never have known anyone killed by a punk kid speeding who lost control of his car, if you......


As a citizen I'd much rather they spend their time dealing with Scion than handing out speeding tickets.

......

I thank god every time I see a speed trap that there are people out there willing to do that boring ass job and sit there and wait for stupid people to drive by.

I willingly thank the cop for being out and doing his job whenever I am pulled over (the last three times for a headlight out, a taillight out, and a mistaken identity looking for someone else in a similar make/model)


you know what, sure, we all would like cops to be busy out there stopping rapists and murderers. But if some punk kid thinks it is cool to drag race down your street and causes your car to flip into a house, catching on fire.....you are just as dead as if you fell into the clutches of the next Dahlmer.





so.....I guess that shows the basic reason why I like playing tribunals, and some people want tribunals to go away. It's a basic personality difference. I respect those who put their lives on the line and do boring work that keeps me safe. Others like to break laws (that they see as insignificant) and thus resent the people who might catch them doing it instead of going after the "REAL" criminals.

Nice... straw man + won't someone think of the children! + liberals + an underhanded personal attack. I give you one and a half troll points.

Speed traps almost never target kids drag racing down residential streets. They target the people going slightly faster than the speed of traffic on major highways. People who, while sometimes annoying, generally aren't very dangerous. Sure, sometimes they snag the douche going 110 down that same highway, but that's not where the kids are drag racing... Speed traps are revenue producers and little more. Statistically speaking they don't save lives. Anyone who thinks otherwise isn't paying close attention.

Of course, arguably the tribunal works in the same way... snagging those out of range criminals is a great way to boost the revenue/gear for the spire.

nt

It's boring to be forced to be parked on your ass in town. If you're like me, you start sitting in Market Square begging for someone to prep up and actually attack you.

If you're not in the cabal, you are either the victim of, or observing Tribunal spending the majority of their lives chasing down people that will never be in their PK range in their lifetime. More often than not they are not fun to fight against, in fact they are downright annoying and come off more as bullies with gigantic e-peen than anything, especially when they are placing flags solely on the virtue of 'logging in just in the nick of time' and usually very often catching the wrong person in the act in the first place. Furthermore, Tribunal healers/transmuters are very rarely about saving lives rather than punishing criminals, which begs the question of why isn't the cabal actively trying to *prevent* crime by doing anything other than murdering people, such as ordering special guards to rescue victims via aliases, haste, flight, invis, word of recall, sanc, healing, etc.

Much like speeding traps, only people blinded by the prestiege of law enforcement or placing the value of safety over freedom and rights, don't see that the traps are generally useless and annoying. Even I drive by speed traps every day seeing some poor bastard pulled over on the side of the road and think to myself 'They deserved it.' when in reality, I know better that it's just the beginning of a ####ty day for whoever it was being pulled over and that they would never have killed someone to begin with.

You need to think about the funstick of the people whose actions are restricted in the cities, who are going to get an EXP hole anyway and once flagged there is no recourse besides death to force the Tribs to get rid of the flag, and furthermore being flagged because you attacked a Justiciar while he was chasing a lowbie outside of a city just sucks royal ass when every non-trib related mob in the game harrasses you, some of which are very dangerous with lagging moves and gear-destroying moves.

I wouldn't mind the exp hole on wanted flags if you could remove the flag by taking the Scales or killing the issuing Tribunal enough times, or losing the exp hole altogether. None of these things has anything to do with the competency or lack thereof of the people in the cabal, rather competent people only make these flawed and honestly assholish controlling prickish attitudes inherent in these one way mechanics are more apparent. None of this even has to do with Outlander. 'Don't get wanted' is not an option when the person you want to kill is guildsitting and you're below level 30, and ultimately restricts the amount of PK action that happens on the MUD severely because it's so freaking huge now.

>It's boring to be forced to be parked on your ass in town. If
>you're like me, you start sitting in Market Square begging for
>someone to prep up and actually attack you.
>Furthermore,
>Tribunal healers/transmuters are very rarely about saving
>lives rather than punishing criminals, which begs the question
>of why isn't the cabal actively trying to *prevent* crime by
>doing anything other than murdering people, such as ordering
>special guards to rescue victims via aliases, haste, flight,
>invis, word of recall, sanc, healing, etc.

Because that's not what the cabal, in its purest form, is about.

