Tuluk's Shadow Artists: Now With More Flavor

[Jherlen]

If you're concerned about templars not corrupting the system because "man it sucks to force templars to not be corrupt in one single area," you don't have a problem now because of a new system--you always had a problem with the old system and just never knew it.  At least now you do, eh?  For the record, even soldiers have restrictions on what they should be doing with the powers they have.

Yeah, that's a very good point. I was just hoping we could use the new system to get a bit farther away from that problem in Tuluk. Allanak doesn't seem to have it as badly.

The restrictions on soldiers seem to be mainly mechanical based out of not wanting people to exploit the crime code, which everyone knows is a giant sawed-off shotgun that can pretty well gank most PCs unavoidably if used by the wrong hands or for the wrong reasons. The restrictions we're talking about here are more social, though - defining guidelines for how templars can/cannot interact with other characters. I'm fine with restrictions on "hard power" because the game just wouldn't be playable for anyone without it otherwise. Restrictions on "soft power" don't sound as fun because they just cut down on interesting RP situations - here specifically, ways templars can be self-serving greedy assholes. I want to see as many ways as possible for templars to be greedy corrupt assholes in Tuluk, but maybe I'm in the minority.

[Nyr]

It seems like the best fix to this would be to have a single individual, a "Shadow Broker", for example, that is in charge of maintaining these secrets and making sure they don't get out. Instead of having a Templar who has a lot of other responsibilities and possible conflicts-of-interest going on behind the scenes. Have a single role kind of like a "Dealer", who has one concern and one concern only. Cultivating and managing Tuluk's base of Shadow Artists, and receiving, negotiating, and delivering contracts between clients and Shadow Artists. He would be a public figure, a "face", where as his Shadow Artists would be unknown.

We are doing that, except it's several individuals (templars) and they're part of a larger organization (the templarate) and this is only one of many tasks they are expected to do (giving them something to do as well as providing role diversity).

They work directly for the templarate without question/negotiation. They do work for someone directly. They have a different duty, but the same governing guideline. It's the final governing guideline which makes them basically soldiers. Not where they eat, what they wear, and how they train. Same basic concept as special ops soldiers and grunt foot soldiers IRL.

They work directly for the city without question/negotiation, as defined as present, subject to some future changes to the documentation.  Again, this is not about the templarate but about the city.  They do not work for anyone directly or with exclusivity.  The only governing guideline is that this thing you chose to do...you have to do while you choose to do it.  And as mentioned, we're looking at some ways to mitigate that one aspect, but one similarity doesn't make someone a soldier.

Who decides when they become a master artist? The Templars in charge of giving them the contracts they can't negotiate? I wonder how many Templars will be knocking down the door to give these Shadow Artists the power to tell them no? I also wonder if "Master Shadow Artist" will be basically the same thing as "Master Bard" or "High Templar". Those roles/ranks that exist, but not on a level that the player base can actually attain.

This was covered earlier, but templars would handle promotion.  Yes, the templars in charge of giving out work and monitoring how that work actually goes will determine whether or not PC artists have actually done what it is that makes an artist good enough to move from one rank to the next.  And I don't think master artists would be given the power to just say no, just the power to negotiate their rates, if that.  As for master bards, that role is one that the playerbase can actually attain (hence the changes to bardic documentation allowing this to become a PC role, the stipulation being that the upper ranks cannot be beholden to any patron other than the Circles--which is the same sort of thing we see as a necessity for master shadow artists).

I would feel better about this if there was a solid rule against it. Saying "We'll punish anyone caught doing this.", is a lot like shutting the gate once the horse is already out.

All sponsored roles need some kind of expectations and guidelines for them, and in this case, the guideline "if you habitually abuse your power you can expect it to be dealt with" is just fine by us.  There have been times where templars in either city state have done things that were not kosher ICly by the letter of the internal rules they were meant to follow, but played out with plot just fine.

I like the idea of making them confirm with staff and thus, "Higher up NPC's". Having two PC Templars sitting in a room governing their own abilities to hire their own Shadow Artists to kill their own enemies is a lot like the wolf picking between saint and sinner rabbits.

