Posted by Graatch(VIP) on April 24, 2000 at 13:41:26:
I have spent some time of late thinking about the Empire cabal and the trend of Imm anath’ing.
After more than a little consideration, I believe that Imms should not be anath’ing morts. Here
are my reasons why, in no particular order.
Empire, as a cabal, is really four smaller cabals. Unlike the other cabals, there is not just one
person who can induct (and for empire anath as well), but rather there are five persons with that
power. Granted, all positions are not always filled, but neither are other cabal leader positions
and the imms of those cabals rarely step in even during the in-between leader times. Because of
this, there are five times the sets of eyes and ears open for stories, information, whatever, which
would let the sectleader/emperor know that someone is in need of anath’ing. The cabals have
mortal leadership for a reason, and empire has more leaders than any other cabal. They should be
doing whatever needs doing, that mortals can do. Mortals can anath, so they *should* be the
ones who anath. The same has always been true for inducting, and should be equally applied
here.
There are those that say that imms are and should be anath’ing because they have access to
perfect information and complete discovery of the truth regarding mortal action. This, to me, is
really an argument *against* imm anath’ing of mortals. Making someone anathema is a radical
alteration of the character, and should be solely based on the IC actions of the character. There is
a reason things are not hard coded. People are people, not machines, and you should be able to
expect reasonable outcomes with reasonable situations. Imms can snoop you using an ooc power
that should not really be used to impose what other mortals can do to you given the proper
circumstances.
Lets remember that this is a cabal of powerhungry evil people with no care or concern for anyone
but him or herself. In fact showing care or concern for anyone is a reason for anath’ing. So, while
these people realize the benefit of law and order, they are not necessarily opposed to breaking
any and all rules for their own benefit, given the right circumstances. For example, lets say you
want to attack someone in town. If you take the precautions to ensure that nobody is there (lets
say it is Seantryn or Udgaard or even Ofcol, the lesser traveled cities), and the only person who
would know you attacked in town is the victim, then you should be able to do so. Assume for
the moment that you were correct in thinking nobody was there, that nothing exists to impugn
you other than the words of your hapless victim. Then no mortal leader is going to anath you and
you should by all rights get away with it. Rightly so. Obviously, if there *was* someone there,
duo’d, or simply hiding in a way you could not see, and they inform your sect leader or emperor,
then you will certainly have to answer, or deal with it, and anath might be in your future. But
that’s the risk you take. The risk you shouldn’t be taking (shouldn’t as in it should not be part of
the game) is that some wizi imm just happens to be watching you. There is nothing you can do
that will alert you to this, no way you can prepare or deal with it, and so the simple fact that they
can use this ooc power means your play is limited, both in rp and in pk.
Imms should let the mortals chosen as sectleaders/emperor deal with their people. If a citizen
gets enough accusations against them for breaking imperial law, go ahead an anath. If they get
even one and you just feel like it, go ahead. But when an Imm does it, and does it in such a
manner as to exclude any mortal behavior which would have obviated that action, it defeats the
purpose of roleplaying.
Lastly, and in some respects most importantly, there is a seemingly basic notion of fairness
involved when making such a radical, and generally speaking negative decision regarding a
character. When someone opts to join the empire, they know (or should know) that getting
anath’ed by your sectleader or emperor is not all that difficult or uncommon, and can be based on
virtually nothing at all. But if they play the game right, appease their sectleader/emperor, show
strength, etc, and choose to break the imperial law when they cannot by mortal means be caught,
then they should not be anath’ed. (For that). There is, in this, a certain level of consistency. A
certain amount of predictability that you, the player, can expect. But there is no consistency,
no predictability, to imm snooping, and information sharing. There is no way to “play the
game” with imms, is no way to “fool” them in the way that you can “fool” a mortal. Whether
ib be through lying, a lack of witnesses, by destroying items which are evidence, etc. The imm
need only check the imm logs and bam! that’s it.
I am sure I am forgetting a few things, I had a whole host of reasons in my head this morning on
the subway as I was thinking about it. However, I am sure that in the back and forth I expect this
post to generate the thoughts will be fleshed out and brought to light. That is the best part of the
forum, in my view.
Also, for those of you who seem to thrive on asinine and insulting retorts... No, I don’t have an
empire char who was just anath’d, nor have I even had a char in empire for over a year. I simply
spent some time thinking about it due to the recent rash of anaths and posts.