Life Oaths or Tour of Duty

[evilcabbage]

Honestly, if you're willing to put in tht first year as a recruit? You can probably take a life oath.

If you can't take the life oath, then you can't take it,leave the clan and find one that doesn't require it, or find a way to be contracted as a mercenary. I'm sure this is possible.

[Nyr]

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.

So where should the line be drawn?  Okay, if you join any clan in the Known World that recruits people in-game, you basically have no real authority, and you have very little (if anything) you can do without the approval of the higher-ups.  If you want to do more, you stick with it over time.  Past a certain point, you'll probably have to say "okay I'm going to stick with you guys" or say "okay I'm not going to stick with you guys, have a nice clan."  A recruit is the shit end of the stick of the clan, maybe, but they're still part of the clan. Semantics?  Maybe.  If you're arguing that recruits aren't really part of the clan, then I'd argue that the recruit stage shapes what a player wants to do in a clan--or whether they want to even stay in the clan at all.  It doesn't matter if it's "part of the clan" or not.  It matters what the player and the PC decide to do with what they have available.  If you want to play a role in which you don't have to swear for life to it and can leave at any time, there's a word for that, and it's "mercenary" or "partisan" or "grunt" or whatever the lexicon is for an IC group of people.  Some groups might even let you hang around at the "no authority and few responsibilities" stage of their clan ranks, too. 

The reason for the differing cutoffs for a life oath is more often than not based in IC stuff that should be left as IC speculation, really.  (Perhaps it can even be addressed IC--through your clan staff via a report, if necessary.)  There are some really good IC reasons for it being the way it is in the majority of these cases.  Maybe you aren't privy to knowing why.  Still, if you're unsure or have some concern, it can't hurt to inquire with your clan staff.

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.

Good point, and--as mentioned above--exceptions are made, and sometimes more frequently than you might think...that's because we get this point.  Clan gets closed because there's no interested nobility/staff decide to shut it down rather than re-recruit?  I've discharged members due to that in Tuluk in the past.  "You leave on good terms.  Yes, it's rare.  Here's a final bonus for your trouble, enjoy, shop S-MART."  If that's not feasible due to the nature of the role, I'd offer, "You can transfer to this other group that works closely with this existing clan," or...you can store.  We want you to be happy, so we will do our best to provide an option.

[Celest]

Good point, and--as mentioned above--exceptions are made, and sometimes more frequently than you might think...that's because we get this point.  Clan gets closed because there's no interested nobility/staff decide to shut it down rather than re-recruit?  I've discharged members due to that in Tuluk in the past.  "You leave on good terms.  Yes, it's rare.  Here's a final bonus for your trouble, enjoy, shop S-MART."  If that's not feasible due to the nature of the role, I'd offer, "You can transfer to this other group that works closely with this existing clan," or...you can store.  We want you to be happy, so we will do our best to provide an option.

I've seen a few of those examples first hand (including some of my PCs, in the not-really-in-the-clan-but-are way), so I know that it does happen and am appreciative for that. My post wasn't meant as a criticism of staff, or those clans in any way, or to suggest that life-oaths are an OOC construct, just to demonstrate why some people feel as if they're "locked" into a role as soon as they join. You were saying that they aren't, and I was pointing out that it depends on when you consider "joining" to happen. In some ways, they are, because you're not a member of Clan X, you're a recruit and thus have none of the privileges even though you're technically a member of the clan, and forums, and can leave/enter their compound. However, you're absolutely right when you say the recruit phase is a good way to determine if you as a player will enjoy this routine before being locked into a Life Oath role, and I think that's why so many people "wash out" of these organizations during that phase. The RP certainly does mold and shape the characters, but that's as much a mark against you being in the clan as it is for it, because while you're involved in the clan's stuff you're still being trained and not involved in the actual clanny stuff. Usually because it's secret, hence the life oath

Where should the line be drawn? I think it depends on the clan. Of the two lifesworn clans I know of, one should definitely stay as out-the-gate. The way the clan is set up, and their reputation, you just know what you're getting into, and the recruit phase should demonstrate that if you don't know already, and out-the-gate makes total IC sense. It would be bizarre for them to have tours of duty. The other I don't know enough about to draw conclusions. Tours of duty would make IC sense, from an IC lore standpoint (I think?) but not from a pragmatic IC standpoint due to aforementioned speculative stuffs?