Ok, we'll continue to make sure they run this by us like they already do.  You do believe that templars tell us what they're up to, right?  Templars are not the worst players ever and we trust them to use their brains and adhere to the guidelines we set; if they have questions, we can answer them directly.

[bricklayer]

What exactly is a patron's incentive to hire a thief?

Went over this before earlier in the thread with regards to all artists.  Essentially, does the patron want direct control over guiding the actions of their particular artist with regards to their own personal jobs?  If so, then that is their incentive to have one.

Sorry for being repetitive, I only just found this thread today and hadn't totally caught up.  Thanks for the replies - they clarify a bit and makes sense.

Perhaps shadow artists can have a more Tuluki name?  I'm on the fence about this - the terms "shadow artist" and "shadow agent" are very clear about what they do, but in a generic-RPG way.  On the other hand, there are already so many Tuluk-specific names for things that it isn't easy for newbies or those new to the Northlands.

[Nyr]

What exactly is a patron's incentive to hire a thief?

Went over this before earlier in the thread with regards to all artists.  Essentially, does the patron want direct control over guiding the actions of their particular artist with regards to their own personal jobs?  If so, then that is their incentive to have one.

Sorry for being repetitive, I only just found this thread today and hadn't totally caught up.  Thanks for the replies - they clarify a bit and makes sense.

Perhaps shadow artists can have a more Tuluki name?  I'm on the fence about this - the terms "shadow artist" and "shadow agent" are very clear about what they do, but in a generic-RPG way.  On the other hand, there are already so many Tuluk-specific names for things that it isn't easy for newbies or those new to the Northlands.

No problem, happy to explain and even link to previous examples in the thread once I find them.  Shadow artists with a more Tuluki name?  Possibly, I suppose, but it has certain Tuluki connotations on its own.

[williamson]

They might need the ability to negotiate, and perhaps that is a perk that can be afforded to master artists in order to provide more incentive to become one.  The templarate has in the past hired shadow artists to do certain tasks.  It did not break the game then, and I doubt it will break the game in the future to allow them to do so as needed.  

I think that's a great idea. There should be major perks in obtaining the rank of master shadow artist and that sounds like a great one. Perhaps master shadow artists are the only ones given jobs outside of Gol Krathu? Dangerous and highly profitable jobs such as kidnapping someone from Luir's, poisoning a noble in Allanak, or bringing the Sun King's justice to that defiler?

Most of the discussion has been centered around assassination. However, I see more problems with espionage and stealing. Consider these situations:

Chosen Lord A goes to Templar A to hire a shadow artist A to fill Chosen Lord B's bedroom with filthy barakhan lizards. Chosen Lord B is furious goes to Templar A to hire a shadow artist to find out who's to blame. What does Templar A do? Can they be corrupt, pretend to hire a shadow artist and keep all the profits since he already knows who's to blame? Can Templar A hire shadow artist A and leak them the information? Does Templar A hire shadow artist B and see if they can do it all alone? Can Templar A feed the wrong information to Chosen Lord B, no matter what they do, to serve the cities best interest and tell them that it was all done by Lord Fale in Allanak? Does the staff have to police whatever Templar A decides to do?

Bard A goes to Templar A to hire shadow artist A to steal Bard B's favorite lute. After it's stolen, Bard B goes to Templar A to arrange for his stolen lute to be returned to them. What can Templar A do? Use shadow artist A again? Search Bard A, find the lute, and claim it as stolen property? If so, can Bard A just hire another shadow artist to steal it again?

Shadow artist A is "asked" by Templar A to steal an Oash signet ring from Allanak. However, shadow artist A is an elf and can't speak with a southern accent. He feels he'll die trying to obtain it. Shadow artist A, the elf, bribes Bard A to hire another shadow artist to steal the signet ring for him. Is that legal? Is it okay? What happens when Templar A comes to shadow artist A and says with a grin, "While you're at it, grab two signet rings."

