Recent Tuluki RPT

[Cuusardo]

I was under the impression that it was supposed to be huge and monumental because of the reason behind its planning, not just because of who showed up.  I mean, that sort of thing doesn't happen every day on Zalanthas, so that's why I thought bards would be crawling all over each other to get there for it from the get-go.  Oh well, my bad.

It still was pretty rockin' though.

[jstorrie]

I'd thought that - among other things - the charm that was offered as a prize was so rare and sought-after that it would have dragged many performers out of the woodwork. This is mainly why I thought it so jarring to find only a very small number of PCs had performed.

[spawnloser]

Did anyone know that was to be the prize before the event?

[Reiloth]

I felt that it was more of a hoidy toidy affair. Bards competing with really specific subject matter...Might not be interesting to every Apprentice of the Circle. They might even be really intimidated, by both the subject matter, and the really higher-up audience.

Regardless, I think it was AMAZING. And I think that every other competition i've seen thus far has been completely different from the next. Each has its striking cast of both Judges and Players, somtimes Master Bards show up to perform or judge, somtimes they don't. I have a feeling theres a LOT of virtual competitions going on, involving the different Arcs, all the time, but theres just so many bards, that it doesn't matter if your PC knows or shows up.

For massive scale competitions...Like if someone frigging became a Hlum noble or ...I would expect everyone and their singin' grandma to show up. With beer.

Dunno, just thoughts.

[One Who Probably Knows]

I'm surprised at all of you.

This is clearly in-character information about a single event.  Why would you even be discussing this again?

How does it make a difference?

When Tlaloc a discussion about bards and competitions might be interesting I believe he meant in general and not to open up discussion about this one particular event again.  It was clearly expressed by multiple parties that what happened ended up being a surprise.  Refer to the other thread that got locked for being too IC (just like this thread) to see what happened.

if you guys want to talk about bardic contests, and their NPC/VNPC presence (which I think is a great topic), please feel free to post in a new thread.

Now if you guys want to discuss bardic competiions in general and the possible presence of virtual or npc bards by all means.  Let's get into that.  But please, pretty please, for all of those who spent time trying to plan the rpt and discovered that it was way cooler than they could ever imagine stop dwelling on it.

[Reiloth]

Uh I wasn't divulging IC information. I was vague for a reason, because I wanted to discuss past competitions and future ones.

To stipulate, hypothetically, Competitions with;

-really specific subject matter

-Really Higher Ups expecting the Best of the Best

-High Stake Competition amidst the Bards that perform, as in threats against other performers from performing, and either becoming really famous or the laughing stock if you don't place at all.

These sort of competitions strike me as both enticing and deterring to potential-performers. Its a double edged sword. If you place well, then you make out well. If you don't place well, you stand to lose a lot of face, especially if you -arent- of the Circle. That seems like even less reason to be considered for Apprenticeship. Meanwhile...Master Bards might not even perform, just to give the little guys a shot. It seems like Master Bards already are the shit, already won a BUTTload of competitions in their hayday, and are kind of around to teach and lecture rather than win all the prizes.

The sort of PC-run, small time competitions..I'd love to see more of those. Like Arc competitions, to test Seekers on specific subject matter. Like a series of duels, using only daggers, for Arc of Blades, or small-time plays, one acts, for the Arc of Acting. Or even HOUSE sponsored Competitions. Remember all those little charms, for every House, that exist? Those would make -perfect- prizes for Circle Bards. I'd also like to see more Sponsoring. Theres a few Bards I know of that are patronless, or being swallowed up by one patron because no other Nobles or Faithful are jumping at the opportunity. See a Bard you like perform in your local tavern? Seen them perform a couple of time? Want to bend them to your will? Make them your partisan. It'll be a great symbiotic relationship.

[spawnloser]

Problem I see with your questioning why bards are patronless.  There is only one active noble house in the north due to the fact that we're still waiting on the grand opening of the new system for noble houses up around those parts.  The bards around are already known and have already made impressions on the Chosen of that House, I'm assuming.

[Morfeus]

Theres a few Bards I know of that are patronless, or being swallowed up by one patron because no other Nobles or Faithful are jumping at the opportunity.

