Life Oaths or Tour of Duty

[Potaje]

 This idea came while watching Rome and thinking about old soldiers retiring in game with out being stored and the difference in what having a Tour of duty might mean versus life oath for those in the Militia or Legion clan.

Has little to do with getting in and wanting to get out as much as allowing a player to have more options in their Pc's life that are not going to innately be detrimental.

   

[Tzurahro]

As a player I hate lifeoaths.  

As a player, I hate being excluded from the juicy things that are hidden from everyone but the most trusted of the inner circle occurring within a clan.

As an organization (with sometimes I get to be as a Storyteller), I'm not giving up my goodies unless I got my hooks in someone good.  If they want the juicy stuff and to be part of the inner circle, I have to own them.

[Kismetic]

Asking for a life oath off the gate seems fairly damning to recruitment

I am unfamiliar with any clan that does this, for what it's worth.

"We'll take you as a recruit for a year, but after that, you've gotta swear your life to us."  That's off the gate.  It doesn't sound very fun, either.

[Talia]

True, but an Allanaki militia recruitment rule that has been run for a vast number of years has been recently broken. Why not change other rules to afford players a more playable clan lifestyle?

It seems hypocritical to me that some rules that have been upheld for thousands of years can be broken at a whim, yet others (such as life oaths) can not.

Staff needed to do a thing that was potentially a big bummer for a group of players, so in order for those players to feel like they had options and weren't being screwed over, staff made a decision to allow a one-time exception to the rules. It doesn't seem really fair to call that "hypocritical," nor was it whimsical in the least.

I get that some players have long-standing negative feelings about life oaths in certain clans, but that doesn't make life oaths a bad thing for the game. And, no one is forcing you to play in those roles. You will not always have unlimited freedom in every role; that's part of what produces interesting differences in various character roles in the game.

[Marauder Moe]

I wouldn't mind seeing life-oaths done away with, at least as a broad clan policy.

Life oaths as an enforcement of trustworthiness seems meager as best, seeing as the life oath itself is already a matter of trust.  One can still commit treason and/or flee a clan after swearing such an oath.

Furthermore, not every character who would desire to leave a clan would also desire to betray that clan's secrets.  Some just want a different life that the clan simply cannot provide.

I'd just as soon have each circumstance (of a character wishing to leave) handled on a case by case basis.  Though, in truth, this already happens with clan policies.  Sometimes exceptions are made, as has been noted.

[Potaje]

I want to reinforce that I do not mean my post in anyway as a condemnation of the Life Oath, just a contemplative questioning of it versus the idea of Tours of duty. And to field others insight or feeling of that.

[EldritchOrigins]

Organizations don't want to train "noobs" and have them leave to their enemies/competition.  They want some kind of commitment.  If there weren't official life oaths, there'd be implied ones.  If Amos quit Tor and started working for Salarr after a couple years, I'm sure he'd probably have an accident soon after starting with Salarr.

Also there is always breaking the rules.  Sure there are consequences, but consequences can be exciting (even if short lived).

[Whiran Luck]

If you don't want your pc to have full access to a clan's 'secrets' or goings on, or don't want to be promoted to a leadership position, no one is forcing your pc to take a life oath. At the same time, you can't really have it both ways. If an organization wants to trust you enough to take care of you, protect you, give you money, power and authority, as well as juicy secrets, then you need to prove it to them by swearing your life-long service to them. It's a pledge that basically says if they invest all this money, effort, time and trust into you, you're not going to bounce as soon as something turns your head, and that you'll follow your orders and not betray whoever is giving them.

Personally, I fail to see the problem or even how this wouldn't or shouldn't be commonplace in the game world.

For most commoners who work for any organization, I am sure many take life-oaths after a few years regardless of rank since it generally means they can ensure their family is taken care of, they will always have a place to work, and the house now protects them. Still, many other organizations offer positions where a lifeoath is not needed, and some will choose to keep certain employees at a certain level even if they do offer life oaths. It all depends on the organization.

The feeling that this is unfair may coincide with the change to a majority of player-run plots, with players/characters believing they are much more important in/to the gameworld than they would otherwise be.

Why should life oaths be important and taken:

- Job security. Generally, being offered a life oath means whoever is offering you this wants you to work for them and doesn't intend to fire you (or kill you).

- Protection. Many people who offer life-oaths also offer the clan protection to go along with it. Organizations are less desirous to see their lifesworn employees, of proven loyalty and mettle, killed than that of some fly-by-night who doesn't even know if they're going to be working there the next year. Sometimes, they'll even go to extra lengths to ensure this protection. And the life-swearee now has people they can mostly trust to watch their back.

