Locked Syndicate for evils only.

I didn't read every post, so apologies if something like this has already been mentioned, but:

Evil is not simply the sum of one's actions.  Evil is also the will and intent behind the actions.  An evil character, or even an actual person, might take delight in the pain they cause others.  A neutral assassin wouldn't necessarily find enjoyment in the pain or loss of life...but can make peace with it because it affords them another meal, or whatever their RP/religious reasons might be.  IMO, a good example of a neutral assassin from movies would be Leon from The Professional (played by Jean Reno).  The neutral perspective could be simply balance - take out the baddies on both sides of the fence, level the playing fields a bit. 

I have not been playing but I assume the problem with the OP is they are playing a class like paladin and neutrals are a pain in the D?  I see no reason to remove neutral option from Syndi.  My $0.02

@Mmm Beer hit the nail on the head. Neutrals in syndicate don't take pleasure in causing pain or murder, therefore not evil. A neutral in syndicate cannot kill for the fun of it. There has to be a bounty. Which makes it a cabal duty. Just like killing a savant if the neutral is in WM. Bounties make you a cabal enemy. It gives the neutral no more agency than any other cabal option gives them.

The difference being it is a fundamental belief that drives the Warmaster, Savant, or Watcher to kill their enemy. A Syndicate is killing for profit as the entirety of the cabal's RP is a criminal underground driven to see wealth and power. 

You guys, the Staff, are saying that a cabal duty outweighs the restrictions put on an alignment/ethos, but that's not true in all circumstances as a Knight can't kill a goodie Tribunal and vice versa.

Neutrals can have multiple reasons for collecting a bounty, but unless you're RP is that you were FORCED to do it and it pains you every, single time then you're in violation of the rules the Staff enforces for neutrals.

You are killing for profit. Whether that profit be for Syndicate, your dying kids, or your own magic invention shop to push out Brambus. You're still killing for some sort of profit. And that is, and always has been, an outcastable offense. 

Saying its cabal warfare doesn't wash away the motives behind it. How many Knight have refused to fight? Warmaster goodie vs Savant goodie and they refuse to fight despite it being cabal duties, right? Why do neutrals get a pass on this?

I know this won't ever change, but that's what I think.

Yet we're still stuck on this idea of morality for an alignment that is meant to be fluid within a cabal setting. 

Neutrals are not goods or evils, so, why make those comparisons?

Good restrictions and neutral restrictions are very different. Goods not killing other goods as an example of restrictions in cabal warfare is not at all the same thing. Neutrals only need a reason to kill to avoid outcast. Goods can NEVER kill another good without being outcast. That is a clear difference. For the former, a good reason (Which cabal warfare is!) is required. For the latter, there is NEVER a good reason.

On 8/20/2019 at 9:38 PM, mya said:

I agree, but it's not going to be changed because pkers like the mechanical advantages of being neutral.

What kind of advantages are you talking about, I would be curious to hear.

On 8/20/2019 at 9:02 PM, Lloraaru said:

Murdering people for money is evil, straight up.

Change my mind.

Are the bounty hunters that collect bounties placed by the government on criminals evil?

Is the government an inheritly "good" entity?

What if you are a chaotic neutral and don't believe in "government", but bounty is bounty, and gold feeds you.

Is the lion that kills the deer evil, because he kills to feed himlsef? 

Is there such a thing as "evil animals"?

Do you know that some male animals kill male younglings so they can protect their "top dog" status in their pride for longer? Is that evil? Can nature be evil?

Don't forget @f0xx, you agreed with me on FB messenger that Syndicate is evil and I was correct during that discussion. ;) 

In MY opinion, if we want Syndicate to be viewed as a cabal that focuses on taking contracts to kill the big bads of FL, then it needs to move away from the crime RP and more into the Hunter RP. 

In THAT sense, I could see neutral being viable as the cabal is then no longer about the criminal underground and all the nefarious actions that are part of it, and more so about keeping the FL world "balanced". This cabal would not be allowed to be allied or warred with and it would not be frowned upon for a goodie to place a bounty.

You are expected to fulfill contracts. You are given the skills necessary to complete it. And that is it.

