Interesting point of view Gothmogged. Let me develop a little bit here. And thanks for the opportunity.
I'll start with the agreements

. I agree with your description of the game mechanicals. You can effectively become a Paladin, crush the younglings for fun and be a master of evil

. Acting righteous is not a requirement for the title. In this case, « l'habit fait le moine » (sorry, I don't know how english speakers say it

).
I also agree combat style is closely correlated to classes, although I doubt one determine the other.

That said, in game mechanical terms the "remorseless" requirement is meaningless.
Ouch, now to answer this one, we venture deep into the meaning of meaning !

What does it mean that a requirement is meaningless ?
In mechanical terms, all of this is just a bunch of numbers flipping in a database in a box somewhere. And I really don't care for the futur of that box. From a certain point of view, this is totally meaningless, the whole thing. What am I doing here anyway ?

But, this is a role playing game, isn't it ? We are the ones who put the meaning in it, not some mechanics, don't we ? We play games because it makes us feel something, good feelings, sometime bad feelings

. You press some buttons on your computer, you read you defended your guild from the invaders and saved tons of efforts to build some new guild improvement, you feel good. You go to the forum and answer some newbie questions, you feel good, your a nice guy

. You feel it for real. You can still feel it when the computer is turned off.
I agree there is a difference between remorseless and cruelty in the game mechanics. One the one hand, you develop the "skill" through jobs (can remorseless be called a skill

it sounds like an emotional disorder...) On the other hand, you have to interact with other players in pvp. One could argue that pvp is meaningfull because it involves human interactions

, and that jobs are meaningless because they don't

. Robbing people as a job is meaningless because there is no interaction with humans.
But I disagree with that line of thoughts

. When one is infront of his computer, and is role-playing, and is into the game, he might think « hey, I'm a deathknight, I rule, I'm so cool, I will beat the crap out of some people today in the arena, I will go downtown and rob some defenseless markets, I've got a big sword and I'm a remorseless deathknight, which is so cool

». And then one wants to change his avatar : « I want something that looks very bad, very evil, cause I'm a deathknight you know, I'm evil, I want my avatar to represent it

». You can go to your friends and talk about it : « You know this cool game, Estiah, I was a nice guy because I helped others in the guild and the forum, and I robbed some traders you know, had to do it, I'm a deathknight

». When role-playing, one is at least interacting with his own imagination. One knows its only happening in the computer but the thoughts and the feelings remain. I don't think it is meaningless. I would tend to argue that there are consequences for real, outside of the box.
I would conclude with the same phrase as you, but from an existentialist perspective : the team of Estiah bring you the game, but you work your imagination, with the consequences ; how you choose to play is up to you.