I don't really like this approach. I don't think Chosens/Faithfuls should "jump" and hire everyone around. I think working for Chosens/Faithfuls should be an honour and I think that one who hires everything what moves is not doing a good work (IMHO), simply because it should be the Apprentice bard/servant/hunter/future Aide/Guard who jumps at the opportunity and approaches Chosen/Faithful to impress him/her with abilities and ask him/her for patronship. Indeed, situation grows different once the commoner in question gains power/powerful friends/wealth/whatever.

IMHO, of course.

[Reiloth]

Problem I see with your questioning why bards are patronless.  There is only one active noble house in the north due to the fact that we're still waiting on the grand opening of the new system for noble houses up around those parts.  The bards around are already known and have already made impressions on the Chosen of that House, I'm assuming.

Good point. I merely see it as a means to have an 'in' towards fame and fortune. It offers good funding for ideas for competitions, and a feasible means to make it happen. It also would likely help with certain Arcs, if you needed to travel or find a language instructer, etc. Might help with Competitions too, if its a Celebration of Commemorating the Idea of Slaves, and your patron is a Winrotholi Noble.

I also think its viable to be patron-less. I think 90% of my characters that were Bards were as such, and did fine. Theres perks in either direction, I suppose.

[purity]

You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

I don't really like this approach. I don't think Chosens/Faithfuls should "jump" and hire everyone around. I think working for Chosens/Faithfuls should be an honour and I think that one who hires everything what moves is not doing a good work (IMHO), simply because it should be the Apprentice bard/servant/hunter/future Aide/Guard who jumps at the opportunity and approaches Chosen/Faithful to impress him/her with abilities and ask him/her for patronship. Indeed, situation grows different once the commoner in question gains power/powerful friends/wealth/whatever.

IMHO, of course.

Its a two way street actually and i don't think i am disagreeing with you but just attempting to reiterate .

a noble can only give patronage to a few people before others(templars/nobles/commoners) think that they are 'loose' or don't have very high standards for those that they form patronages with. There by devaluing the patronages already formed and further devaluing and future patronages.

On the other side of the coin some commoners(Mainly the PC ones) will know that what they can offer someone is valuable, they know that they are good and will not go offering or accepting patronage to a noble or templar when they know another noble/templar with more influence/power (or no shameful marks ,etc,etec) be interested in their services and a more valuable patronage.

[Gimfalisette]

Other comments about the mechanics of patronage:

Tulukis just aren't gossipy enough about patronage, IMO. I'd think this would really be a subject of great interest to a lot of people, but you just don't hear talk about it, and the word about who is partisan to who doesn't seem to get around well. I'm hopeful this will change when the new nobles come in, and maybe there will be a bit more struggle over obtaining good partisans. I think this is part of the reason why there have been some patronless bards, actually--because there's just not enough gossip happening. (Tongue-in-cheek: Maybe Tulukis are just taking "subtle" way too far and deciding not to talk at all )

Of course, there are also many Tuluki PC commoners who seem completely uninformed as to what patronage is and how it works. That kind of boggles me since it's well laid out in the "Tuluki roleplay" doc: http://www.armageddon.org/general/tuluki_rp.html#politics . There's nothing there that says patronage/partisanship applies only to bards, by far. And as as patronage is a custom that is the direct result of the changed relationship between nobles and commoners that came with the Occupation, I would think that Tuluki commoners of all stripes would be well-aware of the system. (And proud of it too, because it's a huge difference between Allanak and Tuluk.)

As to who jumps on who for patronage, when it comes to bards: It happens both ways, as it should. Sometimes the hopeful partisan offers his/her services, sometimes the potential patron comes asking about the matter. It's a somewhat delicate issue to my mind. And it's not really that the Chosen or Faithful are jumping on every potential partisan and snatching them up immediately, by far. However, the truth is that at any given time the number of active PC bards is smaller than the number of active PCs who could be patrons. So there are some categories of potential patrons that never/rarely see the "trickle down" of partisan bards, because all the bards got patronage higher up the food chain. With a crop of new nobles coming in at some point in the future, I see this issue as becoming more acute, not less--bards will be snatched up for patronage even more quickly. In some ways that's good (I'd like to see more of the intense competition for good partisans that the docs imply), and in some ways that's not good (my wish would be that every PC Faithful, Chosen, and merchant house family member have at least one partisan bard, but there will never be enough PC bards for that to happen).