I guess the best solution, for the people who don't want to work as a life-sworn PC but still want to get involved in that sort of thing, is to do what you mentioned and try and get involved as an "independent contractor."

[evilcabbage]

For the record, I was the one who said get in as a mercenary of some kind, i.e. independant contractor.

[Whiran Luck]

I don't agree that recruits aren't part of the clan. As Nyr said, they may be the shit-end-of-the-stick clan-wise, but they're still part of it. They get, choose from the assorted following: pay (in most clans), training (in most clans), a chance to see what the higher-ups do and decide if they can do it, like it, or do it better later on (in most clans), the grunt's share of the action (they tend to be the disposable cannon-fodder, like it or not, but this also puts them in a good place to see the action after the plotty-plots get moving-- in many clans), a moderately safe place to sleep/sex/relax (in most clans), a moderately safe place to store their stuff (in many clans), food/water (in many clans) and much, much more.

Not only a time of trial to see if they like who they're working for, it gives the clan a chance to see if they like them back, if they're a good fit, and if they're worth keeping on, as well as offering them some training and seeing where they'd fit in the best among the other rank and file. I haven't heard of any clan offering life-service right off the bat, though some people do choose to take a life oath when they first come in. There are good and bad aspects to this sort of thing, but that's best left IC.

Further, unless you app-in to a role, authority is earned in game, so yes, you have no authority when you're first recruited to any position. Depending on a clan, it can take as little as an OOC week to gain some authority or it can take OOC months, depending on the clan and the position. To say that you don't get any authority and that doesn't make you a member of the clan is erroneous. You're a member of the clan, sure, but you're a grunt at the bottom of a steep totem pole. And yes, you -should- have to earn it, unless you app in to a leadership position. The latter, however, gives you no real choice to stay at the bottom, if that's what you want to do.

[valeria]

I think life oaths are very Zalanthan, especially in the sense of the militias and some of the more militant noble houses.  If I was a God-King, I wouldn't approve of the wishy-washy.

Also, they've never personally deterred me on an OOC level.  Usually I toss so many restrictions on my own characters that one more 'restriction' doesn't cramp my style.  And I have a feeling if I ever had a character who really wanted out of a life oath, they'd find a way and take any consequences.

[Potaje]

I wonder what the thoughts of others are on the perspective of the militia based play in both city-state, if it was to be set up as Tours of Duty, as apposed to Life oaths. And why they may think that a life oath is needed or not?

Bump to keep the question at the forefront.

[Down Under]

I like the idea. Tours of duty. Kurac already does this, I believe, with Mercenary and Regular being completely different ranks. Mercenaries are kept at arm's length, Regulars aren't. It'd be nice if most, if not all, clans had ranks with this distinction. I still believe that PC's shouldn't need to take a life oath unless they make it past the bottom 'accepted' rank (Private, in most cases). Promoted to Corporal? You gotta oath up.

[Dan]

If you are just signing on for a tour of duty, I expect it would be known to everyone that you'll be doing low-level, basic work. Life will probably suck for you, but you will make enough to support yourself and a small family. Sort of like being a conscript. Comparing it to modern military, it would be like joining as an enlisted man or woman. There is room for advancement, but you'll probably never get the super deep down dark secrets and will always be answering to someone for nearly anything you do.

Life sworn are those who can be trusted to act with some of their own initiative, take charge of soldiers and will earn a bit more. They are the officers of a modern military. Even at lower ranks, someone life sworn will be trusted over anyone on a tour of duty, and probably placed in charge of them. The life sworn can now be told about this, that, and the other, be given certain secret things, access to various places, etc, simply because, they have sworn their lives in defense or protection of these things. Breaking that bond is akin to suicide, and who the hell would want to give up their career, full of benefits and security for some outsider?