Templar A hears that Chosen Lord A secretly likes magickers. Templar A hires Newbie A to join Chosen Lord A's clan and spy. Three weeks later, Chosen Lord A comes to Templar A and wants to hire a shadow artist to test Newbie A's loyalty. Can Templar A lie and say Newbie A passed the test and keep all the coins? Can Templar A select a shadow artist and warn Newbie A about the upcoming test? Does the staff have to police Templar A's actions?

Merchant A goes to Templar A and hires shadow artist A to steal a book from Merchant B's wagon. Shadow artist A is a partisan of Chosen Lord C. During the theft, shadow artist A is caught and killed. Before they are killed, shadow artist A contacts Chosen Lord C and rats out Merchant A (from an educated guess or by luck) and Templar A's involvment. Chosen Lord C is furious and plots to kill Merchant A for indirectly getting his favorite partisan killed. Merchant A wrongly believes that Templar A spoke about the matter OOC and files a player complaint. Is the staff stuck policing all this?

To me, espionage seems like a much more complex and difficult subject for the templars and shadow artists to deal with. The information could be fiction, intentional lies, confused half-truths, OOC leaks, or just the plain old truth.

[Quirk]

All right. I'm going to try a new approach to breaking this; not because I dislike it, but because I firmly believe the most helpful thing I can do is find problem areas while the docs are still in flux.

Let's assume the current suggested situation holds, and the shadow artist doesn't have the right of refusal.

The shadow artist is told to kill her best friend:

The player doesn't want to make her PC do this. What are her options?

• OOC: Store. Not pretty, but we have to acknowledge it's a real possibility that the player may not want to play the PC after that.
• IC: Go rogue. Artist tells best friend, best friend and artist skip town together. This is fine, but I'm worried it's going to be too common a response to the situation.
• IC: Fail non-fatally. Give your best friend a warning and dress it up as clumsiness. Unless the templar's going to kill you for failing, you're probably in the clear, if somewhat disgraced.
• IC: Do nothing. Delay indefinitely. The best friend carries on with life, artist stops hanging out with them and communicates largely over the way. Some templar frustration may be expected. Eventually.

Which of these do we want to encourage? All are sensible enough responses to "I don't/my character doesn't want to do that".

Note these responses also work for a master shadow artist who doesn't want to make a move against his old patron.

The shadow artist is put on a sucide mission:

Maybe it's a surly, grizzled warrior. Maybe it's a noble followed by bodyguards. Whoever it is has an overall suspicious demeanour, and every antidote known to Zalanthans. The artist is pretty certain that they're not going to make it without help, but the templar's too busy to listen. What's a somewhat newbie assassin/burglar to do in a world of warriors and rangers?

Well, what are the options?

• IC: Go out in a blaze of glory. You never know. Maybe Surly and Grizzled will forget to draw his sword.
• IC: Get help. Hope your friends don't mention it to anyone, ever.
• IC: Go rogue. Time to start a new life somewhere else.
• IC: Fail non-fatally. This one's trickier, because Surly and Grizzled probably won't play along with giving you a flesh wound.
• IC: Do nothing. Delay indefinitely. If possible, make it look like you're just about to do something for as long as you can. Some templar frustration may be expected. Eventually.

Before we plump to encourage the blaze of glory option, consider the dangers of it as a common outcome: crazed kamikaze assassins as a daily hazard in the lives of the badass but unpopular. Actually, that might be pretty fun for everyone except maybe the poor players of assassins losing a few days of character play-time each run. Unless we let them go out of chargen right into the mincer... though they still might have better survival rates than those joining the Byn.

[Nyr]

Most of the discussion has been centered around assassination. However, I see more problems with espionage and stealing. Consider these situations:

Chosen Lord A goes to Templar A to hire a shadow artist A to fill Chosen Lord B's bedroom with filthy barakhan lizards. Chosen Lord B is furious goes to Templar A to hire a shadow artist to find out who's to blame. What does Templar A do? Can they be corrupt, pretend to hire a shadow artist and keep all the profits since he already knows who's to blame? Can Templar A hire shadow artist A and leak them the information? Does Templar A hire shadow artist B and see if they can do it all alone? Can Templar A feed the wrong information to Chosen Lord B, no matter what they do, to serve the cities best interest and tell them that it was all done by Lord Fale in Allanak? Does the staff have to police whatever Templar A decides to do?

