Tuluk's Shadow Artists: Now With More Flavor

[Nyr]

Those that want more utilization have probably felt hamstrung by the existing system; those that don't want mandates are probably enjoying the way the current system works out for them.  We don't have to pick a perfect position right in the middle, nor does our implementation have to make every single player happy.

I think that almost everybody that's chimed into the thread wants more utilization, but many don't want mandates.  I'm not trying to balance two opposed poles, I'm trying to suggest a parsimonious system that achieves the goal that everybody wants (utilization) without the thing that many don't want (mandates).  Is there a reason that the staff wants implement the mandates other than to increase utilization?   I haven't seen one, but if so then my argument is moot!

Which mandates do you have a problem with?  Don't say all of them.  Say which ones, then say why after each one.  I'll detail what I've seen from you so far on it.

You don't like these:

THE DISLIKES

All those mandates.

The templar is mandated to accept any and all contracts provided the contracting agent has the proper status and money, the templar is mandated to not futz with the choosing of the "shadow artist" to execute the contract, the executing sneaky-type is mandated to accept any and all contracts, the executing sneaky-type is mandated to speak of the contract to nobody, and sneaky-types are all mandated to be independent of everyone when they reach high levels, even independent of their patron/employer.

because:

I feel this will cut down on RP at each mandated step in the process above.  There's no weighing of risks and benefits before taking out a contract, no give and take between contracting agent and sneaky-type or contracting agent and templar, and so on.  All these interactions are drastically reduced.

To the first point, yes.  It will decrease the amount of roleplay between the agent and templar and the templar and artist.  However, the other changes will increase the roleplay between everyone in Tuluk as there is more happening to talk about, and more happening to react to and employ artists to react to and counter. I think it's a good tradeoff.

The incentives for patrons/employers to hire sneaky-types are far outweighed by the disincentives.

Quote from: Taven on September 26, 2013, 03:45:32 PM
Furthermore, why would you want to patron a shadow artist? ... ... Why pour in all that effort?

Quote from: Nyr on September 26, 2013, 03:55:35 PM
Because you'd be able to use them for contracts if you wanted to do so.

I agree that this IS an incentive for a patron or employer to hire a sneaky-type, but I just think it's a very small incentive.  After all, why does Chosen Lady Dasari care if the sneaky-type that the templarate compels to complete her contract is her own partisan/employee or not?  The templarate is mandated to pick a sneaky-type sufficient to the contract's task, right?  And that sneaky-type chosen by the templarate is mandated to accept the mission.  So Chosen Lady Dasari gets a competent sneaky-type for her mission either way.

That's the only (small) advantage that I see for a patron/employer to hire a sneaky-type, but the disadvantages are many.

1. Interviewing, hiring, equipping, and training sneaky-types isn't easy.  It takes money and, more importantly, it takes a lot of OOC time and energy on the part of the leader PC.
2. You're training up PCs that can be put to use by your rivals, maybe not directly against you at first, but to further the goals of your rivals in other ways.
3. Your sneaky-type underling will eventually be required to take jobs directly against you if they rise to a high enough level.
4. If your sneaky-type underling fails publicly in a task then it reflects badly on YOU.  Remember, your underling sneaky-type PC can't refuse any contract given to her, so if she fails miserably at a contract initiated by your rival or anybody else it will still hurt you and it won't touch the contracting agent at all because of the anonymity of the system.

So why bother?  There's a teensy upside and major downsides.  Let someone else go through the trouble and expense of hiring, cultivating, and equipping those sneaky-types.  Let someone else run the risk of their sneaky-types failing publicly at a mission.  You can just sit back and let the other PC leaders go through the trouble of all that work... but you can still put their hard work to your own use because of the mandates.  It's the Tragedy of the (Red Sun?) Commons: all leader PCs will want sneaky-types around to execute their compulsory contracts brokered by the templarate, but no PC leaders will want to personally go through the trouble of hiring and training PC sneaky-types.

I already listed that I disagreed with that here.  http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,46260.msg778914.html#msg778914

The changes undermine the power of leaders and clans (except the templarate).

One route to coded influence in the game is for PC leaders and clans to build their own bevy of sneaky-types to do their bidding.  That advantage is (or was) what makes all the costs, headaches, and risks of cultivating PC sneaky-types ultimately worth it.  But with these changes everyone will have greatly increased access to the services of sneaky-types, nullifying any advantage that the hard work of the PC leaders and clans put into recruiting their own sneaky forces.  Why would anyone fear House Sneaksalot over any other House, if any of the Houses can just as easily hire several burglars (including a few from House Sneaksalot invariably!) to harass their rivals?  What leverage would House Sneaksalot have for their sneaky services if literally anyone can anonymously contract sneaky-types to do their work with the knowledge that the templarate must broker their contract in good faith?