[marko]

Gamfalisette makes a great point about patronage in Tuluk - it is used less than what I would like to see happen.  All too often we see people hired directly into an organization instead of becoming a partisan but this isn't only due to the employer - it seems that many people suffer from employee syndrome and need the limitations and restrictions that comes with proper employment.

Patronage, in a nutshell, is a formal relationship between two people that basically says they will help one another out in some manner.  Usually patronage does not have the same restrictions that employment has (for example, the rules of not leaving the city or rules of when to do certain activities) but still offer many of the benefits of employment (for example, the protection and social influence of the patron).  

I'm not sure if all Tulukis would be gossipy about patronage - since it is simply a part of life.  When making introductions people would usually make mention who of the patrons are.  So, if hunter X has a noble patron then when introducing himself it would be, "I'm X, partisan of noble."

But, I would note that elements within Tuluk would be very gossipy about patronage - Bards of the Circle would constantly keep track of which bard has which patron - but it is likely to be kept within the Circle.  But would the Circle Bards be tracking artisan partisans?  Or hunter partisans?  Probably not as much.  In the same vein many nobles would watch to see who the other nobles are patroning.

[Gimfalisette]

I'm not sure if all Tulukis would be gossipy about patronage - since it is simply a part of life.  When making introductions people would usually make mention who of the patrons are.  So, if hunter X has a noble patron then when introducing himself it would be, "I'm X, partisan of noble."

This would be really cool to see happening. It would make patronage seem alive and well and the full system that it's supposed to be. But a lot of Tuluki commoners don't seem to know anything about patronage at all. Can we change this ICly? If so, how? Perhaps when new characters are looking for jobs, we suggest patronage? What else could we do?

But, I would note that elements within Tuluk would be very gossipy about patronage - Bards of the Circle would constantly keep track of which bard has which patron - but it is likely to be kept within the Circle.  But would the Circle Bards be tracking artisan partisans?  Or hunter partisans?  Probably not as much.  In the same vein many nobles would watch to see who the other nobles are patroning.

I don't see much tracking of patronage happening at all, generally speaking. The information on bardic patronage doesn't flow. And nobles and templars and merchants don't seem quite as hungry for this information as it seems to me they should be. (There are some exceptions to that.) Actually, sometimes bardic patronage is almost secretive, which is really odd to me. I'd think that bards would be all name-dropping happy, "My patron, Chosen Lady Dimples..." but I don't perceive that happening often. What's the point of patronage, from the patron's perspective, if the partisan isn't openly declaring his/her support?

[Dalmeth]

One of the problems with patronage is that a new character has the idea that he or she has nothing to offer a patron.  So they head off on their own and eventually get killed.

[spawnloser]

I'm hopeful this will change when the new nobles come in, and maybe there will be a bit more struggle over obtaining good partisans.

I find fault with this statement.  Lemme tell you why.  Patrons should have multiple partisans...partisans should only have one patron.  Patrons shouldn't be scrambling and fighting for a good partisan as much as the partisans are clawing their way to a good patron.  Yes, the patrons should be competing for partisans...but there are a lot more partisans, and that means more competition.

Don't feel entitled.  You're not.  This is Armageddon.

[marko]

Can we change this ICly? If so, how? Perhaps when new characters are looking for jobs, we suggest patronage? What else could we do?

Yup, that's about all you can do.  And keep talking about it on the boards and refering people to the documentation about patronage.

The biggest problem is our own western mindset is contrary to accepting patronage as viable - we tend to think in terms of go to school, get an education, and find a good job.  Therefore we bring that into the game and look for jobs.  

Patronage is more open than a job since it allows the partisan to deal with multiple organizations, lets the partisan have freedom, they can make their own decisions, etc..