Do I think life oaths are necessary? Not really. If someone decided to leave and started spilling secrets it would be up to the clan/clan leaders to flex and have them shut up, permanently. Then everyone they told these secrets to would also be on the chopping block. Leaving a clan after being an officer in super-sekrit black ops for twenty years would probably result in your being watched after than point, and you would have to periodically check in to ensure no one has scooped you up and tortured you to get their hands on what you know.

If a recruit acts up and wants to leave after two months? Who gives a shit? It makes room for someone else of value and you'd be damn glad you found out they were worthless so soon before they got into a position to find out anything that could be used against you. Have a nice life.

If your life sworn soldier of twenty years has had enough, their body is breaking down and nightmares keep them up from seeing their old comrades die over and over? Hold a celebration, maybe a minor arena event in their honor and let them be a walking, talking example of loyalty. Thanks for serving, your life oath is complete because you did give up your useful years to us. Now go inspire the people, and relax.

[Dan]

Just because you take a life oath doesn't mean the person holding you responsible for that can't cut you loose. Persuade them as to why you suck and should be let go and I am willing to bet that after some negotiation you can be set free or it can be declared that you've fulfilled your life-sworn oath.

If they deny your request and it turns into something akin to being a slave, you would be stored, however.

This should also be the exception, and not the rule.

[Riya OniSenshi]

Most of you seem to be making this more an issue than it really is.

[X-D]

I have not read the second page of this thread.

but I will throw in my 2 cents.

I do not like life oath, I have done it a couple times in the now far distant past and made a life oath to myself to never do it again.

Life oaths do nothing to foster loyalty, in fact they do quite the opposet for many PC/players. My PCs in the life oath clans made quite high rank in both. In both*, I had more problems with treason and desertion with the life oath PCs then I have had playing a leader in any other non-life oath clan.

I personally think that tours of duty foster greater loyalty and a greater % of long term PCs. It also makes it easier on the leaders, since recruitment is easier with tours, you are more willing to let somebody go that does not fit, with life oath you tend to keep them around, the warm body or bird in the hand rule.

I have rarely seen or had a problem with storage, desertion or suicide when dealing in tours, be they 2 years, 3, 5 or even 10.

*I really had four, but since 2 were HG I do not count them, the idea that somebody would take a life oath from a HG is just silly.

You can't leave, you gave life oath.

Huh, what is that?

It is when you promise to serve for your entire life.

Oh, What is a promise?

A promise is when you swear to do something.

Oh, I can swear...Fuck!

(assume this goes on for a while)

So you see, you can't leave because you gave that oath.

No I did not.

Yes you did.

Nah-uh!

You did

When?

Five years ago.

I don't remember.

You did.

Not if I don't remember!

GAH...just leave!

Why?

Cause you said you wanted to.

I did not!

[Majikal]

While life oaths make perfect IC sense, I have to say they don't do much from a players standpoint. Being stuck somewhere that may have suddenly grown stagnant, another clan appealing to you for playability reasons etc, it's nice to have a set time when you can step away from a clan.

Because of this, you end up with long-lived pc's deserting, storing, suiciding, or playing for the other team.. just for something to do.

This is why I steer my pc's away from life oaths, personally.

[Potaje]

I think its funny how the idea of considering Tour of duty versus Life oath is instantly considered someone trying to get out of a clan. It seems that is most the focus, but really its about an alternative perspective to service.

[Celest]

I wonder what the thoughts of others are on the perspective of the militia based play in both city-state, if it was to be set up as Tours of Duty, as apposed to Life oaths. And why they may think that a life oath is needed or not?

Bump to keep the question at the forefront.