This is a little complicated since it's espionage and that doesn't send a message at all.  If Chosen Lord B wants to find out who did it, Chosen Lord B needs a better information network.  Hiring an artist isn't really necessary for that unless there's something to do besides "find stuff out."  If Chosen Lord B has suspicions he should act on those, not try and run some generic contract to "find out who did it."  He needs to provide more direction to the contract than this.  This might fall under the "absurdity" caveat.  If you can't specify exactly what you want to do to a particular person, group, or whatever, you shouldn't be using the shadow artist for that purpose.  In this case, Chosen Lord B doesn't know who dun it.  Who is the contract against?  There's no target.  Yes, the templar knows who did it, but that's not something they need to tell the Chosen Lord (it defeats the purpose of having the message sent, and obvs. the message being sent WORKED).

A better reaction is to take an educated guess and have an artist drop off lizards somewhere else that is pseudo-public, with their heads removed or something.  "I got your message.  Here's mine in response."  Chosen Lord B then beefs up security and goes over all of his employees to see who might be an artist, see if there's a Master that has been hiding here.  If so, there's going to be an interesting conversation.  If not, lie in wait for the next artist (or the hiring agent) to make a mistake so that it tips off the hiring agent.

Bard A goes to Templar A to hire shadow artist A to steal Bard B's favorite lute. After it's stolen, Bard B goes to Templar A to arrange for his stolen lute to be returned to them. What can Templar A do? Use shadow artist A again? Search Bard A, find the lute, and claim it as stolen property? If so, can Bard A just hire another shadow artist to steal it again?

This is a case where I think templar A will enjoy his or her role.  I see no downsides to any of the above except for searching the bard personally, which isn't necessarily guache, just not fun.  It ruins the experience for Bard A (oh, a templar can just waltz in here and take it back, lame) and gives an artist one less thing to do.

Shadow artist A is "asked" by Templar A to steal an Oash signet ring from Allanak. However, shadow artist A is an elf and can't speak with a southern accent. He feels he'll die trying to obtain it. Shadow artist A, the elf, bribes Bard A to hire another shadow artist to steal the signet ring for him. Is that legal? Is it okay? What happens when Templar A comes to shadow artist A and says with a grin, "While you're at it, grab two signet rings."

What's the point of stealing the signet ring?  Just to prove it can be done?  I mean, sure, petty theft is fine just to show the power of Tuluk's artists and all that, but this is a pretty massive sort of job.  I'd figure this would be a case where templar A and...well, elf A...should have a discussion.  You don't send an artist on a job they can't do, and if the artist really thinks they can't do the job, subbing it out or picking a better artist sounds like a good idea.  This is one of the things we want to cover in revisions, by the way.

Templar A hears that Chosen Lord A secretly likes magickers. Templar A hires Newbie A to join Chosen Lord A's clan and spy. Three weeks later, Chosen Lord A comes to Templar A and wants to hire a shadow artist to test Newbie A's loyalty. Can Templar A lie and say Newbie A passed the test and keep all the coins? Can Templar A select a shadow artist and warn Newbie A about the upcoming test? Does the staff have to police Templar A's actions?

That's a pretty specific scenario.  What is the message that the shadow artist is sending here?  How are they testing the loyalty of the spy?  Why outsource that when they are already in a position to easily test that loyalty by using a clanned employee?  If the concern is loyalty, even if there's a system that can be used to send messages like this, I don't think this is quite the way it should be done.  Another employee could easily handle this in-house.  However, I can see where it might be something someone would want to do with a shadow artist.   Templar A is not hiring newbie A as an artist, just as a spy.  Unrelated to that system entirely.  Chosen Lord A (if he suspects his people of disloyalty) could certainly hire an outside party to do that, but...I guess I'm trying to figure out the point of it all for the Chosen Lord.