I also already listed that I disagreed with that in the same post.

PC to PC roleplay has little role in policing the system.

Because of the way the system is set up, it seems that the only way that a templar PC would run afoul of the system is from an Imm intervening, which the quotes above both suggest.  There's no way for a contracting agent PC to know if they're being ripped off , screwed, or ignored by the PC templar and there's no way for a contracted sneaky-type PC to know if they're being ripped off or being sent to their death by the templar PC.  If the contracting agent and the "shadow artist" are both in the dark there's no way for their RP to provide a counterbalance, however small, to the major leverage that the templarate will have.  The many mandates seem to be in place to promote OOC trust in the system despite all the IC and OOC secrecy and reliance on the templarate PCs as brokers.  This is a personal preference, but I would rather see a system that relies less on secret Imm enforcement of mandates and more on roleplay between PCs providing the majority of the counterbalance.

And I wrote that I disagreed with that, too.  So we disagree across the board on everything except that:

there should be more documentation
this strengthens social caste/social rankings

Your solution is to just not do the things that you don't like.  My response to that is...uh...no.  Sorry, but if that's what it comes down to, we're not going to agree.

So if X = a well documented system and Y = mandates and we implement X and then see the increased utilization results we want, then we've proven X works.  How can trying X + Y prove that Y works or is even necessary?  To prove that you would need to implement Y without X.  You can implement X + Y if you want, you're the staff and I'm the player so it's clearly not up to me!  But if X + Y works you still can't claim that you've settled the question of whether Y was necessary or that X alone was insufficient by that single experiment of X + Y.  Implementing both would only prove that X + Y > Z, where Z is our current "system" of uncertainly and lack of documentation and I don't dispute that because I've already made it clear that I think all that's necessary for improvement is X = a well documented system.

Again, not seeing anything here but a desire to not have any of the mandates.  Sorry, we're going to disagree.

I was hoping that there was reasoning behind the unshakeable decision to go straight to the mandate-heavy regime that I could get behind, but I haven't found it.  But as you say, "that's that."

There is reasoning behind each "mandated decision" as you call it, and I've detailed those reasons even to those that disagree with it, and I've heard feedback that I don't necessarily agree with but will keep in mind.  I'm even keeping track of the responses I thought were interesting so that when we go over the docs provided again (with the full team), we'll make sure we've at the very least CONSIDERED the idea of making the suggested tweaks, even if we don't actually do it.  There are several things suggested here that will more than likely make its way into the revised document.

[Nyr]

Would you be happier with a system that had templars more involved and biased in it?  How much more involved and biased should they be, then?

I'd like the templars to be way less involved in fairly, impartially running the shadow artist system, and way more involved in using it for their own personal ends. And in general, I'd love to see templars as biased and self-serving as possible. I think templars as a role would be far more interesting when they have to pay lip-service to city propaganda and to the Sun King, and give the appearance of being above the fray of petty squabbling politics, but in reality they're neck deep in it. Templars should not, ever, be someone you expect to treat you fairly or be your friend unless you've given them a reason to (reasons being money, power, or something else that advances their personal goals.) The recent upheavals in Tuluk sound like the perfect time to dispel any illusions to the contrary. That's why I don't want to see them straightjacketed into having to run Shadow Artist contracts fairly in order to make a system work.

OK.  That's clear enough to at least give us something to work with and consider.  Do you think that the ability to control artist choice, contract price, and also contract timing should be the tools in the templarate's arsenal if they were to use that against any they had political ill-will towards?

[Dresan]

I really like the idea of allowing unlicensed crime along side licensed. On the one hand licensed crime would have prestige and influence of being recognized but at the same time you would have all these restrictions. The 'not being able to refuse' does seem kinda a bit much but other than the ideas already suggested I don't have much more to suggest myself. Besides the fact that you could be going after a lover or someone you care about there is also the fact you can be asked to do a job you don't think you can actually handle. In short I think only people who are already very skilled would probably become shadow artists just to avoid being asked to do something they can't handle, even with shadow artistry ranks. However in return I could see templars instructing legionnaires to provide criminals with the good they need to perform their jobs. Picks, quality daggers and even gear would all be provided by Templar through the legion, it would be illegal to obtain or own such equipment that has not been provided by the legion.