To respond to the question itself, I wouldn't be opposed to having cake and eating it too. I think it would be nifty if there was a "general" militia that deals with crime, shoveling poo, and writing tickets (okay, you get the idea) who serves tours, and then the Elite Badass Mofo Squad who only recruits from the general militia, and is lifesworn. As it is now, I think the two may mingle a bit too much. It honestly seems like it would be fun, for me, to RP a really, really crappy guard who is given virtually no responsibility aside from making sure that no one brings raptors to the gate, but the way that things work IG with the militias, no matter how bad you are as long as you're good enough to not-be kicked out you're bound to be pointed at a magicker sooner or later. In other words, I want to play a Beat Cop but the way it is now, I'm a Navy Seal who just happens to write tickets and do a lot of paper work.

I don't expect any of this to ever take place, though.

[Fathi]

I originally typed up a huge rambling post that included an awesome story about a PC of mine repeatedly throwing herself against the brick wall of trying to quit a clan after rising exceptionally high in the ranks... but I can distill it down to the following:

I believe in the Kuraci Model™. That is to say, I think clans should have more places for folks who are willing to work hard but not swear their blood to the clan. But they shouldn't be treated as well, get as much cool stuff, get as much tail, or be given as many high fives as people who are life-sworn.

Zalanthas is a tribal-minded, jingoistic world where people have a cultural bent toward zealotry and oppression. People who willingly submit to the machine and prove trustworthy should be held in esteem compared to those who do not.

Conversely, I understand how life oaths can be a pain in the ass for players. I have been there. But I have also seen plenty of players (myself included) get out of lifesworn positions through clever finagling, deception, bribery, desertion, awesomeness, murder, and just plain outliving the people who made you swear your oath in the first place.

[Spoon]

I personally like them, restrictive as they are. It's an Armageddon theme anyway, with power comes IC restriction.

[Lizzie]

I've experienced that it depends mostly on the nature of your PC's job.

If they aren't allowed freedom of movement without a higher-ranking person there..
if they aren't allowed to buy/sell for their clan and manage their end of the clan's profits...
if they don't have the coded/roleplayed authority to hire/fire the crew..

then being life-sworn can be way too restrictive. Especially when the boss dies/stores/goes on vacation for 2 RL weeks.

I think once you're lifesworn, it means you have proven that you "have what it takes" to exist as a fully trusted member of the clan, and therefore are trusted with the sids, the sales, and the support staff.

[Cutthroat]

I wonder what the thoughts of others are on the perspective of the militia based play in both city-state, if it was to be set up as Tours of Duty, as apposed to Life oaths. And why they may think that a life oath is needed or not?

I think, even with the current way the life-oath is treated in the Legions and the AoD, that a soldier-type PC could arrange a tour-of-duty style arrangement with a templar, provided the soldier could make it worth their while. If it works, they definitely wouldn't be treated to as much of the kind of stuff that life-oathers get (keeping in mind that the PC units in militaristic clans are generally elite, separated from the vNPC and NPC units, so the life oath makes sense for them and might not necessarily be applied to the other units in the same way). If they're not worth it, then the PC is SOL.

[Nyr]

I merged the derail from RAT into this thread.  If your post is about the nature of life oaths or the nature of tours of duty, this is the thread for you, even if (especially if) you're defending the reasons for the creation of the thread in the first place.

[lordcooper]

I've skimmed this thread extremely lightly and have never played a militia PC, so I can only comment on clans as a whole.

My personal viewpoint is that I just plain love the concept of life oaths.  They'll take you in off the streets, feed you, train you and damn well own you.  From a playability perspective, I can see why some people are against them, but don't necessarily agree.

Maybe it would be a good compromise to have clans swear people in for an incredibly long time instead?  It's open for abuse ICly on both sides, and could provide both the concept of (practical) ownership and the opportunity for players to have a little more variety.

Code Select Expand

At your table, the bulky, one-eyed stump says in sirihish, her unblinking stare fixed on you:
    "Yer time's up trooper, walk outta tha door now an' yer free to find yer own way."