Merchant A goes to Templar A and hires shadow artist A to steal a book from Merchant B's wagon. Shadow artist A is a partisan of Chosen Lord C. During the theft, shadow artist A is caught and killed. Before they are killed, shadow artist A contacts Chosen Lord C and rats out Merchant A (from an educated guess or by luck) and Templar A's involvment. Chosen Lord C is furious and plots to kill Merchant A for indirectly getting his favorite partisan killed. Merchant A wrongly believes that Templar A spoke about the matter OOC and files a player complaint. Is the staff stuck policing all this?

Are we stuck policing this, probably.  And we'd tell merchant A "no, it was all IC, you don't have all of the facts."  We already do that on a regular basis for player complaints.

To me, espionage seems like a much more complex and difficult subject for the templars and shadow artists to deal with. The information could be fiction, intentional lies, confused half-truths, OOC leaks, or just the plain old truth.

I'm not sure long-term spy assets should be under the purview of this system.  That's information gathering.  It's theft, sure, but it is nebulous, it can take a long time (preventing the "spy" from doing other contracts depending on what else they are hiding), and it really doesn't matter unless the spy is going to do something apart from collect information.  I don't think artists should be used for generic jobs like "I want to find out what Kadius is doing with this order" unless there's some specific task they can do in order to make that occur.  If you want to have someone STEAL something from Kadius so that YOU can figure out what they're doing with that order, cool.  If you want to have an artist BEAT UP a Kadian so that YOU can see how they react to future orders, that's cool, too.

This is something we'll make a point to review as well to see if there are specifically worded guidelines we want to have to either allow or disallow this kind of artist use.

[Nyr]

The shadow artist is told to kill her best friend:

Shadow artists probably shouldn't be selected to kill their best friends, it doesn't sound like a smart move to keep the artist inclined to continue to work.

Note these responses also work for a master shadow artist who doesn't want to make a move against his old patron.

For that one I can say "tough titty."  You're not just an artist, you're a master shadow artist.  That's like a masterbard that wants to be lifesworn to an organization.  You don't get that choice anymore.  You made that choice when you became what you are now; you had at least two times previous where you could have decided against the path you set (three if you've thought about quitting after becoming a master artist).

The shadow artist is put on a sucide mission:

Shadow artists shouldn't be put on suicide missions.

[Desertman]

We are doing that, except it's several individuals (templars) and they're part of a larger organization (the templarate) and this is only one of many tasks they are expected to do (giving them something to do as well as providing role diversity).

I mean someone not Templars.

subject to some future changes to the documentation.

I'll wait for those changes to reply. I can't really comment on that which doesn't exist yet. As it stands, it very much appears that they work for the templarate, and not the city. But, changes are coming I guess.

This was covered earlier, but templars would handle promotion.  Yes, the templars in charge of giving out work and monitoring how that work actually goes will determine whether or not PC artists have actually done what it is that makes an artist good enough to move from one rank to the next.  And I don't think master artists would be given the power to just say no, just the power to negotiate their rates, if that.  As for master bards, that role is one that the playerbase can actually attain (hence the changes to bardic documentation allowing this to become a PC role, the stipulation being that the upper ranks cannot be beholden to any patron other than the Circles--which is the same sort of thing we see as a necessity for master shadow artists).

I was unaware you could be a Master Bard now. That's pretty cool. Insert Black Robe Templar then where I said Master Bard.

If they can't say no. Then they are taking orders. If they are taking orders they are....soldiers/servants/conscripts...take your pick. Fundamentally it's all the same at the end of the day. A leader with direct command over a unit of a given designation with the directive that the unit must follow said orders without question.

But as you said, changes are possibly coming to this. I will wait for those changes and see what gets edited etc...

Ok, we'll continue to make sure they run this by us like they already do.  You do believe that templars tell us what they're up to, right?  Templars are not the worst players ever and we trust them to use their brains and adhere to the guidelines we set; if they have questions, we can answer them directly.