On the unlicensed side of things, I can see two organizations taking foothold. For elves  it would be of course the bejeweled hand, providing protection and goods to real criminals. However on the human side of things I can definitely see corrupt legionnaires having a hand in providing unlicensed criminals with the things they need for a cut including protection not only from the law but from other competing criminals that might wipe them out. Without someone there to help criminals and give them some means of safety (since there is no rinth) I could just see any Templar easily stomp crime out easily without any effort. In fact for this to succeed you would need to instruct Templar PCs to worry about bigger things and not petty crime or even small murders. It would be up to the legionnaires to really handle the policing while they focus on more military matters against the sorth and larger plots within the Gol.

However if we go this route, I'm not sure if it will begin turning Tuluk into Allanak lite.

 

[Fredd]

Personally, depending on what exactly the changes to the new templars are. I can see this change opening up a fair amount of RP.

[Nyr]

However if we go this route, I'm not sure if it will begin turning Tuluk into Allanak lite.

This is a bit of a derail, but just like subtlety, that's another thing to be careful about overgeneralizing on.  Just because a city-state does something doesn't mean the other city-state should do the exact opposite thing, only better.  Yes, the two city-states should be different and have different cultures, but "removing both Orders" doesn't necessarily mean "lol just like Allanak, now just all blue robes, lol" any more than "making the Legion and templars more susceptible to corruption" means "yeah now Tuluk is just Allanak lite."  Both cities should have opportunities for the things that people like in the game in their own ways.

[Molten Heart]

Let me throw a framework for an alternate idea up here. I'd be interested in hearing if this would help the system at all, from the staff perspective.

The templarate establishes a third-party group to manage shadow artists. This could be its own independent organization, or attached to something existing, like Poet's Circle. Let's call this for the purpose of this post only, the Shadow Artist's Guild. Obviously it needs a better name.

The Shadow Artist's Guild manages all "lawful" criminal activity in Tuluk. This involves:

• Training aspiring shadow artists to be discrete and help hone their skills
• "Recruiting" new shadow artists if there aren't enough for business
• Cracking down on "unlicensed" criminals -- either by forcing them to join up or getting rid of them
• Brokering contracts in a double-blind system like what was laid out by Nyr. By custom, the shadow artist's guild can't show favoritism to specific Houses or individuals when it sets up contracts.
• The templarate has oversight over the SA Guild as whole, but by custom, individual templars are not allowed to interfere with contracts.

Breaking these down, I'm envisioning a clan compound somewhere for shadow artists to gather and train, if they want. (Or, they could train independently, or with a patron.)

Journeymen and higher in the Shadow Artist's Guild could sponsor new apprentices in the SA Guild, and would be responsible for mentoring them. If a Journeyman's apprentice fucks up and gets caught, that'd hurt the Journeyman's rep too.

If people are trying to work crimes outside the system, the SA Guild has a serious incentive to stop and/or absorb them. Crime is their lifeblood and they have a monopoly.

The SA Guild would need a "public face" to negotiate contracts. This is the only person who would know who requested a job and would need to keep complete secrecy. They would probably have the protection of a high-ranking templar to put them beyond the harassment of templar PCs. If this person ever compromises the secrecy of a contract - either who requested it or who did it - both the templarate and the SA Guild itself would want them to be silenced Very Quickly. An artist in good standing within the Guild would be selected for the job. They could refuse, if they wanted, but it wouldn't be a good idea career-wise.

Once a job has been completed, the SA Guild would notify the templarate/Legion that it was their work. The templarate can deem a crime was too public, too messy, or too poorly executed and charge a fee. It might even become custom that such "cleanup fees" follow most hits, just so the templarate keeps a cut of the action too.

I've more about this - a lot more - but I just want to throw it out there and see if anyone else thinks I'm crazy. The main thing I want to avoid is Honest, Fair Templar Syndrome in Tuluk. I think it'd be such a shame for Tuluk if templars were obligated by the docs to be fair just so this system can work. There are ways we could have a viable shadow artist community in Tuluk while maintaining templars who are vile, corrupt, detestable, brutal assholes. Isn't that the best of both worlds?

I like this idea.  I have some concerns about it becoming too politicized as  laid out here.  I think it'd serve better if the group was as politically unaffiliated as possible and dedicated specifically to the preservation and fostering of the knowledge and traditions of Tuluk's shadow arts.  Similarly, if not exactly to how the bardic circles operate, but just more exclusive, secret and shrouded in mystery.


