The Shadowlands and their inhabitants, [OCC]

[SilentMobius]

An OCC question here for RP reasons, this came up again and again in the beta and I _thought_ I'd been keeping up on officail statements but.....

1. Have OT made _any_ official statements to the public or even just to their employees, suggesting cooperation with the Unredeemed/Chosen/Inamorta?
2. Obviously we've had the (rather weak IMHO) return of Henry Radiman who got a bit religious and said we should run off into the shadowlands and "do the right thing" but have any clans made any statement of alliegance with the Redeemed/Faithfull?

Chat text from NPC's would be great if anyone has seen anything? I sure haven't seen anything from the clan side?

The only concrete information I can see is that Galahad appears to have been accepted by the Redeemed/Faithfull as "Divine" which strikes me as odd, or perhaps its the other way round, and Galahad was never human in the first place?

Dammit where an official RP event when you need one.

I think a lot of the current confusion and trouble with the Omni=Eeevul inference would be solved if we (as roleplayers) have an idea what OT's official and unofficial involvement with the Unredeemed/Chosen/Inamorta actuall was.

[Trisagiona]

I agree with you SM

[AiymaNeut]

Originally posted by SM
An OCC question here for RP reasons, this came up again and again in the beta and I _thought_ I'd bee keeping up on officail statements but.....

Hehe I still remember that HUGE thread titled something along the lines of "Omni=Evil".

Originally posted by SM
1. Have OT made _any_ official statements to the public or even just to their employees, suggesting cooperation with the Unredeemed/Chosen/Inamorta?

No statement yet.

Originally posted by SM
2. Obviously we've had the (rather weak IMHO) return of Henry Radiman who got a bit religious and said we should run off into the shadowlands and "do the right thing" but have any clans made any statement of alliegance with the Redeemed/Faithfull?

No statement yet.

Originally posted by SM
The only concrete information I can see is that Galahad appears to have been accepted by the Redeemed/Faithfull as "Divine" which strikes me as odd, or perhaps its the other way round, and Galahad was never human in the first place?

And that's not necessarily even concrete. Funcom has said time and time again that it is the individual player's actions that determine which side she or he will be (hence, the dynamic faction system). As such, there is less emphasis on Rubi-Kan factional alignment and more on "who likes you and who doesn't" in the Shadowlands. Remember that it's still relatively early in the Shadowlands world, and most people still don't have a great deal of faction points to be considered aligned to either side. However, give it a few months, and I'm sure you'll see some interesting battle lines drawn. I know a few people OT-side that are actually choosing to help the Redeemed.

Another thing to keep in mind, which was even stated by a FC dev in the beta forums, is that the unredeemed aren't necessarily "evil". What is "good" and "evil" is all a matter of interpretation. Remember, many people considered OT the "evil" side when AO launched (and undoubtedly many still do ).

The key difference between the Redeemed and the Unredeemed revolves around the use of notum and novictum. The Redeemed believe in conservation and balance, to the disregard of potential power and the advancement of society's technology. The Unredeemed believe in using notum and novictum to their fullest potential, to achieve the level of power which they feel the people of Zan were entitled to.

Since the great war that fractured the Shadowlands from the "real" universe happened, the Unredeemed have only been concerned with one thing - get back to the Shadowlands (get back home). This is the reason for Omni-Tek's creation; going further back, it is the reason that Vanya met Roman all those millenia ago .

Thus there really is no "good" and "evil" in the Shadowlands. This may be difficult for most players to see because of the aesthetics of it all - the Redeemed villages being bright, built among forests and ponds and populated with the prettier creatures, while the Unredeemed strongholds are darker and more menacing. However, all it boils down to at its basest level is that the Redeemed are tree-hugging hippies, while the Unredeemed are corporate capitalists.

Originally posted by SM
I think a lot of the current confusion and trouble with the Omni=Eeevul inference would be solved if we (as roleplayers) have an idea what OT's official and unofficial involvement with the Unredeemed/Chosen/Inamorta actuall was.

I doubt there will be any official stance. The only true connections that we know 100% are that Galahad is affiliated with the Redeemed and Eva Pourais is affiliated with the Unredeemed. Other than that, we have two somewhat unaffiliated parties - David Marlin on the clan-side and Roman on OT's side - that have yet to be accounted for.

[SilentMobius]

Originally posted by Ammicus
I know a few people OT-side that are actually choosing to help the Redeemed.

Shame they're capped to 0 faction thend an will miss out on a good 70% of the SL content

Originally posted by Ammicus
Another thing to keep in mind, which was even stated by a FC dev in the beta forums, is that the unredeemed aren't necessarily "evil". What is "good" and "evil" is all a matter of interpretation. Remember, many people considered OT the "evil" side when AO launched (and undoubtedly many still do ).

That was Gaute on the AOHoC Chat, after the thread in the beta got up steam. in actual fact the dev posting we had in the bata threads went something like this(I wish I'd saved that thread)

"Remember your characters don't know that OT and the Unredeemed are evil, that is something we devs know as the 'gods' of AO"

Being the most definative proof we have ever had that the devs(who define good and evil in this game) consider OT and the Unremeemed to be de-facto evil.

Originally posted by Ammicus
The key difference between the Redeemed and the Unredeemed revolves around the use of notum and novictum. The Redeemed believe in conservation and balance, to the disregard of potential power and the advancement of society's technology. The Unredeemed believe in using notum and novictum to their fullest potential, to achieve the level of power which they feel the people of Zan were entitled to.

Indeed, and given that notum+novictum is the living essence of the source of life, what they did is touted as a crime against life, they have been cursed and are "Evil" (Read PwH if you what to know what their form of imortality does to you)

Originally posted by Ammicus
Thus there really is no "good" and "evil" in the Shadowlands.

Oh there quite definatly is. The problem is that IRL we may debate if that is true evil or not (and we may well decide that "No, it isn't") but within the microcosm that is AO, it is the Devs that set the metaphysics and moral rules, if they say Unredeemed==Evil that does not mean that if the Unredeemed do no match our IRL defination of evil then they are not evil. It means that in this game world Evil has a specific definition that differs from out IRL opinions on the matter.

Characters, may or may not believe, but it does not stop it from being true.

This is all ignoring the "black and spikey vs white and lovely"-ness

NB, this is a "Diet" version of my previous statements on the matter, if this isn't clear, please read my postings on
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/sho...hreadid=180094
for an expanded version.