Official Northern Coalition Non-Aggression Pact


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

I worked my ass off writing this fine document so let us give it a spotlight, yeah? Thanks to the other Settlements in the NC that took the time to look it over, make some minor tweaks and give it the go ahead.

-------------------------------------------

Non-Aggression Pact

1. Protection

1.1 All Structures and Members belonging to NC signatory settlements are protected from assault by Members of any other NC signatory settlement.

1.1.1 Accepting a contract to perform a function for a third party's interests, be it caravan guard, point of interest management, or otherwise, removes the preface of non-aggression.

1.2 Protection Coverage

1.2.1 Terms of the NC apply only to NC signatory settlements, their holdings, and their members unless otherwise stated.

1.2.2 Players entering or leaving NC signatory settlements guarded by 4 or more NC guards will be extended the courtesy of Non-Aggression.

2. Consensual PvP

2.1 Companies and Members of NC signatory settlements may engage in Consensual PvP with each other so long as terms have been discussed and all involved parties are in agreement beforehand.

3. Conflict Resolution

3.1 Conflicts between NC signatories will be dealt with diplomatically through the leadership council and their designated representatives.

Additional Terms

1. Joining the NC requires a Settlement to receive unanimous approval from all current NC signatories.

2. All Settlements within a signatory Nation automatically become a signatory of the NC. They may not opt out as long as they remain within that Nation. This supersedes the requirement for a Settlement to get unanimous approval from the NC signatories.

3. Changes to any terms of the NC must be negotiated, and a reasonable time period given for negotiations in order for signatories to arrive at their votes. Drafts must be provided to Settlements (via representatives) and decided upon before any public statements about NC business are made.

-------------------------------------------

The following Settlements agree to the Terms of this Pact and having signed below are now considered signatories of this Pact.

Callambea, July 2104

Aragon, July 2014

Golgotha, July 2014

Freevale, July 2014

Mystical Awakening, July 2014

Kreuz Bernstein, July 2014

-------------------------------------------

Goblin Squad Member

Now you just need to prick your thumb here and then leave your bloody fingerprint there. CONGRADULATIONS! Your soul now belongs to Northern Coalition.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Im sorry, my soul was...traded, a long time ago. If that is required, than I must admit I can not join as I cannot pay the fee. Though if I am able to supply another soul in my place, than you need only pick the one you wish me to acquire.

Goblin Squad Member

Ravenlute wrote:
I worked my ass off writing this fine document...

LOL

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

"What would be of the Heaven, if it doesn't exist the Hell."

Goblin Squad Member

Ravenlute wrote:
I worked my ass off writing this fine document so let us give it a spotlight, yeah? Thanks to the other Settlements in the NC that took the time to look it over, make some minor tweaks and give it the go ahead.

By what means did YOU send or present this to Aragon or one of its representatives, to tweak it?

There were three of us working on this, and I know I received nothing from you nor read anything by you.

Xeen, you get anything?

Doggan, you get anything?

That damned chaotic mail service! Obviously ravens are not a good replacement for carrier pigeons!

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Ravenlute wrote:
I worked my ass off writing this fine document...
LOL

*Checks the Northern Coalition forum*

Oh... He must have been logged in under the "Hobs" "Gpunk" "Bluddwolf" "Angeline" "Xeen" "Doggan" "Phyllain" "Deacon" "Sasori" "Kard" "Augir" and "Areks" usernames.

Our bad... dawg.

Goblin Squad Member

"You have what you hold" applies to intellectual property, too. What'd you expect from barbarians?

Scarab Sages

Is that a document to be posted in public? Just wondering...

Goblin Squad Member

Kemedo wrote:
Is that a document to be posted in public? Just wondering...

It was no secret, but it is certainly public now....

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ravenlute forced a vote through the Freevale council to present an NC draft. In 12 hours, without Blunt Logic rep input, he presented me with a poorly compiled document. I removed trade terms and a few other items that were not appropriate.

When the document was presented, it was redrafted in The NC forums into something readable. The redraft with it's edits was presented to Freevale and was accepted with one further change. Ravenlute insisted on a change to something none of the signatories touched in edits. Almost an entire week was added to this process so Ravenlute could delay obstruct work hard at editing himself.