It would be good if this group wasn't the only group the tempalrate went to to find shadow artist contractors.  It'd certainly be the best place to go to find them, but they could go elsewhere.  When one wants a fine diamond ring, they go to Kadius, but if for some reason they need something Kadius can't get them, they can always find exactly what they need.  This group should serve primarily to foster the shadow arts in Tuluk, however it would also answer to the templarate, just like every organization in Tuluk does.  This would also allow the templarate a scapegoat should there ever be a problem, and this would allow independent upstarts alternatives should this group not mess with their plans/circumstances (clan lulls or IC disagreements).  Independent upstarts could also make for a good distraction and even competition.

The idea of this group (or anyone else besides templars) negotiating contracts  on their own concerns me the most.  I think it would serve both groups, the shadowy organization and the tempalrate, best if the template dealt with contracts and contractees themselves.  This would maintain the public notion that the Sun King is in charge (and all is good and well in His Ivory Cit), rather than thinking it's just you and some shadow broker.  It might be a good idea to have some head representative present with contractees, but I think the Templarate should always be the middlemen for shadow artist contracts.

Basically an exclusive group of artists solely devoted to the preservation and advancement of the shadow arts in the city, based on ideals of tradition, and nostaligia nobility, etc to towards art.    Anyone and everyone that posses the skills and inclination along like dedication towards the shadow arts shouldn't be denied membership, keeping any and all politics completely out of it (no political insignia/uniforms, avoiding any and all political talk).  Swear all members to absolute secrecy, with the penalty of death (or even worse).  Have the group overseen and sanctioned by the template (like any other organization in the city would be, but maybe just a little bit more so considering their "sneaky" or criminal nature).  The shadow artist contractors that they provide to the templarate would be secondary to their primary purpose, that being the advancement and preservation of all that is spy worthy and ninjalike in Tuluk and of Tuluki tradition.

[Outrider]

*  Do any other Master ranks within the city answer directly (and with forced compliance) to the whims and machinations of the templarate?   The protection of the Shadow is a thin and brightly lit illusion.   Even hidden license inks are whispered and murmured about in the best of times and even broadcast (incomprehensibly so) as an insult by those who should know better (see rar! thief! rage above).   The reality is that the playerbase is simply not big enough to hide in, the OOC thief rage too intense not to leech into game play, and templars too ephemeral/inexperienced to be fully trusted (by the player of a hypothetical Master thief).

Do they answer directly to the templarate...I'm not afraid I'm following.

I think what I'm driving at with this is while, yes, errybody asks "how high" when a templar says jump - there's no mechanism or documentation in place specifically giving templars reason to go take House X's master basketweaver and mandate her to make a pretty basket for AnonAmos or House Y's master hunter to go out and kill a jabberwock.   

They answer indirectly to the templarate, yes.  But not directly.  If I wanted to work for The Man (well, That Man) - I'd join the Legion or try to be a templar's extra special licensed lap dog in his own little sneaky-elite corps.

Catching up on the reading, though, the only thing that really gives me immediate pause and would make me consider retirement/unlicensing (if it applied to me) would be the whole Mandate.   That isn't to say declining a job shouldn't have a cost . . . but that cost should be related more to an inability to obtain Master or even Journeyman status.   

[Sayyadina]

Which mandates do you have a problem with?  Don't say all of them.  Say which ones, then say why after each one.  I'll detail what I've seen from you so far on it.

You don't like these:

The mandate I dislike the most is the one that "shadow artists" must accept all jobs given to them.  I mentioned the reason why previously in this thread, though it wasn't among your quotes:

What I don't think is fun is an ironclad mandate that "shadow artists" MUST take every job that is brought to them.  That turns something cool and fun into an onerous requirement.

More fundamentally, what if the mandates aren't even necessary?  I've been trying to make the point that IMO the current "system" is under utilized because of a lack of understanding and knowledge amongst the playerbase, not necessarily because of excess reluctance or loyalty by the artist players.  I base my opinion on my own obliviousness to the current "system" for a long long time (and I would mainline Armageddon documentation if I could), and based on my not seeing excess loyalty getting in the way of contracts (though I have seen reluctance).

I think that if there were more publicity and documentation, then there would be more system utilization even without mandates.  I think that demand from contracting agents would go up and the cases of reluctance or excess loyalty from artists would go down and the problem is solved.

So I tried to suggest that if we're all seeking more utilization (aren't we?), that maybe we could implement a system that doesn't include every mandate (to me the most important one to remove would be the mandate that artists can't refuse jobs, as mentioned above) and we could give the Tuluki playerbase a shot at making it work, just like we're currently being asked to trust that the templar mandates and Imm monitoring on the templar PCs in the new system will work.