Certainly. I misunderstood. I was under the impression they would be allowed to hand out "Shadow Artist" jobs without running it by the staff first. I didn't realize that was a set guideline already. Since it is, no worries.

[Cutthroat]

All right. I'm going to try a new approach to breaking this; not because I dislike it, but because I firmly believe the most helpful thing I can do is find problem areas while the docs are still in flux.

Let's assume the current suggested situation holds, and the shadow artist doesn't have the right of refusal.

The shadow artist is told to kill her best friend:

The player doesn't want to make her PC do this. What are her options?

• OOC: Store. Not pretty, but we have to acknowledge it's a real possibility that the player may not want to play the PC after that.
• IC: Go rogue. Artist tells best friend, best friend and artist skip town together. This is fine, but I'm worried it's going to be too common a response to the situation.
• IC: Fail non-fatally. Give your best friend a warning and dress it up as clumsiness. Unless the templar's going to kill you for failing, you're probably in the clear, if somewhat disgraced.
• IC: Do nothing. Delay indefinitely. The best friend carries on with life, artist stops hanging out with them and communicates largely over the way. Some templar frustration may be expected. Eventually.

Which of these do we want to encourage? All are sensible enough responses to "I don't/my character doesn't want to do that".

Note these responses also work for a master shadow artist who doesn't want to make a move against his old patron.

The shadow artist is put on a sucide mission:

Maybe it's a surly, grizzled warrior. Maybe it's a noble followed by bodyguards. Whoever it is has an overall suspicious demeanour, and every antidote known to Zalanthans. The artist is pretty certain that they're not going to make it without help, but the templar's too busy to listen. What's a somewhat newbie assassin/burglar to do in a world of warriors and rangers?

Well, what are the options?

• IC: Go out in a blaze of glory. You never know. Maybe Surly and Grizzled will forget to draw his sword.
• IC: Get help. Hope your friends don't mention it to anyone, ever.
• IC: Go rogue. Time to start a new life somewhere else.
• IC: Fail non-fatally. This one's trickier, because Surly and Grizzled probably won't play along with giving you a flesh wound.
• IC: Do nothing. Delay indefinitely. If possible, make it look like you're just about to do something for as long as you can. Some templar frustration may be expected. Eventually.

Before we plump to encourage the blaze of glory option, consider the dangers of it as a common outcome: crazed kamikaze assassins as a daily hazard in the lives of the badass but unpopular. Actually, that might be pretty fun for everyone except maybe the poor players of assassins losing a few days of character play-time each run. Unless we let them go out of chargen right into the mincer... though they still might have better survival rates than those joining the Byn.

It would seem to me that it's in a templar's best interest to match agents to a job appropriately. If a templar senses that agent A is so friendly with target B that the plot to kill B might be compromised if the contract is given to A, then it seems that the smartest thing would be to give the contract to a different agent. If a templar screws up multiple times, it's easy to assume that fellow templars will discourage him from being a broker to future contracts in the interest of the system maintaining its usefulness (not only to clients, but to templars - law enforcement is so much easier when crime is regulated) and integrity.

[Nyr]

We are doing that, except it's several individuals (templars) and they're part of a larger organization (the templarate) and this is only one of many tasks they are expected to do (giving them something to do as well as providing role diversity).

I mean someone not Templars.

Right.  But we're not doing what you are suggesting and I've made that clear above already.

I'll wait for those changes to reply. I can't really comment on that which doesn't exist yet. As it stands, it very much appears that they work for the templarate, and not the city. But, changes are coming I guess.

Artists = independent contractors registered through the government.
Agents = potential double-blind entities that want independent contractors working for them, but not directly.
Broker = government organization intended to make the system function and also intended to enforce the rules of the system, ensuring its perpetuity.

Artists do not work for brokers.  They work for agents.

The changes I was suggesting have nothing to do with the structure but have more to do with the required tasks of an artist.