- Comfort. In many organizations, the comfort and happiness of loyal and trusted servants is of importance and a life-sworn oath-taker may even finagle for the care of their family in return for swearing the service, ensuring a hassle-free life for them. Lifesworn members of organizations tend to have a higher standard of living overall compared to those who are not, whether this be through increased pay, or even having the organization take care of their expenses altogether.

- Trust. The organization will trust you, and thusly open up deeper wells of information for you to partake of. As a player, you may learn cool new things and secrets. As a character, this makes your pc even more valuable as a resource to protect.

- Peer acceptance. In organizations that employ a mixture of lifesworn and non-lifesworn employees, the lifesworn employees will likely be trusted more, be paid and outfitted better, enjoy better discounts or even free goods (GMH), receive less punishment or better 'missions', so on and so forth. Many lifesworn may even share a comraderie by this fact that by its nature stringently excludes the non-lifesworn employees who may share a state of being an 'outsider'. Becoming lifesworn to this end, ensures that your fellows trust you and at the very least, accord you the same respect they do to others in their brother/sisterhood of similar status.


As far as retirement goes, I'm not sure why that's even relevant. No job in the game has retirement benefits, though I could be mistaken. Nobles of advanced age might step down from whatever title they granted if their family pressures them into it, but most will cling to the power their position holds until death. People don't retire, they work until they either cannot physically work (at which point they might change professions, or if they are lucky, have enough doting children who are able to pay their upkeep), or until they drop dead. Soldiers might end up being promoted to more decorated ranks and be expected to take up mentoring/teaching duties as opposed to field-work as age makes it more difficult, or may receive special dispensation as a 'reserve' soldier and go on to find some other business to do for their respective employer as an aide, shop-keeper, advisor or dung-sweeper should age and accumulated injuries prevent them from actively participating as a soldier.

I'd actually argue that the closest thing to retirement in the game only comes WHEN you swear a life oath-- in that your organization is more likely to let you step back from whatever duties you're responsible for to take a more sedate, more advisory role as your age prevents you from doing as much work as you did in your youth. They're more liable to trust you after the service, you'd still probably be helping them out from time to time, and they might even pay your upkeep if you don't have children to take care of you.

*plink plink*

[Talia]

From a player perspective, as someone who has played under life oaths, to be honest I do not think that most of the dissatisfaction with life oaths comes from the oath itself; it comes from month after month of being in the same city, playing the same guild, with the same characters, with the same activities available. The problem is, though, let's say Lieutenant Amos is allowed to quit the Arm of the Dragon...realistically, what is he going to do next? If he goes to Tuluk, they'll probably off him as a spy. I guess he could go to Red Storm and greb spice for a change of pace   The most likely result of all is that he'll start wandering the wilderness and just get himself killed like any other character. Which is fine. But like I said, I don't think the boredom problem really comes from the clan or the life oath to the clan; it comes from playing Amos for 6+ months (or much more).

I think there are methods of combating boredom that are available to all players. (That is, methods which are ICly realistic and won't necessarily end in a dumb/pointless death.) The first step is to talk to the dudes in charge. Maybe your PC can get a leave to go off and do whatever for an IC month. Maybe your PC can be appointed to run a scouting group to X location. Maybe your PC can do blah blah blah. Apply some creativity rather than griping about the circumstances, because your creativity can potentially benefit both you and the players around you.

Also, everything Whiran Luck said is A+.

[Nyr]

Asking for a life oath off the gate seems fairly damning to recruitment

I am unfamiliar with any clan that does this, for what it's worth.

"We'll take you as a recruit for a year, but after that, you've gotta swear your life to us."  That's off the gate.  It doesn't sound very fun, either.

I wouldn't really call that "off the gate."   That's a year later.  That's a year past the gate.  That's not "off the gate," that's about a year down the road through the gate.  You can even turn around a year after you've gotten past the gate and go back to the gate, heading somewhere else!  Hell, as Marauder Moe puts it (correctly), sometimes later than that, depending on circumstances and on a case-by-case basis. IC determinations, and all that.

I'd just as soon have each circumstance (of a character wishing to leave) handled on a case by case basis.  Though, in truth, this already happens with clan policies.  Sometimes exceptions are made, as has been noted.

So, anyway...

Maybe the answer isn't to change the clan policies because you don't think that is very fun.  The easiest thing to suggest would be to not play in a clan that does stuff that you don't agree with policy-wise (whether that be IC or OOC).  Play what you want to play, and all that.  You can also talk to the pertinent staff via the request tool to see if they're interested in reviewing policies and such based on your experience (it's possible that you could be mistaken on something as well, so they can correct you if need be).  Things have changed before by going through the right channels.

[Kismetic]

Nyr, I don't think you're seeing what I'm saying, here.  A recruitment period of a year may well be a period of time after the instant of joining.  So is five minutes, dude.  The idea presented is that the life oath is expected, and required to join the clan in an official capacity (as in, not Doogie Noobhauser).

