definitive list of semi-lawfuls

[Ursus]

The Coalition government sees itself as exactly that, a legitimate government, and the SCRA see themselves as a legitimate lawful military force.

That doesnt work--Corsairs see themselves as legitimate government of their space too.

HOWEVER, the House Governments and pretty much everyone outside of Omega 52 see the SCRA and the Coalition government as nothing more than terrorists.

At this point I think its worth examing what the purpose of lawful vs unlawful is about. I dont believe it has any effect on game mechanics. You get things like LN NPCs vs RM NPCs in New Hampshire, which is lawful vs lawful NPC spawn, so ... what is the purpose exactly. Maybe just adds a little politics to the game, lawful vs unlawful, sometimes lawful vs lawful, sometimes unlawful vs unlawful. If that's the case just make up whatever want.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Unseelie]

I've long argued that lawful vs unlawful doesn't make a great deal of sense, as basically any organization running a space station has to be effectively a legitimate power and governance else be prone to catastrophic failure...

so therefore, every faction is "lawful" but at war with others.

But the trend of lawful vs unlawful goes like this. You've the four (okay, now five, maybe) "Great Houses of Sirius" who are the "lawfuls. The people who run counter to those groups are the unlawfuls. The great houses or parts theirof get to attack other great Houses or etc without loosing lawful status.

That still doesn't explain the unlawfuls, because most are local unlawful, typically by opposition to a specific great house (and by extension of that, somewhat aiding another.)

I'd go so far as to claim that there are lawful factions, but no "unlawful factions" just "unlawful actions"
which is, actions perpetraited against lawful factions to the detriment of those factions. Tada.
So long as there aren't IDs using the term "unlawful factions" rather than the term "unlaful actions" It removes the problem (untill you argue that the Xenos should get the same "lawful" protection in Xeno space).

---

[farmerman]

You could say that lawfuls are those who can freely land at the major population centers of the sector, or at least in the majority of Houses.

Any corporation can do so in at least 3 different Houses. The same goes for the guilds, Zoners, and Junkers.

Now, I'd say if a group fits the above but can also do certain unrestricted illegal activities, it'd get moved to semi-lawful.

Groups like the Council or Coalition may have legitimate governmental institutions, but the Houses aren't all flocking to allow them to visit. The Council does come pretty close though it'd seem.

---

Faction info links: Samura Heavy Industries : LWB : Watchers

[Sarawr!?]

The thing to remember in this topic is that, a House fighting a House doesn't constitute an unlawful action, that's politics, war isn't necessarily criminal, unless of course you're doing things like killing civilians or prisoners.

So while Rheinland and Liberty for example, are at war with one another, neither of them is necessarily unlawful.

Then you've got Outcasts and Corsairs who are at war with each other. Both of those groups consider themselves as legitimate governments in a sense I suppose, BUT, those groups also commit blatantly criminal acts (Smuggling, Slave Trafficking, Drug trafficking, piracy, murder...the list goes on), those actions make them "unlawful", or a term I rather like for them "Pirate Nations".

Then you've got your groups like the Junkers and Freelancers, who really are "Quasi-lawful" since they have no real inclination toward one side of the law or the other, they walk that thin thin line between legality and illegality on a daily basis.

Then you've got your Political/Terrorist groups (Xenos, Red Hessians, The Coalition, The Hellfire Legion, to name a few.) These are groups that use violence and forceful actions to get their way, though generally, in one way or another, they see themselves as "Good guys", and they see their actions as necessary to help "The people". This is something that your average "pirate" doesn't do, a Pirate is a pirate, and most of them aren't shy to admit it.

Some of these "political" groups may use piracy as a means to an end, but they're devoted to something other than profit. For example, looking at the SCRA ID, you'll find that they've the ability to confiscate many of the same items which are considered criminal throughout the Houses, this in part, is due to the nature of The Coalition, they see themselves as an actual 'legitimate' government, whereas the Rogues for example, are ruled by a Warlord, and the Outcasts with their "Council of Dons"

(I know that I use the Coalition a lot here, but it's what I know, and I'm trying to use them to make a point that's not just relevant to that faction).

I think really that the use of terms like "Lawful" and "Unlawful", needs to be reconsidered, because often times it isn't that simple when you look at a faction closely.

The way I see it, the primary group categories that exist are:

House Governments. (Can be "Lawful" or "Unlawful")
Corporations. (Can be "lawful" or "Unlawful")
Pirates. (Generally "Unlawful", given the nature of their activities/goals.)
Non-Aligned/Quasi-Lawful. (Zoners, Junkers, Freelancers...you never know what they're gonna do.)
Fringe/Rebel/Extremist groups. (Can be "Lawful" or "Unlawful", these groups are too varied to align them all on one side.)