If they can't say no. Then they are taking orders. If they are taking orders they are....soldiers/servants/conscripts...take your pick. Fundamentally it's all the same at the end of the day. A leader with direct command over a unit of a given designation with the directive that the unit must follow said orders without question.

"Soldiers/servants/conscripts/slaves/aides/Bynners/Kadian or Kuraci or Salarri employees/templars/nobles/every single role in the game with some sort of oversight" all get IC orders as well and can get in trouble when they don't do the work they are asked to do.  So yes, artists are just like that.

[MeTekillot]

The thing with the Byn and Kadius is the Sergeant usually gives you a bit of input on whether or not you want to tag along to fight that mekillot, while shadow artists just hope that their Faithful Lord doesn't order them to go toe-to-toe with Chosen Lord 80-days Winrothol and his entourage.

[BleakOne]

I honestly don't see what the problem is. Even if it is usable as a method of execution, isn't being sent on a suicide mission better than being killed by the powers Templars already have (in this case, disappearing)? It will have Staff oversight and be used by players trusted enough to play as Templars.

If you can't handle the idea of having to kill someone on a contract, maybe don't play as a Shartist?

[Sayyadina]

The thing with the Byn and Kadius is the Sergeant usually gives you a bit of input on whether or not you want to tag along to fight that mekillot, while shadow artists just hope that their Faithful Lord doesn't order them to go toe-to-toe with Chosen Lord 80-days Winrothol and his entourage.

Kadian crafters also occasionally get to decide what they want to craft on a given day, instead of crafting only what and when they're told by others.

[Lizzie]

The thing with the Byn and Kadius is the Sergeant usually gives you a bit of input on whether or not you want to tag along to fight that mekillot, while shadow artists just hope that their Faithful Lord doesn't order them to go toe-to-toe with Chosen Lord 80-days Winrothol and his entourage.

Kadian crafters also occasionally get to decide what they want to craft on a given day, instead of crafting only what and when they're told by others.

Kadian crafters aren't deciding between murdering Amos or murdering Malik. Nor are they deciding between robbing Talia's apartment or robbing Kaiylieayiliah's apartment.

If you're a licensed assassin, licensed thief, licensed burglar, licensed whatever else, it's because you've agreed to do something criminal, with consent of the authority. Since you are doing it with their consent, you have to do what -they- want, with their consent. Otherwise, you're doing it without their consent, which is - illegal.

[hyzhenhok]

99% of the complaints left seem to be 1) this role doesn't offer 100% freedom, it's oppressive and evil and I could never enjoy it, and 2) I don't trust templars not to break the rules as written.

The answer to the first is: some people enjoy restricted, high-pressure, dangerous roles. If you don't like the restrictions of the Byn schedule, you don't have to play in the Byn! And if you don't like having to do contracts for the templarate, you don't have to play a shartist! Funny how that works.

The answer to the second is: this is not the first organization or role in the game that you might not want to play in if you don't trust PC templars to follow the rules set out for them. Anyway, I'm pretty sure it will be OK to send in a player complaint if a templar assigns your apprentice assassin to kill Muk Utep the next time he makes a public appearance and doesn't let you back out of it.

[Jherlen]

Actually hyzhenhok, I want templars to be able to break the rules and be corrupt, but they're being told they can't be. I'm sad.

[hyzhenhok]

Actually hyzhenhok, I want templars to be able to break the rules and be corrupt, but they're being told they can't be. I'm sad.

Funny how that is. Some people want templars to be corrupt. Others are terrified the templars will abuse their power and make the rules unplayable. The staff seem to be siding with the latter group by laying out pretty strict rules to assuage fears of corruption to make it work, but the latter group is paranoid and doesn't actually trust the staff's assurances.

[Sayyadina]

The thing with the Byn and Kadius is the Sergeant usually gives you a bit of input on whether or not you want to tag along to fight that mekillot, while shadow artists just hope that their Faithful Lord doesn't order them to go toe-to-toe with Chosen Lord 80-days Winrothol and his entourage.

Kadian crafters also occasionally get to decide what they want to craft on a given day, instead of crafting only what and when they're told by others.