And looking at it from a realistic perspective --  is a year really enough time to ensure that someone is trustworthy and competent enough to earn something like a life oath?

But again, my issue was with playability.  People who want to swear life oaths with their characters seem few and far between.  It should be a reward, not a sacrifice.

[Nyr]

A life oath is expected and required past a certain rank in many clans.  This is more than likely not going to change.  Your problem is with one (or perhaps two) clan(s) in particular, it seems.  Please discuss this with clan staff, as suggested, or deal with it IC.

[Kismetic]

A life oath is expected and required past a certain rank in many clans.  This is more than likely not going to change.  Your problem is with one (or perhaps two) clan(s) in particular, it seems.  Please discuss this with clan staff, as suggested, or deal with it IC.

Those situations where someone has worked hard, and clawed their way up the ranks to get to X rank in Y clan ...  it makes perfect sense taking a life oath, at this point.  You're correct, in fact, that I'm referencing only a couple clans.  You're also correct about the inclusion of this debate into my next report.

If it's unclear, I'm batting for the home team, here.  I think it makes reasonable sense to ask why, in these (one or two) case(s).

Edit:  And thanks for your (and Talia's) quick responses.

[EldritchOrigins]

I don't think these life oaths are mandatory, but what is an organization to think if they offer the opportunity and someone doesn't take it?

[Case]

I've spent the majority of my time on Arm under a life oath and I'm a player that thrives on variety. Instead of worrying about the confines of the characters, I've tended to make it my goal to do what I want regardless of what the rules say. That's pretty Zalanthan in my mind. Only issues I've ever had are slaps on the wrist for not doing things on the sly enough from time to time. Some things you just can't do, mostly due to the risk of it. *shrug*

If you are so worried that you'll get fed up doing something routine, why even be in the clan to begin with? If you stick it out long enough, you may be able to change things. If you put in efforts to fix the rut, there's a good chance you'll generate fun and risk for everybody involved. On all the RPIs I've played, this expectation that everybody will hand you fun on a platter day in day out is a significant reason for leader PCs burning out and the high turnover for clanned PCs. If your barrier to enjoying a clan is the idea you are intended to stay in it for the character's life, you're doing it wrong. If the clan was fun and worth being in, from the efforts of all the PCs involved, you would stay anyway!

[Synthesis]

Everyone knows life oaths are just a reason to pursue a character beyond all measures that would grossly be considered reasonable, given the character's status, and in a manner completely disproportionate to the offense committed.

Private Schmuckatelli deserts the AoD to live with his boyfriend in Red Storm?  

10,000 'SID BOUNTY

SCRAMBLE THE WHIRAN FORCE

MURDER EVERY PC WHO EVER SMILED AT HIM

CRY HAVOC AND LET SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR

[Celest]

A life oath is expected and required past a certain rank in many clans.  This is more than likely not going to change.  Your problem is with one (or perhaps two) clan(s) in particular, it seems.  Please discuss this with clan staff, as suggested, or deal with it IC.

While this is true, I think it's also worth mentioning that in a few of these clans, the non-lifesworm rank is recruit and thus isn't really considered a part of the clan, ICly. So to suggest that there are no clans which require you to be lifesworn to join right at the gate is a little... iffy. Codedly, from an OOC perspective? No, there are no clans. From an IC perspective? Yes, many clans require a Life Oath to officially join their ranks, instead of being a temp who gets to wear their colors.

Edit: "many" being, many of the ones I am aware of. All the ones I'm not aware of may be the opposite, but I know two clans off hand which I'm fairly certain require life oaths to join.

Also, I think Jeshin is absolutely right. There absolutely are clans which give "taboo" knowledge to their members, and the two I can think of that are the most obvious are the two which happen to be lifesworn clans IIRC, specifically because they deal with those who use "taboo" knowledge on a regular basis. In other words, it's not stuff you would want Runner Amos talking about in the Gaj. This knowledge may not be secret OOC, and many players may be aware of it, but they're not commonly known IC I think.

Of course I may be confusing just which clans are life sworn and which are not

Edit edit: I also think that Life Oaths would be a pain, not because of the life oath themselves, but because leadership or minion stagnation can mean that your long-played PC can end up out in the cold with few options. I've never done a life oath, though, so I don't know for sure.

[brytta.leofa]

If I were renovating AoD docs based on my own limited experience and viewpoint, I'd start the life oaths at corporal, not at private, but require privates to enlist for at least 3 years at a time.

[MeTekillot]

Why don't you guys just have your characters make total asses of themselves while in the clan that gets them thrown out but not killed?

Why not trying to pull some string with the higher-ups and a little application of favors and coin to have you "fired"?

[DustMight]

But what do you mean "require 3 years of enlistment" - how do you enforce that "required" aspect if not with the only punishment that we currently have in place: death.