I added that if the system still doesn't work without some mandates and it's still underutilized then the debate is definitively settled and I'd be convinced.  I would then be satisfied that mandates are necessary, and I'd be cool with them being implemented:  mandates ahoy!  This stepwise implementation could even be IC: first the new docs (without at least the artist mandate) go in because Muk wants chicanery and killin' in the streets, and if after a few RL months the staff decides there's not enough system utilization then Muk can decide that He is disappointed in His wimpy citizens and He can issue whichever mandates were left out.

However...

You clearly disagree with me and you don't think that merely improving the documentation will be enough, so you're going straight to documentation plus mandates.  That's our main disagreement.

I was hoping you would be willing to try a trial of documentation without mandates because I don't see the harm except a few more months of "more of the same" at the worst,  but you don't want to do that and that's fine because the decision is yours as the staffer and not mine as a player.

Thanks for all the responses!

[Dresan]

However if we go this route, I'm not sure if it will begin turning Tuluk into Allanak lite.

This is a bit of a derail, but just like subtlety, that's another thing to be careful about overgeneralizing on.  Just because a city-state does something doesn't mean the other city-state should do the exact opposite thing, only better.  Yes, the two city-states should be different and have different cultures, but "removing both Orders" doesn't necessarily mean "lol just like Allanak, now just all blue robes, lol" any more than "making the Legion and templars more susceptible to corruption" means "yeah now Tuluk is just Allanak lite."  Both cities should have opportunities for the things that people like in the game in their own ways.

Very true. And I would really love to see more corruption all around. However a lot of things that would hold the new system back and what keeps corruption levels and crime low right now are in some ways what makes Tuluk what it is.  One of those things would be patriotism and this desire to follow 'tradition' where as you would be considered a traitor if you don't. The other reason of course is the fact big brother can always be watching, which is also very much Tuluk. These are all still very cool aspects of tuluk though which I hope aren't totally lost.

Anyways I'm not saying that there shouldn't be more corruption or anything else in Tuluk as one might find in Allanak however I'm just saying the reasons these things being allowed to flourish and exists are hopefully still unique to tuluk.

'I may not make an honest buck, but I'm 100% American.' - Eddie Valentine(1991), the rocketeer

[Dresan]

Both cities should have opportunities for the things that people like in the game in their own ways.

This is a bit of a derail but I wonder if this means someday Tuluk might have its own style of mages?   

Maybe not.

[Jherlen]

Would you be happier with a system that had templars more involved and biased in it?  How much more involved and biased should they be, then?

I'd like the templars to be way less involved in fairly, impartially running the shadow artist system, and way more involved in using it for their own personal ends. And in general, I'd love to see templars as biased and self-serving as possible. I think templars as a role would be far more interesting when they have to pay lip-service to city propaganda and to the Sun King, and give the appearance of being above the fray of petty squabbling politics, but in reality they're neck deep in it. Templars should not, ever, be someone you expect to treat you fairly or be your friend unless you've given them a reason to (reasons being money, power, or something else that advances their personal goals.) The recent upheavals in Tuluk sound like the perfect time to dispel any illusions to the contrary. That's why I don't want to see them straightjacketed into having to run Shadow Artist contracts fairly in order to make a system work.

OK.  That's clear enough to at least give us something to work with and consider.  Do you think that the ability to control artist choice, contract price, and also contract timing should be the tools in the templarate's arsenal if they were to use that against any they had political ill-will towards?

I definitely think there's interesting possibilities for the templarate to have a "special" relationship with the Shadow Artist's Guild, one that differs from relationships the SA Guild would have with other Chosen/GM Houses or independents. Let me start by enumerating things I don't think templars should be able to do with regards to the shadow artists. This below list is mainly referring to PC templars. I imagine if whatever the Tuluk equivalent of a Red or Black robe is these days came to the SA guild with demands, they'd be followed to the letter. But PC templars shouldn't have that kind of pull.

• Templars should not be able to know which shadow artist carried out a particular job unless they have a really, really good reason to need to (such as, say, they suspect the hit was carried out via magick). In other words, a templar should not be able to walk up to the SA Guild and say "my aide's apartment was just burglarized and someone lit a sack of poop on fire in her bed, tell me who it was so I can punish them!" It should be clear that templars who demand info about a contract just to exact personal vengeance against the artist are not going to get the courtesy a second time, among Other Consequences(tm).
• Templars should not be able to blanket forbid that contracts be taken out on anyone (besides standing rules that templars and militia themselves are off limits). So a templar can't say "Chosen Lady Dasari is my soul mate, she's off limits to contracts because I say so."
• Templars should not be able to demand they be informed of all new contracts being placed, or shake down a Shadow Broker to learn what contracts are in progress. Meddling in the affairs of the SA Guild at that level should be against custom, and not approved of by the High Precentors or whoever. A templar trying to do so might find himself with a new, exciting job overseeing a guard post in the grasslands, or even disappeared.
  