---

[LN] Recruitment | Rachel Baker Bio

[Ursus]

Discovery Server Rules does not have the word "lawful" so its not explicitly a rules definition. Some of the IDs use "lawful" and "unlawful" in a rules context, but they dont define them. EG, "Can attack pirates and terrorists in self-defense, to protect another lawful trader, or in defense of corporate bases of the same affiliation." And the opposite of "Can engage pirates, terrorists and lawfuls within their Zone of Influence." Those are statements of permisison so they are rules, but the classification is undefined in the rules... Given the above, lawful-unlawful is alignment for role-play purposes. Any reference in the rules is for "this type of faction" not for specific factions.

Looking at the classification of the factions in the game files, "lawful" is the house government factions and the trade factions that support them (including house corps and also guilds such as BHG), while "unlawful" are the factions that directly oppose them. To be more precise, unlawful factions directly fight the house governments and their supporters, while the lawfuls support the house governments (<-- how its defined in the game files). So in this model, the global factions such as GMG and Zoners do not blatantly attack the house governments so they are classified as lawful. Rebel factions such as Council and Hellfire fight the house governments so they are classified as unlawful (refraining from attacks on civilians is a strategic choice not to alienate the civilian populace, not an alignment indicator). This is pretty simplistic, but its the way the game files are structured so there ya go. Unfortunately the game files and rules do not talk about "semi-lawful" at all, so back to square one for that one, or I could simply choose to ignore it for the work I'm doing. There is no defined concept of "unaligned" either, which would include groups like Zoner and Freelancer, and might also include IMG/GMG if it were defined.

On a broad note, the game only has one axis of alignment (eg, no such thing as unlawful-good or lawful-evil), and its binary off-on. There is room here for Discovery to add some depth by adding a second axis, or by defining intermediate steps such as semi-lawful or unaligned, which do not exist at the moment.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[Jinx]

lawful: factions who abide to the law of an officially recognized authority of a core world. for the matter of lawfulness, only the core / sirian house worlds count.

all factions that respect those laws and follow them are considered lawful

navy, cooperations, police, factions that reside inside their ZoI and enforce the law there.

semi lawful: factions who abide to the law of an officially recognized authority of a core world, but who make their own rules whenever possible. - which includes borderworlds and edgeworlds. - whenever they do pass into recognized house space however, they play by those rules.

IMG and GMG (these days), zoners, factions that may not act unlawful

semi unlawful: factions that play mostly by their own rules. they may break even a house law flagging them unlawful, BUT they tend to only commit minor violations and make up for it.

some smugglers, Junkers, freelancer, mercs, factions that may act unlawful

unlawful: factions that violate the laws of a recognized house. since only core worlds count for that matter, it does not matter if they follow their own code or consider themselves a house as long as the coreworlds do not officially recognize them as such, too.

all pirates, terrorists, factions that primarily act against house laws

gallia:

we assume that gallia is officially recognized as a lawgiving house. even if things with sirius may be twisted or mirrored, the same still applies.

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[Ursus]

lawful: factions who abide to the law of an officially recognized authority of a core world. [...] factions that respect those laws and follow them are considered lawful

This is a good definition for house lawfuls and the supporting factions, the inverse also works for unlawfuls.

semi lawful: factions who abide to the law of an officially recognized authority of a core world, but who make their own rules whenever possible. - which includes borderworlds and edgeworlds. - whenever they do pass into recognized house space however, they play by those rules.

This doesnt work. Junkers do not play by Kusari house laws, for example.

---

Discovery 24/7 Negotiating Tactics:

[lw'nafh]

Lawful - Follows the set laws of the house in which they reside of travel through. 'Illegitimate' houses do not count. (Pirate nations, etc)

Quasi-Lawful - Generally follow the laws, but may not under the right circumstance.

Unlawful - Does not follow the laws of the house(s) they reside. Pirate nations included.

There, you've got your definitions, now stop whining about how the 'classifications are incorrect/ambiguous'.

---

вellυм ѕe ιpѕυм aleт

[Gentlefood]

I'm fairly certain that for the purpose of IDs the line "May protect other lawful traders" applies to all traders who are not smugglers, or directly tied to an unlawful faction. IE: GMG could protect IMG if that was on their ID. Or ALG protect DSE. However roleplay and House politics dictate actions more than IDs.

[Silver]

8| Reavers are semi-lawful.
Since we do work for the unlawfuls.. And we do work for lawful houses at the same time.

Perks of having no shame in killing for cash.

<3

---

[8:32:45 PM] Dusty Lens: Oh no, let me get that. Hello? Oh it's my grandma. She says to be roleplay.
[12:12:00] Traxit: this is smut stop