Kadian crafters aren't deciding between murdering Amos or murdering Malik. Nor are they deciding between robbing Talia's apartment or robbing Kaiylieayiliah's apartment.

If you're a licensed assassin, licensed thief, licensed burglar, licensed whatever else, it's because you've agreed to do something criminal, with consent of the authority. Since you are doing it with their consent, you have to do what -they- want, with their consent. Otherwise, you're doing it without their consent, which is - illegal.

1. I guess you disagree with Nyr on whether Kadians are a valid comparison to Shartists?

2. You also disagree with Nyr regarding who the Shartists serve: agents vs. templarate?

3. You're confusing the need to get permission for thievery/assassination with the mandate that licensed/thieves assassins do everything they're told without exception and without negotiation.  They're two different things.  The former, actually, is part of the current (undocumented) system.  The latter isn't.

Moving on...

99% of the complaints left seem to be 1) this role doesn't offer 100% freedom, it's oppressive and evil and I could never enjoy it

Actually, the role of a patriotic and licensed assassin doesn't even have 10% freedom, which is the problem.  And it's a big problem with many players, judging from the responses.

Look, the mandate on Shartists to accept any and all jobs from the templarate seems driven by an OOC concern.  The concern is that the current undocumented system doesn't work, not because it's undocumented and thus general awareness of the system is low, but because Shartists are refusing contracts.  Thus it follows that a new system will also fail without the ability to force Shartists to accept any and all contracts.  I don't agree with that analysis, as I've shared previously. 

However!

I wonder if a compromise would be acceptable to both "sides?"  Maybe the templarate can have the ability to compel Shartists to do jobs, but not EVERY job.  Maybe the Shartist can be forced to accept any job, but she gets paid triple the normal rate and the difference comes out of the templar's pocket (and not the contracting agent's pocket)?  Or maybe a Shartist can decline one job for every job they've accepted?  Or maybe a Shartist can be compelled 3 times per IC year for an apprentice, 2 times yearly for a journeyman, and once per year for a master?

What do you guys think?

[Riev]

I honestly think its a good idea that Templars will kind of need to be "in the know" as far as who their Shadow Artists consort with, and "know their tools" as best they can, so that killing a best friend/etc DOESN'T pop up. It gives a little more rounded-out flavor for the role.

And making them the Brokers? Honestly, other than a veteran player giving you a random donation because they want you off their case, or you're a harass Templar that shakes down and extorts everyone around you, how easy is it to make coin? Now Tuluki Templars have an avenue to bring in coin, with Southern Templars still shaking down anyone with that sicky sweet smell of spice wafting from their skin

[Ouroboros]

And making them the Brokers? Honestly, other than a veteran player giving you a random donation because they want you off their case, or you're a harass Templar that shakes down and extorts everyone around you, how easy is it to make coin?

You'd be surprised at what insidious minds come up with.

[Ouroboros]

this is not the first organization or role city in the game that you might not want to play in if you don't trust PC templars to follow the rules set out for them.

Fixed. This system has an effect on every single character playing in Tuluk, inked or not, not just those partaking as Agents or Artists.

Some people want templars to be corrupt. Others are terrified the templars will abuse their power and make the rules unplayable.

And some want them to be as corrupt as they already are and always will be, while ensuring this corruption only has an effect on their personal plots and not the system as a whole.

[Qzzrbl]

Bugh.

For the love of Ginka.

Want to do Shadow Artist stuff, but don't want to be opressed?

Do it under the table and against the law.

All problems solved.

[bcw81]

Bugh.

For the love of Ginka.

Want to do Shadow Artist stuff, but don't want to be opressed?

Do it under the table and against the law.

All problems solved.

Everyone knows Tuluk doesn't have crime what are you talking about?

[solera]

I may have missed the answer to this.
Can a Faithful veto a contract to kill ?
For example, if the mark is doing indispensable work for the city, or for the "incorruptible" templar.

I assume the client will have a choice of Templars to approach most times? (I'm not suggesting that the Faithful are not united in serving His Radiance.)