Unfortunately, posting this also violates the spirit op expects other signatories to exhibit. Don't speak for other signatories without approval.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:


Xeen, you get anything?

That damned chaotic mail service! Obviously ravens are not a good replacement for carrier pigeons!

Someone was flinging poo

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Is paragraph 1.1.1 intended to provide exceptions for members who accept contracts on other members?

Goblin Squad Member

This isnt a Q&A


1 person marked this as a favorite.

SHUT DOWN SON

More seriously, I believe 1.1.1 is saying you are not protected by the NA pact while performing a beneficial act for a non-NC member, so other NC members have the option of killing you as part of acting against said third party without breaking the NA pact.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Is paragraph 1.1.1 intended to provide exceptions for members who accept contracts on other members?

No, read it carefully and you will understand what it is saying.

Goblin Squad Member

Fierywind wrote:

SHUT DOWN SON

More seriously, I believe 1.1.1 is saying you are not protected by the NA pact while performing a beneficial act for a non-NC member, so other NC members have the option of killing you as part of acting against said third party without breaking the NA pact.

Reading for understanding of what it says, and not for what you want it to say is a great asset. Congratulations.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Is paragraph 1.1.1 intended to provide exceptions for members who accept contracts on other members?
No, read it carefully and you will understand what it is saying.

I'm sorry, but this is the first time I've seen "preface" used that way, and I don't have the ability to divine intent by staring at words.

I'm guessing that posting this rough draft was a mistake, so I'll stop trying to make predictions about how others will act based on it.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We all recall how confused you could be on determined subjects... :)


Pact wrote:

1.1.1 Accepting a contract to perform a function for a third party's interests, be it caravan guard, point of interest management, or otherwise, removes the preface of non-aggression.

It's not that complicated, though replacing "be it" with "such as" might clarify it a tad. This section is solely to simplify guard-bandit relations and has nothing to do with getting hired to kill other members. It's defensive only.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Pact wrote:

1.1.1 Accepting a contract to perform a function for a third party's interests, be it caravan guard, point of interest management, or otherwise, removes the preface of non-aggression.

It's not that complicated, though replacing "be it" with "such as" might clarify it a tad. This section is solely to simplify guard-bandit relations and has nothing to do with getting hired to kill other members. It's defensive only.

So, if I hire a Freevalian to guard my caravan, the Aragornian raiders can attack the guards, but the guards can't proactively clear out the Aragornian raiders?


Nope. And if you hire me to protect your caravan and then demand I start hunting bandits like a TEOer, I'ma tell ya to go hire a bounty hunter. Hiring a merchant guard to go to war is like hiring a neighborhood watch program to track down Osama.

Hire me to actually guard, though, and I will kill any identity-crisis-afflicted bandit who comes close to your precious shipment of tiny kittens and bunnies.

Goblin Squad Member

I think the complication is in the use of "preface," which I also have some trouble parsing in this context. Unless there is a non-aggresion preface to the agreement that we aren't seeing. Or it might just be a usage I haven't encountered before.

edit: Not that any of us has any real business dissecting the meaning of your agreement.


I believe, decius, that the person is wholly excepted from the NA pact, so they can defend themselves if attacked by fellow NC members. It would be too limiting if they can't defend themselves, because obviously no one outside of the NC would hire a NC member to do anything, but the NC would have to keep an eye on things to make sure a NC member-settlement isn't taking advantage of the clause. A balance would have to be worked out.

Unless of course, the point is actually to discourage members working for third parties, in which case it would work as intended.


Decius is asking about guards attacking proactively, not reactively.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Fair enough. I'll just have to hire from groups allowed to strike first. Letting the opponent make the first move is too high a cost to hire local protection.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Decius is asking about guards attacking proactively, not reactively.

Right- guards that allow bandits to approach close enough to attack get replaced by guards that do their job.

Goblin Squad Member

Hey, it's nice that some of you have questions and all that jazz. But this entire thread was posted because of angry happenings within a settlement. This is not the NC policy thread. If you have questions or "confusion" about the NC and how parties therein interact with one another, direct it to the NC thread.