Odirig sounds like he's ready to run for office.

Speed traps generate revenue. They also make the police look like they are doing something useful. If driving above the speed limit (and I'm not talking about the example of the guy going 110 or drag racing kids) were such a life threatening crime, judges and prosecutors wouldn't let us amend the tickets down to non-point, non moving violations for an increased fine.

Use the street I live on for example. A long stretch through with no stop signs or lights. Very popular for people getting to work in the morning. Myself included, complain along with my neighbors about dumbasses going sixty through a residential neighborhood down this street, which only usually occurs between 4p.m.-12a.m. Guess what time they set up their little ####ing speed trap? 7:30a.m.-9a.m. When people are going to work and driving 5-10 over. Really? They're saving lives? They bite my taint and the prosecutor agreed with my complaints when I was chatting with her about it. A lot of cops are douchebags, just like a lot of tribs

Please, save my life from the guy that double parked!! He might slaughter my entire family with his reckless abandon and incosiderate parking habits.

Jesus christ man, get a grip.

>
>so.....I guess that shows the basic reason why I like playing
>tribunals, and some people want tribunals to go away. It's a
>basic personality difference. I respect those who put their
>lives on the line and do boring work that keeps me safe.
>Others like to break laws (that they see as insignificant) and
>thus resent the people who might catch them doing it instead
>of going after the "REAL" criminals.
>
>

Two additional items:

1) Your argument here is that Tribunal, in its current focus, is boring to play. I don't necessarily agree with you, just wanted to point that out to you in case you hadn't realized you said it.

2) I'm not suggesting tribunal stop handing out speeding tickets at all, just boosting the focus of the cabal more towards cabal wars and PKilling (outside of protected cities of course).

When the scales get taken, all law should be off.
Let the Outlanders actually be able to bring chaos.

When the scales are gone, no one should be able to be warranted... and laws should say that no one can be flagged later for crimes commited when scales are gone.

Possibly have city guards become dejected and not attack criminals, but deffinatly no flagging or special guards if they can have them(forget if they can have guards without scales).



NO FLAGS WITHOUT SCALES
Or, get rid of it. With more people playing WoW instead of mudding nowadays, not having tribs would bring a lot more fighting back to the game. Some of the most fun times are those 10-15 minutes of chaos as tons of fights break out in Galadon, and is then quickly squashed when 1 tribunal comes on.

Also, there are two order cabals. It'd do the game good to funnel the people who are playing tribunal into the other cabals as again, less people mud in general and CF only gets bigger.

>Also, there are two order cabals. It'd do the game good to
>funnel the people who are playing tribunal into the other
>cabals as again, less people mud in general and CF only gets
>bigger.

Wow. This is among the first times I've heard of there being "too many" Tribunals and they they need to start playing other cabals. Yeesh. Nep, how about a total numbers per cabal post to show how the perception rarely adds up. (I'll be shocked if Tribunal is actually as high as some of the others.)

Then again.. how many cabals currently have active leaders?

Noldruk

There was one point where there were 21 Outlanders and 35 Tribunals. But, out of those 35 Tribunals, there were five or so who weren't around consistently. Now there are 32 with 5 not being around consistently. The difference are the levels of the members of the cabals. When Tribunals had their really strong run, and they are still pretty strong now, they had a lot of heroes.

Right now, there are 37 Outlanders with a decent amount of hero range players. When Outlander only had 21 players, there were only a handful of heroes and most of them didn't stick around very long when they got there.

I know more than a few people who would stop playing cf forever if the option of playing a law cabal character was taken away.

Just like there are more than a few people who would stop playing if anti-law was taken away (there was a playerbase hit when sylvan went down, before outlanders came back)

just the same for anti-magic people.

Just the same for mage people. (hit in playerbase when nexus and warlocks died, and no other mage cabal was present)

To get rid of tribunal, you'd need to make empire take neutrals, if not goods. There are too many orderly roles that don't fit empire(even evil ones) to require all orderlies to go empire.

I have a feeling this post is more of a result of ic frustration that your characters have to deal with other characters trying to stop them, so cf can be better for you, than any real desire to cf better for everyone.

"There are too many orderly roles that don't fit empire(even evil ones) to require all orderlies to go empire."

The only guilds orderlies can't get into is Outlander and Nexus.