Here are some things that I think templars could influence, possibly:

• Templars could affect the price of a contract on a specific person (not a whole House or "all Lady Talia's servants", specific people.) A templar should be able to say "this person is useful to me right now, I want it to be more expensive to harm them." The templar would deposit however much money he feels the target is worth to him with the SA Guild, and that gets added to whatever the new minimum price on that person. So let's say a hit on Amos would normally cost someone 500 sid, but Amos is doing some spying for Faithful Lord Malik. Malik gives the SA Guild 1000 sid, and now the price on Amos' head is 1500. Let's say somebody else REALLY wants Amos dead, though, and contracts the hit anyway. Malik does not get told a hit has been contracted. Amos dies, and the SA Guild gives Faithful Lord Malik back his 1000 sid. This sort of price-fixing shouldn't be an indefinite type of deal, either, it should be for a set amount of time, to prevent long-lived or rich templars from just making the minimum bounty for all their servants 20000 coins. (In fact, I like this counter-bountying idea so much that maybe it could even be open to everyone in the city, but templars get more favorable rates??)
• Templars could also affect the timing of a contract. It shouldn't be easy for them to know a contract exists in the first place, but templars are crafty people and I bet they'll learn or at least suspect contracts have been taken out now and then. In such cases they should be able to tell the SA Guild that they have a serious interest in keeping the target alive/unharassed until such and such a time. The SA Guild would consider the templar's request, but doesn't have to honor it. After all, the person who took out the contract that a templar is trying to affect might be another templar!
• Templars should get preference for their own contracts in terms of price and timing, if they ask for it. A templar should also be able to pick which shadow artist carries out a job that he contracts, if he wants to. If a shadow artist has been specifically requested by a templar for a job, that shadow artist had better have some really good reasons for saying no (which is how things are today anyway). Templars overusing these privileges and dragging the SA Guild into the middle of too many personal/political squabbles would be warned, however, that the SA Guild isn't their personal hit squad and may start having to decline jobs unless it can be shown the jobs are in the City's interest too, and not just the templar's.

There are plenty more nuances to work out about the relationship, but I think they'd end up as just nuance. The crux of the idea is that the SA Guild is its own independent entity with templarate oversight, and is able to exist above the fray of political battles of PC-level templars and Chosen. PC templars more than anyone else could influence contracts, but they won't have absolute power over all of them. Having an independent group negotiate the contracts instead of templars themselves frees templars up to be political animals who can be governed by personal selfish whims and ambitions, while still allowing everyone else in the city to know that shadow artist contracts are trustworthy and won't be broken. The system is one that people can put faith in, even if they don't want to put their faith in individual templars. That to me seems like a win-win.

[Blur]

Edit: I don't know who this post got here but just to use the space for something useful.

Any policing of unlicensed crime or lack there of should be left to the legionnaires. We don't need two organizations trying to do the same job.

[Outrider]

So, okay I'm still reading along and - again - I like a lot of it.

What is the incentive then, for the PC?  I can see the benefit in this change to the templar, the noble, and the folks using said services.   What's in it for the Shartist?

Two case studies here, looking aside from the assassin angle:

Shartist A:   Indie picker (whether it is pockets or lockets), low skill but with a strong inclination not to have to wear anyone's colors, spar anyone's dummy, or eat one more tandu sausage.   Licensed already because, well, it's a good idea and nobody likes jail.  Self-motivated, though.  Art for the sake of art.  Good artistry is its own reward.  Why would they ever desire to be under this new system?  

Shartist B:   Housed picker, licensed because it is part of his employment.  Cultivated by an employer with the long game in mind.   Never know when you'll need to know something, ya' know?  All love for the art aside, loyalty is her currency. . . just she's not a hunter anymore than she's a basketweaver or someone who can re-purpose Katy Perry songs for the next big square-dance.   Why would they desire to opt into this new system?   I see a considerable amount of risk, but what's the gain here for the player?  


I see this as narrowing the focus very, very specifically to attract a character type or concept that would already be inclined to be a templar's man Friday anyway.    

[Delirium]

Jherlen and I are basically singing along in harmony here. I really hope his ideas are taken under consideration.

I also have a radical notion of making the Shadow Artists a branch-off organization of the Poets' Circles - after all, artistry is the purview of the Circles, and there is already a LOT of overlap, as many bards are and have also been shadow artists. There needs to be a way for them to coexist, and this seems like an easy way to ensure they can do so.