That would depend on how you define proactive, kobold. If for example, you declare very openly that any hostiles within striking distance, or some other arbitrary distance, is considered a raider, then it becomes reactive. That being said, what decius said is true, and it may just be better to hire allies who have no issues killing hostiles at any distance.

@doggan We can't ask questions about a NA pact we haven't seen, so I believe we're just airing our thoughts on what has been presented. If this is not the current form of the treaty, the NC is free to give us the current one.

Goblin Squad Member

Fierywind wrote:

I believe, decius, that the person is wholly excepted from the NA pact, so they can defend themselves if attacked by fellow NC members. It would be too limiting if they can't defend themselves, because obviously no one outside of the NC would hire a NC member to do anything, but the NC would have to keep an eye on things to make sure a NC member-settlement isn't taking advantage of the clause. A balance would have to be worked out.

Unless of course, the point is actually to discourage members working for third parties, in which case it would work as intended.

It is actually what I would call a "mercenary clause". If a 3rd party caravan hires NC member guards, and an NC member bandit group attacks the caravan. The NC member guards can fulfill their contract and fight off the attacking NC member bandits. The NC bandits may continue their attack, without violating the NAP, because they are raiding a 3rd Party caravan.

There is another element of this, "Fore Knowledge". If the NC bandits are made aware that the caravan has NC guards, or more importantly if they are made aware that the caravan is destined for a delivery to an NC settlement, then it will be left alone.

Goblin Squad Member

NC and NC interaction is always prefaced with non-aggression... Unless you are fulfilling a 3rd party contract.

I'm not sure what is complicated about that.

Goblin Squad Member

How do you regale 1.1.1. with 1.2.2 when, say, the person(s) being guarded are said "third party"? Being guarded by four+ gives them the political Non-Aggression, and yet what if you are at war. Note how it doesn't state you may not ally with enemies of other NC signatories...

Goblin Squad Member

Again, not a Q&A.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would like to state, in case it wasn't clear, that this is not the 2006 album by Office, Q&A.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Decius is asking about guards attacking proactively, not reactively.
Right- guards that allow bandits to approach close enough to attack get replaced by guards that do their job.

Who said the guards would let them approach? The bandits come near, they get shot. And if the guys from Aragon don't like that, they can file a complaint with the complaints department.

BUT I DON'T CHECK THAT S~%&

Goblinworks Executive Founder

-Aet- Areks wrote:
Again, not a Q&A.

Right, so a discussion of the leak. According to a strict reading, any member hired by any third party is completely exempted from both the protections and restrictions, so that is the status quo, given that the various stakeholders have expressed a strong preference for strict readings of rules.

Goblin Squad Member

In all honesty, when have I ever cared about the "sanctity of the agreement display" or things like "don't question that" and "you should make a thread for that"?

My question, though rhetorical, still stands. I was suggesting you might want to revise your positions and your document to make it more clear. Or am I just trying to poke the bear?

Goblin Squad Member

5.


4?

Goblin Squad Member

Blue.


Red!

Goblin Squad Member

Ardvark.


-Aet- Aareks.

Well, the "a" had to go somewhere.

Goblin Squad Member

Chinchilla Consquela

Goblin Squad Member

I assume you have TOP MEN working on it?

Goblin Squad Member

-Aet- Areks wrote:
Chinchilla Consquela

THE CHINCHILLAS WILL NEVER BE THE SAME

Goblin Squad Member

Neither will the flying hebrew attack pigeons of death for that matter...

Goblin Squad Member

If I did have questions, where would be the best place to direct them? I know how to reach various Pax related groups, and I'd go to Hobbs for EoX matters, but I don't have a contact for the NC.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Please do not ask questions here. Send any questions you may have to the Northern Coalition FAQ Thread.

Goblin Squad Member

TEO Alexander Damocles wrote:
If I did have questions, where would be the best place to direct them? I know how to reach various Pax related groups, and I'd go to Hobbs for EoX matters, but I don't have a contact for the NC.

As always, thank you for being respectful enough of other players to make that effort. As Ambassador, I know you have an account on the EoX forums. We can direct you from there as to where you can ask your questions and receive answers.

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Official Northern Coalition Non-Aggression Pact All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.