I would like to see more enforcement options:  break and oath and get banished from a city or unable to sell to NPCs of a particular House or have unofficial bounties.  You split from the Byn as a runner with your training sword?  Maybe the privates arrange something just 'cause your character is an idiot and used them.  More fun than officially sanctioned death-hunts.

That said - as much as I used to not like life oaths - what's the real problem?  Your character joined and clan and now doesn't like it?  That's the real-world man, RP it.  When people join the Army and don't like it they figure something out.  Some of them end up in jail.  Since we don't put characters in jail the options are storage or death.  Maiming would be cool, but likely a deserter's player isn't going to let that happen - unless they are a pretty cool RPer. 

In the end life oaths SHOULD remain for many ranks (as has been stated by multiple posters) but perhaps desertion at lower levels could simply result in maiming, banishment, loss of wealth (even bank accounts in the case of city militia) and status.

Being known as an oath-breaker in a harsh world should put a character on par with the lowest of the low, when thieving scum wouldn't want anything to do with you as they couldn't trust you.

Which brings to mind another type of punishment - codedly marking the character as a oath-breaker.  Watch him try to get another job.

[Potaje]

But what do you mean "require 3 years of enlistment" - how do you enforce that "required" aspect if not with the only punishment that we currently have in place: death.

I would like to see more enforcement options:  break and oath and get banished from a city or unable to sell to NPCs of a particular House or have unofficial bounties.  You split from the Byn as a runner with your training sword?  Maybe the privates arrange something just 'cause your character is an idiot and used them.  More fun than officially sanctioned death-hunts.

That said - as much as I used to not like life oaths - what's the real problem?  Your character joined and clan and now doesn't like it?  That's the real-world man, RP it.  When people join the Army and don't like it they figure something out.  Some of them end up in jail.  Since we don't put characters in jail the options are storage or death.  Maiming would be cool, but likely a deserter's player isn't going to let that happen - unless they are a pretty cool RPer.  

In the end life oaths SHOULD remain for many ranks (as has been stated by multiple posters) but perhaps desertion at lower levels could simply result in maiming, banishment, loss of wealth (even bank accounts in the case of city militia) and status.

Being known as an oath-breaker in a harsh world should put a character on par with the lowest of the low, when thieving scum wouldn't want anything to do with you as they couldn't trust you.

Which brings to mind another type of punishment - codedly marking the character as a oath-breaker.  Watch him try to get another job.

Desertion was not the comparison, It was Tour of duty versus Life Oath, so where you launch into a good point about desertion, the real consideration and answer to the proposed issue was the three year commitment. A soldier with looking at three years has a point of departure attainable with out the need to be hunted.
Never needing to -desert- in the first place.

I would add is a factual, rl, part of our working army if you wish to pull that aspect out. Hence, Tour of Duty.

[MeTekillot]

I've seen the force-storage from high-ranked people trying to leave clans. I wonder. Why do they get force stored, exactly?

[Wolfsong]

Probably because it wouldn't make sense to break established game documentation to slot them in elsewhere.

[My 2 sids]

For newer players, PCs used to have to take their life-oaths a lot sooner than they do now.

I think what some are forgetting are the VNPCs:
1) most commoners go from job to job, most don't even have full-time employment directly interacting with the rich and noble.

2) we no longer play slaves.  ICly the word for a full-time servant who would be given close access to secrets and truly protected is slave



That's the way the game is right now.  Maybe they'll open up slaves again, maybe we'll have Arm.2, maybe they'll start requesting leadership-rolls for unclanned.  But, until then, there is the semi-IC/semi-OOC need for almost every PC to take an oath and die from murder.

[Nyr]

I've seen the force-storage from high-ranked people trying to leave clans. I wonder. Why do they get force stored, exactly?

I haven't seen this happen without damn good reason.

Is it a sponsored role?  Okay, sorry, you were brought in for a specific purpose.  Tough titties if you don't want to play it.  Either play it or store.
Is it a tribal role?  Okay, sorry, you agreed to play to the documentation, not the exception to it.  Tough titties if you don't want to play it.  Either play it or store.

Otherwise, you'd need to provide specific examples, and I can't think of any example of force-storage on someone that tried to leave a clan that didn't fit the above two categories.

But, until then, there is the semi-IC/semi-OOC need for almost every PC to take an oath and die from murder.*

*in some specific instances in perhaps two clans in the entire game
I mean, if you don't want to play in a clan exclusively, don't play in a clan...exclusively...or work it out IC.

If I were renovating AoD docs based on my own limited experience and viewpoint, I'd start the life oaths at corporal, not at private, but require privates to enlist for at least 3 years at a time.

We are not discussing what to do for specific clans on the GDB.  You may take this to discussion with the clan staff, but clan documentation/policy for specific clans will never be decided based on player consensus on the GDB.