Syndicate, as it currently stands, is a cabal that is driven by profit. Profit through murder.(Syndicate) Profit through selling.(Merchant) A Syndicate collects a bounty for a PROFIT. Whether that profit goes to them or the cabal, it doesn't matter. You're doing it for a reward. FL's rules clearly state that a neutral/good killing for the sake of profit is an outcastable offense. Whether that profit is equipment, gold, or CPs for your cabal.

Shit, I am pretty sure I've chosen the wrong side anytime my opinion aligns with @f0xx 

...

I think it's time I go and rethink my life and the choices I've made that led me to this point.

Turns out even a blind @f0xx has the correct time twice a day so we are good!

Are the bounty hunters that collect bounties placed by the government on criminals evil?

If they kill them, yes. Killing for money is evil.

Is the government an inherently "good" entity?

That depends on the "government".

What if you're CN and don't believe in government?

Good and Evil aren't subjective. Morality is objective and to suggest that it's subjective is immoral.

I understand the argument to the contrary; I just completely disagree with it.

Example:

Rape is evil, period. No matter what.

Killing children is evil, period. No matter what.

I understand there are things less self-evident than rape or infanticide, but that doesn't mean moral objectivity goes by the wayside*.*

Things don't become less evil just because someone has good reasons - it just means they had good reasons to commit evil.

What about animals

Animals are incapable of good or evil.

if we want Syndicate to be viewed as a cabal that focuses on taking contracts to kill the big bads of FL

It's sometimes sold as that, and it's dishonest; I've seen plenty of times there be an elite, establish, caballed evil and a noob good both logged on who are both bountied - and the Neutral Syndicate who is also logged on pops the weaker Good.

Like I said earlier, Neutrality (not just in FL but in D&D and probably all sorts of other games) very often is used as an OOC way to skirt around RP restrictions and strengths/weaknesses and is defended with shoddy, lazy RP.

Syndicate, as it currently stands, is a cabal that is driven by profit. Profit through murder.(Syndicate) Profit through selling.(Merchant) A Syndicate collects a bounty for a PROFIT. Whether that profit goes to them or the cabal, it doesn't matter. You're doing it for a reward. FL's rules clearly state that a neutral/good killing for the sake of profit is an outcastable offense. Whether that profit is equipment, gold, or CPs for your cabal.

Exactly.

It's unreasonable to suggest that Syndicate by its very nature isn't evil - and even try to make that argument is to attempt to rebrand evil as something other than what it is.

There are a list of names a Syndicate is presented with. These names are to be associated with people and these people need to be killed. Who are they, who wants them killed, and why do they want them killed are not questions that are asked by the syndicate. There is no reason needed to kill other than “they are on the list”.

Neutrals in FL need “a reason to kill”. If uncaballed, this reason can only be dictated by an in game circumstance that the character is then forced to make a moral (alignment-based) decision about. By joining Syndicate, you forsake the need for your character to ask “why?”. You now have a hard-coded reason. “Its all business”.

How is killing “whoever is on the list” regardless of how they got on the list considered a neutral stance? Because I have to eat? Are there no jobs in Aabahran? No animals to hunt? Being a killer for hire is a reasonable profession amongst the town folk? Sorry, I’m not buying that.

Again. Crusaders kill to empower their weapons. Profit. Plain and simple. More power, help greed. Greed btw is not an evil alignment.

Your original post said change your mind. A closed mind can not be changed. 

Give me a reason its evil that does not set on the foundation that they kill for coin. Because that is false. Coin is easier to get than bounties. 

I have seen WM neutrals kill for trophies or to loot the opponent who was not savant, but thats not evil right? Because his ideals allow for it.

I begin to think there is no reason for this thread at all. If the neutral kills your Good, you have an RP reason to retaliate.

Just do that.

3 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

Again. Crusaders kill to empower their weapons. Profit. Plain and simple. More power, help greed. Greed btw is not an evil alignment.

That's not profit. You are warping the definition to try to reach for a rebuttal. A good crusading vs evil is basic goodie rp. The most widely accepted trait of a good is they fight evil, this is not done for profit. Profit is an increase in currency. The only cabal that kills for profit is syndicate. Furthermore, crusaders rp at its core is selfless,  and all about brotherhood, and protecting people. They kill evil so evil stops killing good.