At your table, you say in sirihish, rising slowly from your seat:
    "It's nothin' personal sarge, but I got kids ta think about now..."

You stand up from a scuffed, agafari table.

A sly grin playing across her lips for a moment as she shifts her hand ever so slightly closer to her obsidian shortsword, the bulky, one-eyed stump says to you, in sirihish:
    "Aye.  It'd be a right shame if their father didn't look after 'em in any way he could."

You sit at a long, scarred bar of agafari wood.

At your table, the bulky, one-eyed stump says in sirihish, her tone open and friendly:
    "So that's anotha fifteen years, aye trooper?"

The defeated trooper nods glumly.


Note: I'm not arguing for this so much as simply trying to throw an idea out there.

[valeria]

To address the 'why not just make the tour really long' thread in this discussion, I don't see how a really long tour of duty would fix anything.  If you're absolutely miserable in your role, being stuck it in for several more IC years can be just as discouraging as being stuck in it for life.  I'm thinking of my second character, who was stuck in a clan for a term of years after a change of circumstances that made both her and I absolutely miserable.  Knowing that I was only going to be stuck in Miserable Land and not wanting to play the character for three more months wasn't very helpful, and that was not with a long term of years.

[Nyr]

I wonder what the thoughts of others are on the perspective of the militia based play in both city-state, if it was to be set up as Tours of Duty, as apposed to Life oaths. And why they may think that a life oath is needed or not?

Bump to keep the question at the forefront.

I'm still not that clear on what your question is.  However, if my previous posts did not elaborate on it, I'll try and explain here.

Every clan requires life oaths past a certain point.  You are suggesting incorporating tours of duty in at least two clans, at least up to a certain point. I am making an assumption here based on the one sentence there--correct me if I am wrong.

Pros of changing things, OOC:

--some players may like more opportunities to do different things in existing clans
--some players do not enjoy the concept of a life oath
--allows for more mainstream mobility within existing clan structures

Cons of changing things, OOC:

--staff review of a process that both works out of the game and makes sense IC
--you can just not play in a clan that requires a life oath if that is important to you or your PC
--life oaths are, as mentioned, not necessarily as rigid as they are on paper (mostly because you can't write)

So if two of the cons against an idea are "well, you don't have to do it" and "there are exceptions to this anyway," you generally get less interest in changing things, especially when it is coupled with "we'd have to make sure this makes sense, isn't abused, and actually provides these clans with what they need."

Why I think a life oath is needed:

I think it fits the gameworld pretty well.  There are places where a tour of duty might work.  There are places where tours of duty already work.  The ones not doing that may have deeper reasons for not doing it.  Most of the powers that be want dedicated, talented people working for them.  They don't want them working for other people later on.  That's a loss of an asset into which time and effort has been invested.  It makes IC sense from that very basic level.  Does it make OOC sense?  Probably not to those that disagree.  Maybe it is too restrictive for a certain style of play.  However, that's part of playing a game like this.  You do have to figure out what you like and play that.  If not that, you may have to figure out what you don't like, and not play that.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I like the idea. Tours of duty. Kurac already does this, I believe, with Mercenary and Regular being completely different ranks. Mercenaries are kept at arm's length, Regulars aren't. It'd be nice if most, if not all, clans had ranks with this distinction. I still believe that PC's shouldn't need to take a life oath unless they make it past the bottom 'accepted' rank (Private, in most cases). Promoted to Corporal? You gotta oath up.

I absolutely agree with this. I've always thought that most clans should have a temporary position above Recruit. There is one clan that I can think of that shouldn't (Tor), but that is because of how they present themselves, as the elite of the elite. Per the Kuraci Model, and the Byn model, most clans should have tours of duty at low ranks, and life oaths at higher ranks.

A Recruit, BTW, is not a rank per say. It's more of a testing position, where the leader sees if you are worth a shit. Are you part of the clan? Eh, sure, but not really.

[EldritchOrigins]

Just play raiders in Red Storm all the time.


Wait!  Do raiders make people take life oaths?