This would also explain why there is templarate oversight instead of the Templars being directly involved (if we go with Jherlen's ideas).

[Ouroboros]

interesting stuff

I like the idea of it; my main concern is the additional work involved (though that is immaterial to the idea being interesting) as well as the additional resources required to maintain it separately from the templarate (i.e. it'd require PC involvement to manage separately from existing PC sponsored roles).

I think that if the general concept of what Jherlen outlined, and I and others mentioned already (a third, neutral party) is liked by staff, it really doesn't have to be as in-depth as what Jherlen proposed. Given this change isn't being retconned (thank God) but applied live, it would make sense for it to start small and evolve naturally over time. While having a coded clan, compound, and all those other bells and whistles might sound great, nothing more is needed for this to work than one or two sponsored PC roles to act as Shadow Brokers. The point of this is to place the brokering and administration in more impartial hands than those of the Templars. This ensures that the system itself remains unbiased, while Templars and every other true-inked citizen can remain as biased and corrupt as they already are in their personal motivations.

Should the system prove to work and there's enough activity taking place, any expansion of the system can occur at later stages and preferably organically. For example, instead of training facilities being dropped into the city out of nowhere from staff, this is something that those involved in the Shadow system can work towards on their own in time, as needs arise. This not only ensures staff won't waste valuable development time to build something that will be used by one PC a year, as well as that if and when the system is expanded on, it can be slated into staff's ongoing projects in a schedule that works for them.

Would you be happier with a system that had templars more involved and biased in it?  How much more involved and biased should they be, then?

Speaking personally, and contrary to Jherlen's feelings on the matter as last presented by him, I don't feel there should be any special wiggle-room for Templars in this system, nor any oversight by them at all. Shadow Brokers should report to staff directly, as Templars would under the currently proposed system, and viewed as civil servants. Templars should have the same freedom and limitations in the use of this system as everyone else, including Chosen. That can't occur while oversight or special perks remain in their hands, as it presents a conflict of interest. One that will exist no matter what documentation states, and more importantly, one that should exist.

This is what I was trying to communicate from the start and you didn't seem to be understanding. I'm not looking to eliminate bias from Templars, because that can't be done in my opinion. I'm looking to eliminate their bias from having an effect on the system as a whole, while at the same time letting them take full advantage of that bias through the system. To the extent of, once again for emphasis, even being able to take out contracts on other Templars, be it due to their own political agenda or the benefits the patronage of such an act might offer them.

For this particular issue, I think that the problem might be that the playerbase at large hasn't seen the beta "So You Want To Rule The Artists" document that outlines this from the templar's perspective.  It doesn't disclose anything secret, it's just how the templars would be running the system.  Is that something that might be valuable to review, even if it's not committed permanently to public documentation (i.e., put up for viewing briefly)?

While I personally continue to feel Templars should not act as brokers, I think at least being presented with their documentation would be helpful at this stage. At best, it might appease some concerns. At worse, it could offer us ideas on adjusting it towards a neutral Brokering system. But since we're examining this system as a community right now, full transparency would likely be helpful.

[janeshephard]

While having a coded clan, compound, and all those other bells and whistles might sound great, nothing more is needed for this to work than one or two sponsored PC roles to act as Shadow Brokers.

Do you mean having a call out and creating these Shadow Brokers or using existing sponsored roles?

If you want to kill this before it even starts, do it a sponsored role. Whoever gets this will play for one month, then stop logging in and store.

[Ouroboros]

While having a coded clan, compound, and all those other bells and whistles might sound great, nothing more is needed for this to work than one or two sponsored PC roles to act as Shadow Brokers.

Do you mean having a call out and creating these Shadow Brokers or using existing sponsored roles? If you want to kill this before it even starts, do it a sponsored role. Whoever gets this will play for one month, then stop logging in and store.

I mean a call being put forth, yes, not using existing sponsored roles. I'm not sure why you think that would fail though, given the currently proposed brokers, Templars, are themselves a sponsored role. Either the playerbase has an interest in seeing this system in place and evolving, or it doesn't. If it does, these roles will be filled just as every other sponsored role is filled. Staff has never had trouble in seeing even the most boring (to some) roles filled, because our playerbase has a ton of diversity in it's interests. If the playerbase doesn't have an interest in this system, then it will fail regardless of who the brokers are because there won't be an interest in it from the agent or artist side either.

[janeshephard]

I mean a call being put forth, yes, not using existing sponsored roles. I'm not sure why you think that would fail though, given the currently proposed brokers, Templars, are themselves a sponsored role. Either the playerbase has an interest in seeing this system in place and evolving, or it doesn't. If it does, these roles will be filled just as every other sponsored role is filled. Staff has never had trouble in seeing even the most boring (to some) roles filled, because our playerbase has a ton of diversity in it's interests. If the playerbase doesn't have an interest in this system, then it will fail regardless of who the brokers are because there won't be an interest in it from the agent or artist side either.