Counting Scarab, that leaves 7 cabals for orderlys to join.

There is one Neutral cabal. There is one "chaotic" cabal. People are going to quit playing the game because there are not two orderly cabals?

edit: and i've never played a character that is directly opposed to tribunal, nor does my current have any issues with them

For orderlies, you are using "can get into the cabal"

for neutrals and recusants, you are using "is specifically designed for my align."


Of course, if you use two different measuring sticks, you will come out with a wide disparity, nomatter what.

Last time I played a rager, Orderlies could not be Villagers. That might have changed. So that's two or three that Orderlies can't be.


Let's look at neuts and recs the way you looked at orderlies.

The only cabal neutrals can't get into is tribby. (they can oath and turn orderly for empire)

The only cabal recusants can't get into is ...tribby.

Ok, take away the oath. And Neuts and recs have the exact same number of cabals they can't get into as Orderlies do.

Oh, and Scion? They can be orderly? As far as I know, no. oh, well, Just checked, I guess so. News to me, every single one that I have met (that I can remember anyway) tries to act Recusant, or even straight chaotic.


Let's look at orderlies the way you looked at neuts and recs.

There is one Orderly cabal. Sure, empire is orderly, but you have to admit, it is EVIL first. orderly second.


Let me go so far as to say, there is one "law" cabal. There is one cabal designed around enforcing order.

Sure, you can be orderly and Maran. Or orderly and scion. But in those cases, the ethos is more of an after-thought...something to flesh out how your character goes about doing what the cabal is all about...which has nothing to do with order.


Let me go even furthor.

Tribunal is the only cabal that focuses only on ethos.

Empires are about evil...in an orderly way.

scions are about eaeeeeviiiiil.

fort is about rainbows and lolipops and righteous vengeance-filled asskicking of the damned.

outlander is about anti-establishmentarianism and self sufficiency.

nexus is about magic/nature/good/evil/order/chaos

ragers is about kil duh wiser...wizz...wheez.........mage.


*ONLY* tribunal is focussed only on Ethos. Which is a good thing not only for the ethos it promotes, Orderly, but the ethos it fights against.

There would be no reason to actually remove Tribunal outright from the game. Especially at it's strongest.

But people not being able to flag while the scales are gone would actually, you know, make there be a tangible benefit to taking them. As it is right now, even if they don't have the scales they can still make your life a living hell. If people couldn't be flagged WANTED by taking the scales, and, even better, current WANTED flags get cleared when the scales are taken, people would have a tangible benefit for fighting against Tribs outside of Outlander and putting them in their place.

It also means Tribunal can serve their purpose of preventing lowbie PK on the whole. If you want people to stop dying in your jurisdiction, go retrieve.

I'd even say with that kind of limitation it'd justify the 50/50 chance of getting re-flagged after killing the outer. Then you can simply take the raid further, kill the Executioner, and your flag is cleared. Their recordbooks are cleared because they lose their power, their right really, to uphold law in the land.

That kind of power hit for losing the Scales would entirely account for their ability to harrass out of PK players and would also entirely account for the fact that they serve the game balance to an extent that they are partially existent for OOC game balance purposes rather than entirely IC. Trying to argue that the power hit they take is fine as it is, is outright delusional. They should take a *greater* power hit for losing their item because of their OOC role for game balance and their ability to prevent mobile recall out of range, not a lesser power hit than every other cabal in the game. At least they keep their special guards.

compared to raiding other cabals.

Normally, one of the very tangible reasons for raiding an opponent is to deprive them of their powers until they recover. When they do, things are back to the status quo.

Because Tribunals can't shackle non-wanted characters, nor can they attack non-wanted enemies in protected towns, their players have a strong OOC motivation to search for any reason/excuse to flag whenever they can, for only then do they have powers beyond the considerably powerful vigilance.

This creates a really strange scenario in the current setup: as a Tribunal, you would actually DESIRE non-wanted people to take the scales, because after you regain them your cabal would have access to more powers than it did prior to the raid. Similarly, you would be motivated to camp out on your home turf in the hopes that your enemies would attack you there, as their new wanted status increases your power. Conversely, if you want the advantage in fighting the Vindicator, you need to stay unwanted.

In sum, if it is accurate that the Blood Tribunal is in place to give lowbie newbs a modicum of safety, then I posit that the Outlanders and their anti-order mandate were created to keep Tribunal entertained, for in no other cabal war I can think of are is one side actually discouraged from taking the item of the other cabal.