But we have this problem a lot with Tuluk - there are no contemporary or historical western civilizations that are similar to Tuluk.  Without a frame of reference we have to rely on documentation and on our experiences in the game.  

... (There are some exceptions to that.) Actually, sometimes bardic patronage is almost secretive, which is really odd to me. I'd think that bards would be all name-dropping happy, "My patron, Chosen Lady Dimples..." but I don't perceive that happening often. What's the point of patronage, from the patron's perspective, if the partisan isn't openly declaring his/her support?

Well, from what I've gathered about Tuluk there aren't a lot of potential patrons around at the moment so some exceptions would make it like 50% of the potential patrons which isn't bad...

But, on a more serious note, the snippets we've seen about the Opening of the Northern Houses have appeared to include an emphasis on patronage and the nobles having less employed character and more patroned characters.  I think this will have a significant impact on helping Tuluk grow and flourish as a culture.

When I played a Circle Bard we religiously kept track of the members of the Circle's patronage.  So I suspect this is a thing that probably comes and goes.  To me, it makes sense that Circle Bards would be very observant as to whom is patroned to whom and what social advances are being made by both patron and partisan.

As to why would patronage be kept quiet?  Well, I can see it for some people who might like to keep it as an ace up their sleeve.  But, for most bards it doesn't make a huge amount of sense - I would think that they would be announcing their patronage at any competition and before any performance at least - since, typically, a bard is patroned to assist in the overall growth of the patron's social standing.

spawnloser makes a great point that we should keep in mind - patrons tend to have multiple partisans (because they can afford it) and partisans tend to have one patron.  If a partisan takes on multiple patrons then the belief is that they are diluting the benefits to the patron - which may lead to a patron to drop the partisan.  And a partisan who switches patrons regularly may be seen as unreliable.

But to make a further note - just because someone is patroned does not necessarily mean they are restricted to dealing solely with that patron.  That is entirely dependant on the individual patronage agreement.  Some allow partisans to deal with everyone and some might place restrictions (like a Noble may not like another Noble and thus inform their partisan that they cannot perform services for that other).

[Gimfalisette]

I'm hopeful this will change when the new nobles come in, and maybe there will be a bit more struggle over obtaining good partisans.

I find fault with this statement.  Lemme tell you why.  Patrons should have multiple partisans...partisans should only have one patron.  Patrons shouldn't be scrambling and fighting for a good partisan as much as the partisans are clawing their way to a good patron.  Yes, the patrons should be competing for partisans...but there are a lot more partisans, and that means more competition.

Well, to quote the docs at you:

Patronage of a particularly good bard is considered a status symbol amongst the upper-class. Often an up and coming bard will be courted by many nobles, merchants, templars and wealthy independents for service. In the North, Bardic Circle bards are always in high demand while unaffiliated bards are often considered to be of a lesser value and their services cheap.

It is on the above documentation that I'm basing my hope for more struggle over good partisans. And of course, in PC terms, there are not more potential partisans than patrons, but the opposite--which I noted is a problem. I think that if there's a good bard or any other kind of partisan out there--then yes, there should be competition over that partisan. Partisans should also compete over good patrons, but that will only happen more if there are more partisan PCs.

Don't feel entitled.  You're not.  This is Armageddon.

:roll:

[spawnloser]

You're taking this a little personally and a bit less general than I'm intending things, Gim.  That is all I will say except to reiterate a bit more explicitly something I said before, which you did quote but did not comment on besides to make a silly face.

You're not entitled.  Don't feel that way.  You're not entitled unless you're a noble.  Noone should have certain notions on how people should think about their character.  There is always the chance that there's just something about your character that pisses someone off when you thought that person should adore your character.

Now, to be VERY specific.  Gimsfalisette, I have noticed quite a few times that your position on the board in many cases DOES seem to come from how people are treating your character and how you think they should.  Instead of bitching about it here, maybe you should try to change how people are treating your character through IG action?