I think a call will fail to attract an active player for it. It will get apps and people will play it but eventually the novelty will wear off. In addition to that, if utilization is off you've spent all that time doing the sponsored roll thing only to have no one use it.

Just assign a Templar to oversee it initially? Then recruit from within the organization.

[Ouroboros]

I think a call will fail to attract an active player for it. It will get apps and people will play it but eventually the novelty will wear off. In addition to that, if utilization is off you've spent all that time doing the sponsored roll thing only to have no one use it. Just assign a Templar to oversee it initially? Then recruit from within the organization.

I'd say 14 pages worth of discussion on this is a good indicator players would be interested in such a role. We could do a show of hands, but I don't think that'd be appropriate. However, your fears are the same with any sponsored role, including Templars (who do store as well, believe it or not). If one stores, a new one can be brought in, just like with any other role.

However, I'll counter your proposal with this. Since I agree there's a sense of novelty to such a role, I don't think we'll have any trouble getting this role filled to start with. That being the case, it's far more logical to have the a sponsored role oversee this initially and then recruit from within, than to bring a Templar into a system they're eventually not going to be overseeing.

In fact, that could be a function of retired Shadow Artists. They could be offered the opportunity to retire as Brokers, depending on the rank they're retiring at and their reputation during their career. In that way it would function like other clans... Leadership could be achieved both by someone rising through the ranks (even though this would be a lateral shift, not a vertical one) or by sponsored calls going out when such a PC doesn't exist.

[janeshephard]

In fact, that could be a function of retired Shadow Artists.

Don't "retired" players play even less?

In any case, we won't know until staff give it a try.

[hyzhenhok]

Two case studies here, looking aside from the assassin angle:

Shartist A:   Indie picker (whether it is pockets or lockets), low skill but with a strong inclination not to have to wear anyone's colors, spar anyone's dummy, or eat one more tandu sausage.   Licensed already because, well, it's a good idea and nobody likes jail.  Self-motivated, though.  Art for the sake of art.  Good artistry is its own reward.  Why would they ever desire to be under this new system?  

Shartist B:   Housed picker, licensed because it is part of his employment.  Cultivated by an employer with the long game in mind.   Never know when you'll need to know something, ya' know?  All love for the art aside, loyalty is her currency. . . just she's not a hunter anymore than she's a basketweaver or someone who can re-purpose Katy Perry songs for the next big square-dance.   Why would they desire to opt into this new system?   I see a considerable amount of risk, but what's the gain here for the player?  

OOC, both of them gain having a new source of fun and conflict from the contracts that the templarate will be giving them. IC they get more opportunities to earn money, and they get the social status of promotion and having their status as a master thief or assassin actually recognized.

The cost is Shartists are losing the ability to commit crimes willy nilly and then get off free because they have a license. If they're actually good at their job, however, probably they'll have no problem continuing to "illegally" practice here and there, so it's not much of a cost. And again, it adds fun and conflict for when they do get caught.

So as far as I'm concerned, both the cost and the benefit Shartists get is way cool. I dig it.

[BleakOne]

I, personally, really dig the idea of Tuluk being a place where you have to be careful what you say and do, because everyone can call down a beating, burglary or killing on someone who fucks up badly enough. Paranoia and corruption ftw.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Such a role, to me, is a new Merchant Style role. It'll be filled, and I suspect quite easily.

[Outrider]

Not seeing that new source of fun and conflict, though.   I see a greater chance to be someone else's pawn - at absolutely no risk to anyone but the pawn.   At least if some semblance of free-agent artistry exists, then you can negotiate price.  If the price isn't good enough, then no go.  As it is, what's to stop the templar from sending this up and coming Journeyman Shartist (who just happens to be working as a leg-waxer for a House he's not too keen on) for making him take on "Break into Fort Knox and pee on the wall" mandatory job for, oh, 200 'sid.  That's the fair price because, well, screw it. . you're an agent of the city.  Suck it up or you won't get your BrownieBadge tattoo and I'll kill you.

The premise that licensed artists are doing anything "willy nilly" is not one I agree with. .  nor is there any Get Out of Consequence Free card played just because you have inks.  

[BleakOne]

Abuse would be dealt with by the staff, I imagine. A low-ranked PC Templar whoring out His System to kill off artists they don't like would likely find themselves in situations with less-than-healthy results.