Idea Plug:
1. give tribunals more power outside of their cities
2. give other cabals true incentives to raid the Spire
3. look at current tribunal powers and see how they might be adjusted to make things more interesting for all partiers.*

*It's Friday, and what are parties without partiers?

If you make tribunal lose more when they lose the scales, and, if you give other cabals true incentives to raid the spire.

Then you need to get rid of the fact that if the village takes the scales, and a tribunal retrieves, he can't go back on duty for an hour or so.

Heck, you would also have to get rid of the fact that normal tribunal can't raid other cabals at all without suffering at the minimum a loss of all powers for over an hour, and probably a boot from tribunal, unless a tribunal imm finally allows the spire to declare war, (historically) after more than a month of a cabal taking the scales over and over with no fear of reprisals, because Tribunals aren't ALLOWED to take their item to get back at them.


This is one of the reasons the village always declares war on the spire. They know that they can take the scales with no consequences for a month + before an imm let's the tribunal take the head back.

No longer suffer the punishment of being out of duty due to retrieve the scales. Thanks gods that change was made...

If we're going to keep tribunal in the game, make taking the scales matter.

By not having the scales = not having any powers, ect, it makes the cabal war of chaos vs order much more intense for both sides.

The Outlanders would be much more willing to attack for the scales instead of camp, while the Tribunals would me much more willing to retrieve than camp.

All in all, it would make the order vs chaos struggle more fun for all parties, and make for a lot less camping

(again, i am not currently and never been involved in tribunal vs outlander, but it's obvious what occurs)

I suggest you play a few heroes in tribby, and a few in outlander.

Then see if you are still so gung ho about changing things or getting rid of tribby altogether.


If you have never been involved in outlander v tribunal, how can you claim to have any idea that your idea fixes a problem and doesn't cause any?

How can you have any opinion on the balance of the situation at all?

because I've had plenty of heros

contrary to what you may believe, you really *don't* have to have multiple tribs/outlanders and be a rocket scientist to understand whats going on. Most people would agree with my basic summary.

.

Is there ANY incentive for tribs to retrieve? I'm guilty of it when I had mine. Why the #### would I waste time retrieving? I can't manacle people? Big deal. If there is something I'm missing, please, point it out.

Just out of curiosity, and I may have missed it somewhere, but what is rule 12 and what's the conflict of opinion that caused this argument?

Noldruk

One, why does it take so long for tribunal guards to react to a wanted person? I have seen guards not attack a wanted person that was within PK range of another character for a rather lengthy time. Tracking creatures such as nightwalkers and beastcall attack instantly.

Two, what if a Tribunal is in a NON-PROTECTED city has a good rp reason to kill a guildguard or guildmaster for experience or for the equipment it has? Say a tribunal paladin wants to rank on guildmasters in Aboria, and people that can rank in Daryslon? Or, lets say a neutral shifter wants a piece of gear from an Udgaardian guildmaster? How does rule 12 come into play?

It only applies to cities that are protected.

Why does it take so long for the special guards to attack wanted persons even if they are in the same pk range of you. Also, wouldnt it be more benefical if one could judge people outside there area of duty? It is a pain the say hey meet me at my city so I can see if you are chaotic and break the law.

>Why does it take so long for the special guards to attack
>wanted persons even if they are in the same pk range of you.
>Also, wouldnt it be more benefical if one could judge people
>outside there area of duty? It is a pain the say hey meet me
>at my city so I can see if you are chaotic and break the law.

Alright, here's the deal:

Special guards, unlike beastcall and nightgaunts, are called directly on a person. Special guards, due to their not being innately aggressive (people can call them at any time, criminal present or no), check for wanted criminals in the room sort of the same way a tracking mob does - We've all had moments where our char has gotten lucky and been able to walk right by an aggro mob or a mob tracking us, just by the sheer timing of our walking.

Now.. maybe there is/could be a quest mob or something - vindicator elite, that act more like how you want them to act... Dunno. Maybe you can look into that IC.

And as far as I know, the guilds issue, atleast from my hayday, applies somewhat to non-protected cities. In so much as you were strictly forbidden to enter other guilds in non-protected cities. Basically, there is NO tribunal business you can have (unless you're a Vindicator) in a non-Tribunal protected city.

