Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
No offense, but calling "Neutral alignment, simply accepting quests" a concept for an organization seems like a stretch. It's just a description of a single trait + a statement of the obvious, as any of our organizations will be involved in completing tasks.
I'm just finding it difficult to understand what could be more clearly defined that would differentiate the existing concepts. Although, if the character Sifa wasn't a slave, I could have imagined it.
I don't want Iron Hearts 2.0, where a crazy barbarian with an axe is accepted into the organization simply because she's a new player character.
Come on, I wrote a whole elaborate post there to justify it.
Are there any?
Hmm, no, I'm being slow. For some reason, I thought that the Heroes player got a revolutionary card, not a rogue's card. However, the latter even more strongly emphasizes my point.
Given the presence of Arteryans in our squad, the idea of serving Airisufir doesn't sound very good. Their description strongly hints at a future conflict with the church, considering their desire to cooperate with Lisliar and subjugate non-humans.