9 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

I have seen WM neutrals kill for trophies or to loot the opponent who was not savant, but thats not evil right? Because his ideals allow for it.

This is not acceptable neutral rp. Had it been reported that a barb was just trophying people at random only for trophy and looting they likely would have been punished.

4 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

Again. Crusaders kill to empower their weapons. Profit. Plain and simple. More power, help greed. Greed btw is not an evil alignment.

Your original post said change your mind. A closed mind can not be changed. 

Give me a reason its evil that does not set on the foundation that they kill for coin. Because that is false. Coin is easier to get than bounties. 

I have seen WM neutrals kill for trophies or to loot the opponent who was not savant, but thats not evil right? Because his ideals allow for it.

I begin to think there is no reason for this thread at all. If the neutral kills your Good, you have an RP reason to retaliate.

Just do that.

Crusaders can't kill goodies at all and only vs neutral when forced to. They smite evil and their weapons gain strength through that act. That is not the same as killing for gold. Their increase in power is a byproduct of their crusade against the forces of evil. Similar to Avatar gaining levels for killing evils.

A few of you have said that its easier to farm for gold than it is to collect bounties and while that may be true from a player perspective, what IC/RP reason would I have to believe that I can kill the slith merchant in Hamlet 10 times instead of collecting on a bounty? We forgive this level of OOC because its necessary to the game, but to use it as a reason for RP is entirely different.

WM can't kill for trophies indiscriminately unless they are evil. Goodie/Neutral will be outcasted. I know because its happened to me. Whether or not this should be an outcastable offense is also a good debate topic.

You say he is closed-minded and won't change his mind, but maybe its because you have failed to present a good argument? 

Just a thought...

I said i would attempt. I also said many times I am on the fence on this one. Trick you have played Syndicate L. Were you only after gold? Tell the truth from a player stance what was your goal when you created the character?

Killing without having to roll a morality check is evil.

57 minutes ago, Fool_Hardy said:

I said i would attempt. I also said many times I am on the fence on this one. Trick you have played Syndicate L. Were you only after gold? Tell the truth from a player stance what was your goal when you created the character?

Ekhurift wasn't interested in gold at all. He was a wolf without a pack and desired to have a sense of family and found it in Syndicate. Later, when he became the Hound of Chaos and tattooed, he still didn't care about the gold and did it because he wanted two things. 

1. A pack to call his own.

2. He embodied chaos. 

There were a lot of times that I thought an outcast was coming my way from the aggression, but it never really happened because of the Syndicate flag. 

I personally don't believe I really lived up to what Syndicate RP is described as in the help file, but there just wasn't any other place to go to as that type of character. So, I made the best of it. Had I been outcasted, it probably would have been justifiable, but it could have easily been argued the other way with the Chaos religion he followed/tatted to. 

I pushed the "family" aspect very heavily and really ignored the criminal enterprise side of it. 

It sucks to say, but there just is certain RP that you have to skirt the edge with or not join a cabal. There are a few kinds of RP that might be able to get away with it and I think Chaos religion is definitely one.. You have to be careful though.. hm..

Its got me thinking, that's for sure.

What about a Tribunal who sentenced people to death to uphold the laws? They do it to protect the people is the premise. Then they go council and make new laws that allow them to attack people because no one was breaking the laws on the Maxim. They essentially wanted more reasons to attack people. 

Look at this sedition law for instance. Now you can be arrested for RP. Does this law protect anyone or is it just a neutral tribunal seeking more reasons to pad his roll numbers? Should we consider not allowing neuyrals into Tribunal? Maybe they are skirting PK restrictions.

See.. You had me thinking about Ekhurift and considering the options, but now you're kinda pushing too hard.

Tribunal acts in a way for the betterment of all, flawed or not flawed. Law is a governing force to keep and maintain peace and isn't tied to the concepts of greed the same way Syndicate is. They aren't killing for the same kind of profit a Syndicate is. 

And the sedition law is actually a good law to enact considering what the Church is doing. They are damn near inciting riots and violence. Its a great law that actually has an IG RP reason to it instead of making up a random one.