And as far as I remember, Arboria doesn't have guildguards.

(and no, I haven't played a Tribunal in about 4 or 5 years)


Noldruk

>Alright, here's the deal:
>
>Special guards, unlike beastcall and nightgaunts, are called
>directly on a person.

Meant to say they are NOT called directly on a person. Also meant to say nightwalkers not nightgaunts. At any rate, the point was taken, I guess.

>Special guards, due to their not being
>innately aggressive (people can call them at any time,
>criminal present or no), check for wanted criminals in the
>room sort of the same way a tracking mob does - We've all had
>moments where our char has gotten lucky and been able to walk
>right by an aggro mob or a mob tracking us, just by the sheer
>timing of our walking.


>Now.. maybe there is/could be a quest mob or something -
>vindicator elite, that act more like how you want them to
>act... Dunno. Maybe you can look into that IC.
>
>And as far as I know, the guilds issue, atleast from my
>hayday, applies somewhat to non-protected cities. In so much
>as you were strictly forbidden to enter other guilds in
>non-protected cities. Basically, there is NO tribunal business
>you can have (unless you're a Vindicator) in a non-Tribunal
>protected city.
>
>And as far as I remember, Arboria doesn't have guildguards.
>
> and no, I haven't played a Tribunal in about 4 or 5 years)
>
>
>Noldruk

I could have swore it said you could not enter a guild unless on immediate tribunal business, ANYWHERE. I believe there is something attached to the end stating just that.

CraftedDeception

Umm...if you aren't on duty...

..and someone with this line of thinking would have been kicked from the cabal.

(this is of course back in my hayday, not current times)

If Odrirg knew you were a village warrior, and there were mages in town, but he didn't know what specs you had, he would walk into your guild and look at you.

I see that as directly on tribunal business in Odrirg's point of view.

I have also had tribunal characters outright ORDER new inductees to make sure they explore inside all of the guilds in their cities because knowledge of your jurisdiction's layout is very important to the proper implemenation of the rest of your duties as a tribunal.


it depends on what you see Tribunal's job.

100% punish crime, nothing else.

or...

50/50 punish crime, prevent crime (your mere visible presence can oftentimes prevent it)


I have played tribby chars both ways, and I believe validly.


That said.....

Yes, there are many things in Tribunal that are, and are designed to be, open to interpretation. rule 12 is one of them in my opinion.

That does *NOT* mean that the mortal leader of the cabal doesn't have the right to say "We will follow *MY* interpretation and no other. period. end of story"

I've played a tribby leader that said it like that. And if I hadn't messed up and lost the post, I probably would have demoted and booted quite a few tribunals who were following valid interpretations of tribunal behavior and laws...but not *MY* interpretations.

I've also played a tribby leader who was willing to let others follow their own interpretations, as long as they were logical and didn't break the letter of the law.


I think many of the problems that non-tribunal players (and many tribunal players for that matter) have with the cabal, is not understanding exactly that dynamic.

The rule was put in to prevent going into other cabals unless there was a criminal or a crime to investigate there. That is why the rule was put in.

As far as enforcement goes, that has been done loosely. Mostly because Tribunal hasn't had an immortal leader in quite awhile. Hopefully, this will change soon.

Discussion is under way to make the point more clear. But, we do understand that some players are going to do things their way. So, until then, all we can do is inform the leader if they are about. In both cases recently, the leader either made the decision or was going to be the one to make the decision regarding the punishment, if any, to be given out. In one case, it was one of the reasons that prevented a player from getting a promotion. In the other case, the player became abusive, by his own admission, which gave the Executioner no choice but to remove them from the cabal. The third time it has happened has been with a current player, so that can come up if they wish it.

If it was the design intent for rule 12 to mean no going into guilds unless there is a criminal or investigating a crime, and nothing else, that's fine, dandy, and cool.

But, I don't think the wording of rule 12 implies that currently. There are many things that can be considered "tribunal business".


staying alive so that you can flag that lvl 15 bashing fire giant who is murdering mages in town, by hiding from those 4 ragers who just came into town to kill you by going into the shaman guild....could be argued to be "tribunal business".

I had assumed that, like other things in the law and in the spire, rule 12 was meant and designed to be able to be interpreted many ways, so I've always treated it as such. And as such, yes, I see no problem with the mortal leader punishing or not because of any interpretation that conflicts with his own.

