I'm afraid I don't see what Neutrality has to do with...
notum mining. Neutrals chose not to participate in the Clan-OT struggle for a variety of reasons (nearly as many as there are neutrals). They never said they didn't want to mine notum...just that they did not find interest in the struggle between Clan and OT, which seems much more related to question of 'freedom', 'justice' and self-government.
The idea of fighting a war over notum seems hardly 'side' related to me. I can easily see as fierce a competition between rival Clans and between rival OT guilds as I can between OT and Clan. In fact anyone expanding and competing directly for land in near proximity is likely to be seen as the immediate threat...OT or Clan or Neutral.
And, BTW, a neutral faced with expansionism by neighbors is not violating neutrality by defending, even pre-emptively, their holdings. By attacking an expanding neighbor, OT or Clan, a Neutral is NOT necessarily attacking OT or Clan...just a nearby threat.
Quote:
Originally posted by Formrider
I respect and understand all your points Basiel, but I am not sure if I agree from a roleplaying point of view. A neutral has made a stand towards the conflict, and that is not to get involved. And the conflict on Rubi-Ka is based on the Notum. Without Notum, no one would ever have come to this rock. If a Neutral org. or person would want to participate in mining Notum, I would say they abandon their neutrality. Hence I feel that Notum mining should not be possible for the neutral player. But this is from a roleplaying view.
You see what I mean?