[Gimfalisette]

spawnloser, respectfully, you are 100% wrong as to what I think about how my character is treated in game. When I post on the forums, it is from an entirely general perspective about the whole culture of bards in Tuluk. I speak of trends and things I've noticed. My educational background is in Anthropology, and my professional career path is in data analysis. So analyzing cultural trends is something I do. I think you're stretching far far far to post as you've just done about me, and I honestly think it's completely unwarranted. If there's more you've got to say about your opinion of me, please feel free to PM.

[spawnloser]

The reason I said what I did was because the trend that I'd mentioned began with a complaint made by you that people were not treating your character they way you thought they should.

I still maintain that partisans should be fighting for patronage more than patrons are fighting for partisans.  This is a general statement and I stand by it.  If you think that things are off in game, fix it in game.

[mansa]

I still maintain that partisans should be fighting for patronage more than patrons are fighting for partisans.

Change that to aides and nobles and you got the same argument we've had over the past 10 years.

[LoD]

I still maintain that partisans should be fighting for patronage more than patrons are fighting for partisans.  This is a general statement and I stand by it.  If you think that things are off in game, fix it in game.

Unfortunately, the documentation doesn't stand by you.  It mentions that up and coming bards are often courted by nobles, merchants, yadda yadda yadda.  It doesn't mentiion that bards often roam from House to House in search of patronage, or that performances often double as interviews that influential patrons are frequently invited to attend.

Now, I do agree that most people playing bards portray them as somewhat of a superstar; someone that would be highly sought after and impressive to a would-be patron.  Perhaps they are.  I've seen nothing Gimfalisette has posted in this thread to indicate that she feels these relationships should be changed/upheld because they weren't happening to her character in-game.

Much of the whom-pursues-whom between bards (or anyone) and patrons would have to do with the accomplishments of the person in question.  The documentation states that "up and coming bards" would be pursued, which means to me that they've a few successes under their belt.  They've achieved a few things that can be displayed, prominently or upon request, which make them attractive to the potential patron.

We've all heard the complaints, "Good help is hard to find."  Companies often pay expensive recruiting fees for people to scout and bring them quality workers rather than sifting through the junk applications obtained in the downstairs lobby.  I don't see the Houses being much different.  They are concerned with quality, not quantity, and those that come begging at the door are probably not the ones they want in the first place.  So it might make sense that the "higher quality" performers, soldiers, crafters, and such are approached and courted rather than the other way around.

-LoD

[spawnloser]

(sigh)  I'll say it again.  I was speaking in general terms  I also never said that anything in THIS thread is what sparked what I said to Gim.

Yes, bards should be sought after, courted, etc.  I don't think they should feel entitled, however.  If they act like they're so cool that every Chosen should want them, isn't that suggesting that they are better than the Chosen?  I would maintain that the documentation does not support that ATTITUDE, which was what I was taking issue with.

[LoD]

(sigh)  I'll say it again.  I was speaking in general terms  I also never said that anything in THIS thread is what sparked what I said to Gim.

You mentioned your stance on whom would generally pursue whom between partisan and patron, but you choose to depart some specific comments to Gimfalisette here.  If they don't have anything to do with this thread, then why even include them if it wasn't to make it personal.

I understand that you don't care for the haughty attitude of the bard/aide persona, whom you feel believe themselves above the Chosen by expecting to be pursued, approached, and courted as if they were the more valuable part of that relationship.

I might too, until I consider that the patron sees them as a commodity.  They fawn over them like they would a prize poodle, or a mink coat.  Showing it off to everyone, making sure that everyone knows it belongs to them because it's cute, talented, en vouge, expensive, or famous.  But as much attention as they lather onto these objects, they are no more important in the grand scheme of things than the next commoner removed from that very specific environment.

Proud to be someone's prize poodle?  Sure, why not.  If someone steps on your tail, you can whine and your patron might give them a dirty look or make them disappear, but despite what ambitions and thoughts you have, all you're ever likely going to be is a common prize to the wealthy.  Not a peer, not a friend, not an equal.  A prize for which they pay you handsomely in coin and deed.

The blurring of northern social lines might make these relationships appear softer than they are, but push come to shove, my guess is that many partisans would be disappointed to find where they stood if the patron was forced to trim the social fat from an organization.

-LoD