However, I get the impression that rule 12 isn't supposed to be or designed to have such leeway in interpretation. I'm fine with that. Tribunal is suppsoed to be an orderly cabal, and hard-fast-set-in-stone rules are perfectly fine.

I do think that if this is the case for rule 12, it should be re-worded. I'm glad to hear it is being looked at in immland, thanks for the reply.

Here is the thing from a rp standpoint as well.

Tribunal are paid to protect the cities and the citizens of that city. How does it look to those citizens to see the law hide behind the citizens themselves? How weak does it look to the citizens if the Tribunal runs from guild to guild causing those citizens to be killed?

The point of rule 12 being Tribunal business is the immediate part. It seems very plain to me, but, perhaps not to others. Immediate is what causes an officer to draw his gun and start shooting. Immediate means there is a crime scene to investigate. Immediate does not mean prevention.

>The point of rule 12 being Tribunal business is the immediate
>part. It seems very plain to me, but, perhaps not to others.
>Immediate is what causes an officer to draw his gun and start
>shooting. Immediate means there is a crime scene to
>investigate. Immediate does not mean prevention.

Sounds more like "urgent" than "immediate". Immediate just means that if it's going to happen, it has to happen now. There's a ton of stuff that can be considered Tribunal business that is optional, but requires prompt (i.e. immediate) attention. Going into a guild to check out someone's specs does have to happen now, but it isn't really something that has to happen, whereas investigating a crime carries that extra component of necessity.

Maybe the language should be: "You may not enter other guilds unless you are on urgent Tribunal business" That conveys both the time and importance meanings.

We are kicking around an idea that my cover all of the bases regarding this.

I remember my first Tribunal Murcadin. I was told to investigate all of every city I was stationed in, including the inside of the guild houses, so that I would be familiar with them in case I ever had to locate a criminal. This was something I did when I first entered a new city post and I was never told that was wrong. In my opinion, this is justifible Tribunal Business. To change that would hurt new members in my opinion.

Hiding in another's guild is another matter entirely.

This is something that happens very often when the Magistrate is losing a fight.

The Provost Maethron did this to me on a couple of occasions when I gunned for him solo.

So exactly what stops the Tribunal from abusing guildguards (including their own when they would otherwise not be allowed in)?

Rule 12 was in place and I've seen Tribunal on many occasions do this because of the vague interpretation. If Rule 12 was meant to be interpreted that vaguely it should probably have never even been written.

Home cities are meant to be home field with advantages, yes. Those advantages are cabal powers, not doors to lock yourself behind until you regen. That's what the Spire tower is for.

nt

Hiding in one's guild means you're a dip#### #### who should be booted from the cabal for a failure to do your job.

It's perfectly fine from a PK survival standpoint, but when it's any guild other than your own or the Spire it's an RP violation. That is 'the other matter entirely'. The Spire is far more efficient to hide in if you're going to hide from a criminal and lick your wounds anyway because then they have to consider 'do I really want to raid to kill you?'

Plus this *is* the rule 12 subthread.

nt

nt

Here's a radical thought. I don't ever expect this to be implemented, but it sort of makes sense. Have guild guards allow tribunals to pass when there's a criminal in the guild, but otherwise bar passage.

If that were the only reason, it'd probably be easier to just make guild guards not allow criminals into the guild at all in protected cities.

But let's say you're investigating a crime and a witness is inside his guild telling you "Fortguy attacked Scionguy."

One of the things Tribs base their determination on is judging the witness. Orderly/neutral is better than chaotic in general, but the big thing is whether you see "occasional criminal" or "frequent criminal." Even moreso when there are two witnesses with conflicting versions. Often those chars are in their guild and won't come out (or don't do so in a very timely fashion).

Order them to come out. If they don't, then their testimony is worthless.

Does anyone else thing these should be treated identically? It's a thing that is going to hunt you down and kill you. One is in your head the other is a real thing, but you won't be any less dead from the fiend. Tribunals flag if a gaunt follows someone into town, but tend to not flag if a fiend follows you into town. Anyone care to explain on this one?

I remember, back before Grurk immed and before Odrirg was made second vindie, Grurk got in trouble from an imm for flagging for a nightgaunt following someone who worded.


Please keep in mind, I have played tribunal characters who would disagree with the following, and I believe validly according to the letter of the law....but here is how I believe the imms have shown they want it interpreted, by punishing mortals who have interpreted it differently.


If a conji gaunts someone IN TOWN. crime. The conji sent the gaunt into the town to start a fight (hard to prove)

if a conji gaunts someone out of town, and that someone words. no crime. The victim in this situation brought the gaunt into the town.

If a bard sings that song in town. crime.

if a bard sings that song out of town, and the victim words to town. no crime. The victim in this situation brought the nightmare into the town.



*but* please, let me re-iterate, I believe there are other, somewhat valid if shady, interpretations for some of these situations. In the end, it comes down to how the Mortal leader wants it interpreted.

When I played my second Fortress character there was an evil shaman in the Trib who would raid and summon non-warranted people out of the Fortress to die to a non-trib gank squad. Falun might have been his name.

He would walk freely into every cabal, and there is a log of about six Fortress people who attempted to take him down where he had retreated to Galadon, but he hid behind good cabal guards and used the wait timers he could ignore to buy him time to rest and heal.

There were definitely some good points to that character, but I wouldn't say following the letter or spirit of Tribunal cabal rules at all times was one of them.

Having read that pbf.. and knowing a current character in regards to tribunal.. How did Izuhlzin even compare and being 'lucky' to remain in tribunal until he decided to leave?

CraftedDeception

nt

"New payment options w/ Iron Realms"

Whether or not someone makes a 'bad' Tribunal is not an important issue OOC. This is what roleplay is about - facing up to consequences, as your character would.

Bitching and moaning about it on a forum does no good whatsoever. Take a lesson from history - how many warrants have been removed because a player posted 'This Magistrate sucks ass'?

And now how many crap Magistrates have been removed, or held back, because their actions were brought to a leaders attention IC?

The answer is: A lot. You'll notice Izuhlzin placed a lot of 'bad' warrants, and it was noticed and used to hold him back. It doesn't actually matter what he believed was right or wrong. The Law could be used to justify all kinds of ridiculous stunts. The leader/immortal view of the Law is much more absolute. And failing to respect (or even trying to, in many bad magistrates cases) that is what gets a Magistrate held back or booted.

You, as a victim, need to respect that same absolute to understand how the Law works. It's not black and white, but niether does it mean abuse will go without a relevant rewarded.

Yhorian

I don't think the point of this thread is to discuss current magistrates or how ####ed up TribA is etc. More over the debates of how clear certain laws are and how they should be enforced. For example, the discussion they were having over what constitutes "immediate tribunal business" for example.

As long as there are EXP holes for WANTED flags, players can and will make it an OOC issue, regardless of the actual rules of the game.

I'm neutral to the issue myself because, with the exception of right this second, it's pretty easy to just walk away from and ignore tribunal even in town.

Like a level 15 trib logging in and flagging the entire who list. Or seeing a lowbie with nice gear, flagging them and having your guards kill them just for the loot. Sadly, both of these things have happened, so there has to be an ooc aspect to the oversight of tribunal. On top of that, many anti-tribunal characters cannot in any semblence of role play complain about being wanted unjustly, so there has to be a way out of character to do so.

Me? Get rid of the cabal.

These are extreme cases that have happened. By far and large these things are extremely rare cases. But, Tribunal powers have the greatest chance of being abused by players because they can affect any player at any time in a bad way. It's also been said many times that Tribunal is one of the easiest cabals to get in, but, it's also one of the hardest to stay in if you aren't on top of things.

This is one of those cabals that really needs an imm presence. When it has one, it does well. And I don't mean just from the cabal view. From the non-trib player view as well. But, that non-trib player is relying upon being treated fairly. If they aren't, then it automatically comes across from that player that the other player is cheating. We get notes from players about getting an unfair flag. It usually isn't kept IC. And in some instances in can't be. Players can't see things the way that we do. Some may see this as imm interference. From a rp standpoint, I could easily see the citizens of a city going to the Executioner to file a complaint about a tribunal who may have done something wrong. So, unless the city is clear of all citizens, don't go against the rules and don't break the laws.

I've been flagged for attacking an offduty tribunal on the Hamsah Docks, specifically in 'A Smokey Bar' on the south side. Am I correct in thinking no laws were broken?